PDA

View Full Version : Fans of the Original, what are your thoughts on this game now that it is out?



Gandalf-the-Fabulous
29th Aug 2011, 02:58
Just wondering as Deus Ex seems to have one of the most hostile fanbases what are your thoughts on HR now that it is out and how do you think it compares to the original?

Personally I have yet to get too far into the game but so far I have enjoyed it, of course like any game it does have its problems but so far from a gameplay point of view I think they have done a pretty good job of capturing the spirit of the original game.

Nakah
29th Aug 2011, 03:39
I felt unsatisfied, and that was emphasized by the rampant consolitis, inability to mod, unskippable intros, losing my saved games and the removal of taking notes and such.

I find myself enjoying it, it's a good game, but could have taken a thousand hints from the original.. Guess that's why I'm playing the original while I wait for a solution to my saved games being screwed.

NKD
29th Aug 2011, 03:48
I haven't enjoyed a game this much since the original. I'm already on a third playthrough. I was initially pretty worried when the game was announced, given the lackluster Invisible War, but I'm more than happy with the finished product here.

binlargin
29th Aug 2011, 04:01
I'm enjoying it so far, it certainly feels true to the original. I guess I'll know how I feel about it when I've completed it, but for the moment the only thing that have bugged have been:
1) It crashed twice
2) The first boss fight was pretty damn hard (I'm playing as a pacifist ghost and had no weapons).
3) I don't know whether I'm gonna get the pacifist achievement, as there's no stats screen showing kills etc.

Good so far, I just home I'm blown away by the conclusion to the story

psikoticsilver
29th Aug 2011, 04:35
I thoroughly enjoyed the first half of the game, all the way through the first visit to the Heng Sha hub... but the game failed to flesh out. There really was no overarching conspiracy, no grand foe. Sure there was the Dragon Queen, the Illuminati, etc... but their appearances were so brief, inconclusive, insubstantial and rare that they barely seemed to have any real impact on me.

The developers seemed to wait until near the very end to dump their obvious storyline on us; then, once we reached Picus headquarters, the storyline was delivered too quickly and without real depth. SUDDENLY the illusion of a powerful, world reaching, government controlling, big brother was forced upon me... but, I never really felt alone, vulnerable or against the world. What I did feel like was some badass guy who ran around doing "cool things" and kicking everyone's ass in immersion breaking, 3rd person cutscenes.

As for the endings... they all felt the same. In fact, there were a few sentences present in all four endings, in one manner or another. Also, they left me feeling as if I had no real impact on the world.


What really plagued Human revolution, I feel, was time. Now Human Revolution was of decent length, don't get me wrong. However, allocation of this time was the real issue. MUCH Human Revolution seemed to revolve around quests, errands if you will, running back and forth to grind XP (not unlike an MMO or long-in-the-tooth RPG). Conversations did not have much depth or importance, and where the atmosphere was very vivid and immersive, it provided little to interest the player underneath it's vain surface. The e-books were no more than snippets of pseudo-science or the occasional excerpt from a romance novel. News-tablets did not feel as common or varied as in the original. Furthermore, the interaction with NPC's was somewhat less than interesting. In Human Revolution, each non-storyline character had, roughly, only 2 lines of dialogue, which was either giving us the finger or a sense of how they were feeling about augmentations. The conversations with those connected to the story line had more, but were often bland, with no real philosophical meaning--they existed only to advance the player forward or to serve as a challenge to be overcome. THE SAVING GRACE of Human Revolution's atmosphere was Lazarus. SO perfect. I wish they had expanded on him, or added more like him

In the original Deus Ex more time was spent interacting with people, books, and the in depth, breathtaking storyline with grand foes hell bent on dominating the world. The types of conversations present in the Original Deus Ex existed to present the player with deep philosophical and political choices, or at least to make them think about it. This is a great example of what was missing from Human Revolution. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-bijO3uEw)
Here is another. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO8DET8-vBk)


My verdict? I don't know, I guess I feel slightly let down. I give the game roughly a 7/10... which is a decent score when you think about it and don't give heed to the artificially inflated scores that magazines hand out these days. It's somewhere in-between Deus Ex:IW and the original... and much better than the majority of crap pumped out nowadays.

In the end, the game felt like the lite-beer version of Deus Ex... I'm just glad it wasn't another Invisible war. It really feels like a game made to cater to kids or the masses of casuals rather than those interested in a real story, which is what the original was all about. I would have much less of a problem with this game if it was named something OTHER than Deus Ex, as it fails to deliver in the same magnitude as the original did during it's time.

Now I know there are a few of the same issues in the original... but let's get real, this was over 10 years ago (games should progress) and was not funded to the degree that this release was.

DXM1
29th Aug 2011, 05:41
i think this game is the only game i have ever played that rivals original deus ex. I consider both games to be equal in greatness at this point.

nothing else comes even close to deus ex quality.

singularity
29th Aug 2011, 06:03
It didn't hook me with the rampant addiction that VtMBL did back in '04, and it didn't give me quite the same sense of wonder that the first game did almost 10 years ago... but it's about as close as I've seen to either of those two titles in the last 6 years.

It really surprised me - a fantastic throw-back to what PC games used to feel like, while still having a lot of the modern conventions that PC gamers tend to gripe about today. The regen health didn't feel that bad, the third person cover became very comfortable, the over-the-top story became suprising plausable, the gruff-voiced hero was wonderfully relatable and it felt as if there was always a reason to go back and replay a level.

If anything, I'd say that DXHR will become a classic with time, simply because it will show people that it isn't these trite conventions that are making bad games - it's lazy developers who are failing to impliment them properly. The next time someone complains about regen health, my response will be that DXHR made it work quite well. The next time someone states that 3rd person cover results in horribly-designed levels, I'll have them play the first few levels of DXHR.

Long-story-short, I'm very happy with DXHR, and think that it compares to the original very well, whithout feeling like a horrible carbon copy.

RedFeather1975
29th Aug 2011, 06:03
The original game stood out because of how it captivated the imagination of players.
HR is a good game, but I never felt like it stood out in the way the original did. It's a matter of context I guess. Games have evolved since Deus Ex came out and it's hard to create something that distinguishes itself above what's already been done.
The Simpsons already did it!

alanschu
29th Aug 2011, 06:07
The original is probably my favourite game of all time, and I really enjoyed Human Revolution.

Don't ever go into any game expecting the exact same experience as one that you love (or fanatically cherish) though. Frankly I don't want games that are carbon copies of my previous experiences, and this game made me feel I was in the Deus Ex universe.

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
29th Aug 2011, 07:32
The original game stood out because of how it captivated the imagination of players.
HR is a good game, but I never felt like it stood out in the way the original did. It's a matter of context I guess. Games have evolved since Deus Ex came out and it's hard to create something that distinguishes itself above what's already been done.


Games DEvolved. Regressed. Which is why HR is getting much praise because it feels SLIGHTLY like the original, but still suffers from a bunch of unfortunate design decisions and dumbification which prevent it from being a great game. It's atmospheric, it's solid, it's a much better game than Invisible War (but that's no accomplishment). However, while does certain things right, I feel it fails when it comes to things I described here:
http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1666383&postcount=58

To quote myself:

"The game unfortunately fails in some areas that made the original great.

- boring NPCs - they have no character. No personality. No personal goals, opinions. They aren't memorable. They're used by developers to be in-game encyclopedias that know everything about augmentations and talk about nothing else.

- boss battles - forced on you, give you no other choice but to dispose of the bosses using brute force, it'd be nice if we could for example leave the battle so that the boss would show up later in the story and influence some things

- BAD LEVEL DESIGN - the levels consist of sets of narrow corridors with the option of shooting your way through or sneaking through. The levels in DX were much more open, gave you more possibilities

- no subtexts - Deus Ex had Jacob's Shadow, The Man Who Was Thursday, underlying themes (freedom in the internet age & collapse of the society among other things), references to Bible - all of that was subtely implemented. HR has nothing, it's empty in that regard. It has no good writing to supplement the gameplay and the world facing the augmentation revolution, it only touches on some themes during conversations and nowhere else, hence it all feels forced.

- the gameplay mechanics are also dumbed down compared to the original , things like weapon accuracy and many skills are gone for no reason

- health regen needs to go away

- static environment compared to DX, which allowed you to toy around to a greater degree ."

alpher
29th Aug 2011, 07:48
Both games are a fantastic achievement in that they both expanded on the titles of the time. The original DE took its cues from the games around at the time and improved upon them while building a fantastic world in which to tell its story. The only other games of its time that is on par with it is Thief and System Shock2.
DE HR has done the same. They have taken all the best features of todays games, I can see bits of ME2, The Darkness, Splintercell Convbiction, Bioshock and others, sieved out the garbage and wrapped it up in essentially the same game world adding another good storyline. Some concessions have been made for todays goldfish attention spans but, thankfully, not too many and have been made up for in the info from the ebooks, emails etc. I must admit that I have not been reading these too much as I play but saved them for when I have lunch in front of the TV.
No one could expect DE HR to be the same as the first. The entertainment industry is changing all the time as well as peoples tastes. If the movie 2001 was made now, it would either be an hour and a half action movie with a big setpiece battle with HAL through steamfilled vent sheafts etc, or it would flop.

ranmafan
29th Aug 2011, 08:02
I played it, couldn't wipe the grin off my face until the 1st boss battle (which promptly wiped it off).

It's exactly like the first DE in this regard then. :D Awesome up until a point, where it falls flat on its face, but then gets up, dusts itself off, and goes on being awesome.

Only time will tell if the level design is any less interesting than the first round in Detroit, but I really like it a lot!

Daedatheus
29th Aug 2011, 08:07
Only time will tell if the level design is any less interesting than the first round in Detroit, but I really like it a lot!

Wait till you get to run around in Heng Sha. It's overwhelming, and makes Detroit look silly in comparison. I was so impressed by that city hub, they really "knocked it out of the park" as Sarif would say.


In the original Deus Ex more time was spent interacting with people, books, and the in depth, breathtaking storyline with grand foes hell bent on dominating the world. The types of conversations present in the Original Deus Ex existed to present the player with deep philosophical and political choices, or at least to make them think about it.

Oh my god. You nailed it, you absolutely nailed it. I felt that something deeply important was missing in HR, and you've managed to verbalize it.

For me, the core of Deus Ex was actually never really about the "gameplay" elements. HR has been compared to the original so much due to its options and choices during much objective-based gameplay. But the thing that really GRABBED me when I played the first game was the immersion into a truly philosophical line of questioning, a game that actually EDUCATED me. In HR, it felt like the augmentation debate was all that was going on, all that anyone ever talked about, and as if the audience was so dumb they had to see crazed augmented zombies running around just to get the point of the abuses of technology. All of the media including newspapers, books, and conversations never tapped into the true philosophical depth that its first predecessor did.

Even a slight technical point - in Deus Ex there were many conversations where you have a choice of dialogue options, conversations that did not further any objective or sidequest, they were just there for the sake of the conversation. In DXHR every conversation that gives you dialogue options is part of some objective in the main plot or sidequest. The rest are all just short lines that people say to you. I missed stuff like donating to bums and helping girls get into a club. :D

To put it frankly DX1 made me think, and made me want to keep playing. Unfortunately, DXHR only did the latter. However, it did it really damn well, and I think it deserves much better than your 7/10 score. It really is an excellent game in its own right, and I'd give it AT LEAST 8/10 but probably 8.5 or 9 for the art direction and presentation, a world that you just want to keep going back to. (DX1 would receive a 9.5 to a 10, for transcending what any game has ever done and changing my life in an educational way)

Compared to the FPS-RPG greats of our time, it lacks the intellectual punch of DX1, the emotional pull of VtmB, but it's a stunning technical achievement, is downright entertaining and expansive, and oozes strong atmosphere most of the time. To be honest the execution of the (objective-based) combat/stealth/hacking/social gameplay is a massive improvement, an area where DX1 and VtmB were very clunky and faltered badly. DXHR is a truly excellent game, and while now with your thoughts posted here I realize that it has not surpassed DX1, I hope the high sales the title seems to be experiencing will influence more games of its kind, and we'll finally get an FPS RPG that when launched is better than DX1 was when it launched in 2001. It just seems like AAA titles aren't allowed to be "too" intelligent anymore...

Random
29th Aug 2011, 08:36
It's not a patch on the original. Overall it's a better game than Invisible War, though I'm not sure it's a better Deus Ex game than Invisible War.

HR is designed in such a way that it becomes a designer-driven game instead of a player-driven simulation.

It's a good game for what it is; it's just not anything particularly special compared to other modern games. I know there are commercial pressures to make a 'modern' game with all the modern trappings, but at the same time the Deus Ex licence should give people who truly understand Deus Ex a chance to demonstrate that a lot of modern conventions are crap. But that was probably never going to happen with this development team, several of whom also worked on Splinter Cell Conviction which I've heard (have not played it myself) abandoned a lot of what made SC Chaos Theory really good, in favour of a more action oriented game. You can see a similar result here. And it sounds like the same is being done to Hitman now. I await news of Thief 4.

I just don't like the changes that make HR more like Metal Gear Solid, which includes things like


the cover system
the 3rd person cinematic takedown nonsense
the stealth system which is more like problem solving (which crate has the level designer provided me with to hide behind here?) rather than organically hiding in the environment
the cutscenes (particularly the ones in which Adam behaves counter to how you've been playing, like barging into a room to converse with a boss character, placing him in great danger)
the boss fights of course
the way situations are sometimes dealt with by choices in the dialogue wheel instead of through the simulation (Think of the situation with Anna and Lebedev in the 747 in the first game. In HR that would be handled through a dialogue wheel, not organically purely through your own choices at the time.)
the level design that funnels you through a number of fairly boring environments; Eidos is capable of creative environments so it's a shame they shoved so many generic offices in there, even if they have some nice decorations on the walls; there are no real world locations which I think is a major failing it shares with IW and something I expected them to address
along with the level design, the lack of consumables like multitools and lockpicks in the first game is a downside because it tends to make paths through levels more rigid: hacker goes through this door, fighter goes through enemies, or you can use the vents if you want. Consumables open up more possibilities regardless of your build, allowing you to play how you want at any particular time, which is important in a DX game
most importantly, the reduced potential for emergence. The engine is designed so that emergence is possible, but other systems like the augmentations are not very creative in this regard. The lack of resources (things like explosive or gas barrels, few grenades and mines etc), the poor power management system that means you're often low on power for using augs, the terrible inventory design where many items take up way too much space, restricting your ability to carry tools with you -- all this restricts the creative possibilities.


All that said, what's there is good quality. It was still engaging to play (I didn't have to force myself) except for one stretch of time through the middle section when I got very frustrated by the poor pacing: lots of running around, reading similar emails, talking to NPCs that repeat the same things, and very little 'action'. It took me around 35 hours to finish which is a good about of game time, but a great deal of it was spent readings emails most of which I honestly could have skipped without missing anything of importance. But I wanted to read everything because sometimes there are interesting tidbits or references to DX1.

As for the story, I agree with everything psikoticsilver said above. I felt the focus of this game was just too narrow. It focuses entirely on the augmentation debate, the haves and have nots. It's not philosophical about this like DX1 is; the issue is front and center and dealt with in practicalities. That would be okay if there were a couple of missions or side missions that dealt with it, but basing the whole game on this one issue -- and making almost every NPC line, every email, every newspaper related to it -- just means the issue is well and truly done to death. I loved the sprawling nature of DX1, how it seemed like a grab bag of every conspiracy they could think of (which it was) and yet it somehow managed to draw them all together coherently. HR by contrast is very narrow, and it almost seems embarrassed by this conspiracy stuff that was the basis of DX1.

For all its narrow focus I don't think HR explored the themes around transhumanism, and the ongoing context of the themes, in much detail anyway. Towards the end there are some references to Prometheus (taking fire from the gods) and Frankenstein which is nice. I would have liked more of this stuff because it places the ideas in context: it's not an entirely new thing but it deals with philosophical issues humans have been discussing for millennia.

Something that interests me in the debate is the Ship of Theseus concept: basically how we would feel about replacement limbs and stuff. If we replace an arm, is it still 'ours'? Both arms, both legs, eyes, organs? Is there a point when we stop thinking of our body as 'ours' or does it still remain 'us' even if most of it has been gradually replaced? This isn't dealt with in HR beyond simple lines of dialogue like 'I never asked for this'.

Some people think philosophical discussions with barmen in DX1 were 'pretentious' (even Kieron Gillen said he liked that HR was 'less pretentious' than DX1, for god's sake) but they were interesting and they gave the game extra weight. It was something to think about. DX1 is clearly a smarter game than HR in this regard because the writers had followed these ideas through instead of leaving it at the surface level. I just got the feeling the HR writers didn't do enough research. In a few pre-release interviews when asked about their sources and inspirations, the best they could come up with was Kurzweil and some journalist who wrote a book about this stuff. DX1, by contrast, not only understood current debates, but knew how it fit in the context of human history. That's almost entirely missing from HR.

dumblebee
29th Aug 2011, 10:56
In the original Deus Ex more time was spent interacting with people, books, and the in depth, breathtaking storyline with grand foes hell bent on dominating the world. The types of conversations present in the Original Deus Ex existed to present the player with deep philosophical and political choices, or at least to make them think about it. This is a great example of what was missing from Human Revolution. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-bijO3uEw)
Here is another. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO8DET8-vBk)

YES! You nailed it. This was EXACTLY what I was hoping for with this game. The story felt so bland, shallow and unengaging to me. By the time I finished the game, I was furious, because I felt I had been cheated.

ricardosamuel1961
29th Aug 2011, 11:33
I'm a huge Deus Ex "fanboi", have played the original many, many times. I consider the Hongkong mission one of the best missions ever to be designed. The original Deus Ex was revolutionary, Deus Ex HR is at best evolutionary. Sure, it's a step up from Deus Ex IW (which I also enjoyed, surprisingly), but it's just not in the same league as the first one, for all the reasons already mentioned. The original had a philosophical depth that expressed itself wonderfully in the various characters and your interaction with them: Manderley, Lebedev, Morpheus, Tracer Tong - these were all vividly drawn characters. At the same time, the game was fun to play, and gave you almost absolute freedom on how to complete missions and work your way through a level. It didn't really have boss fights. All the "bosses" in the game were dispatched easily.

I give the developers credit for trying to recreate the magic of the first one, but they don't quite succeed. Environments feel cramped, interaction with non-mission critical npcs feels superficial, the story seems to have a lot less depth, etc. I do not like that the game favors a specific play style and rewards you for that.

More importantly, I just can't get warmed up to Adam Jensen. When you first start Deus Ex, you immediately connect with J.C. because of his relationship to his brother. That relationship becomes a major axis around which the game revolves. For J.C. it's not just about uncovering some plot, it's also about family. And that relationship gives the game an emotional center.

In a sense, family is the important overarching theme of the entire game. In the beginning, UNATCO is your "family". You return to HQ from having accomplished and solved your first big mission. Everybody is friendly with you, greets you, makes reference to what you have accomplished. Janice, the secretary, is warm and welcoming, you meet Manderley who gives you your reward. You meet Jamie Reyes - everyone likes you, gives you stuff, accomodates you. You trust and are being trusted. You are part of something bigger and larger. All of this is established early in the game.

The reversal and betrayal later, therefore, is also a betrayal of your [B]personal[B] values. It feels like your family has abandoned you. And you spend much of the rest of the game trying to find new connections - who to trust, who should you listen to and follow....it was all so clear in the beginning....you and your brother had a purpose, you were working for an organisation whose values you endorsed and, as Manderley says, "takes care of their own."

Deus EX HR, IMHO, just doesn't create those same kinds of emotional connections. Yeah, ok, you're Chief of Security at Sarif Industries, but so what?

Chewy2nd
29th Aug 2011, 11:59
A very good, almost perfect Deus Ex game, but needed to take a few more things from the original.

TehDude
29th Aug 2011, 12:49
I'm a very big fan of the original, however for as amazing as the original is, its still a flawed gem - anyone who argues otherwise is unfortunately looking through the rose coloured glasses of nostalgia.
Deus Ex's flaw are almost entirely related to the execution of its gameplay concepts, as opposed to the game's philosophical concepts and discussions. It was obviously a little too ambitious given the technological restraints at the time, however the thinking behind the gameplay - the discussions, the questions, the ideas - elevate the game far above its mere 'gameplay' and into its current position; Deus Ex made you think about its world, more than about which gun to use.

Human Revolution, to me, is the other way 'round. Its execution is pitch perfect; however, its ideas - its discussions, its questions, its proposals - feel muted. They're there - if you dig - however I have to say I feel as if Eidos was holding back. Maybe it had to be cut due to budget constraints, or maybe they felt that they couldn't get too cerebral and risk their game being replicating the original; a critical darling that completely under-performs commercially.
In either case, Human Revolution is still amazing, and is incredible in its own right and deserves to be treated as such.

If Deus Ex, Invisible War and Human Revolution were the only games ever made, Deus Ex would be still be 1/3, Human Revolution would be 2 and Invisible War would be 3.
However, we live in a world where Call of Duty is the undisputed king of Sales, and people willingly pay US$15.00 for its map packs. In this world, Human Revolution is better than 99% of the trash that clogs our shelves and stores. Its the best this generation has to offer. Period. It might not be as smart as the original Deus Ex, but thats like saying Einstein wasn't as smart as Tesla; either way you dice it, they're both smarter than Snooki.

Falcon084
29th Aug 2011, 12:59
10/10 I loved it!

dimljajvbu
29th Aug 2011, 13:05
I only played DX1 once, a long time ago now, and I don't remember much of it. But I can say I agree with what has been said in this thread about HR. It is very good, but could easily have been so much better.



I await news of Thief 4.

As do I, with great trepidation.

Wunderbar_007
29th Aug 2011, 13:12
Once I got past the initial shock of playing anything new "Deus Ex", I realized how disappointing this game actually is. The reasons have pretty much all been mentioned here.

Doom972
29th Aug 2011, 13:15
While not as good as the first, this is a great game.

Things that I didn't like:

1) Not enough secondary/conflicting objectives. DX and DXIW in particular had a lot more of them.
2) The substitution of melee weapons with takedowns.
3) I'm pretty sure they said at some point that skills will make a return so I was a bit disappointed that getting experience meant unlocking augmentations.
4) Too many cutscenes. It would have been enough to have them for the intro and endings. All the other ones just broke the immersion in my opinion.
5) The Music. They chose to use ambient background sounds instead of music for the majority of the game. I would have preffered a soundtrack more similar to the original game.
6)*SPOILER* The endings. Looks like the cutscene budget ran out.
7) PC port. The first game was a popular PC game and so I expected better handling of the PC version. Hopefully they'll improve on that with patches.

There were some things that I found better than the first DX:

1) The new hacking system.
2) Some very cool new augmentations.
3) The new weapon mod system.
4) Great graphics and aesthetics.

With all of that said, I hope they make another Deus Ex game.

UKStephen
29th Aug 2011, 13:25
http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s187/StephenUKStephen/JCDAASSLRG-1.jpg

Is what I think.

Tuttle
29th Aug 2011, 13:30
Maybe I'm an uncultured plebeian but I liked it how they didn't smack you in the face with philosophy and politics. They just gave you in-game examples and made you draw your own conclusions (Or, just play the game and not think about these sorts of things).

Then I enjoyed the greater "Gray" morality. It's a Dues Ex game through and through; one which I enjoyed more than the original.

pha
29th Aug 2011, 14:29
We have to wait and see how it will stand the test of time, but so far, while not perfect, the game is easily one of the best single player games I've played since the original Deus Ex, alongside Morrowind, Arcanum, Knights of the Old Republic I and II, Vampire: Bloodlines and the criminally underrated Alpha Protocol.

The attention to detail is very impressive, the environmental design is almost perfect, and the whole transhumanism versus purity thing is really thought provoking. Dialogues, reading e-books and people's e-mails add a lot to the story and setting, nothing feels like a filler or forced. Gameplay elements are really fun, stealth is useful, direct combat approach feels balanced, the hacking minigame makes a lot of sense and it's much better than those minigames we've seen in mainstream bigshot games like Bioshock, Fallout 3 or Mass Effect. Some people complain about energy bars or inventory size, e.g. how much space is occupied by ammo but frankly I love it that the game forces me to make choices and be mindful of limited resources.

Still some of the aspects of the game felt really out of place and if I may, Eidos Montreal is really lucky that these unfitting aspects don't ruin the whole experience. If the rest of the game wasn't so great, and if EM didn't have the advantage of a legendary franchise in the title, the game could be unappreciated and forgotten like Alpha Protocol.


Are we sorry we didn’t listen to everyone? No, because that would’ve made a terrible game. You can’t design by committee. You need a leader with a vision. Ours was Jean-François Dugas.

These are the words of François Lapikas. (http://www.siliconera.com/2011/08/09/making-games-is-not-a-democracy-say-deus-ex-human-revolution-developers/)" Apparently most of what we've seen is based on JFD's vision, and Eidos Montreal tried to fit most of their gaming related ideas into one single game, their debut. The game tries to be too many things at once and while it surprisingly succeeds at most, it fails at some.

1. Melee combat consists of automated takedowns. In Deus Ex, taking down an enemy at melee range requires no consumables, with the sole exception of the Riot Prod which uses ammo. Yet in HR, punching a puny augless human spends more bioenergy than carrying a fridge a few meters. Combined with the extremely restrictive energy system (don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the energy system is bad overall) it makes it quite difficult to assume a full melee playstyle. Obviously their concern was game balance, but still, it doesn't make much sense. If you can make it next to an enemy, with or without being detected, there should have been an option to use a manual and/or unrestricted melee system either with the fists and armblades or separate melee weapons.

And since the takedowns use stock animations, they are sometimes incoherent. When you perform a takedown on someone in front of you and detected you, his and your position changes in the takedown animation, suddenly he becomes unaware of you, Adam "teleports" behind him, taps him in the shoulder and punches him when he turns around. Like, hello? "I'd better look away, so that the sharp chinned protagonist can tap me in the shoulder and knock me out."

2. Social battles. Now, nothing's wrong with rich and long dialogues, but if there are right and wrong things to say in the dialogues of a Deus Ex game, they should be based on Adam's discoveries, knowledge, and common sense instead of a minigame where you "study" your "opponent" and try to pick the appropriate thing to say. I'm not a native English speaker but I've failed at only one of these "battles" (yes, without the social aug), and you know what I did? I reloaded. Who in their right mind would deliberately put themselves at a disadvantage by losing these battles? Roleplayers? People who want to discover all dialogue options? Please.

3. Cinematics. It is practically impossible to create different cinematics for different playstyles, or for people who equip different weapons. Thus Adam is always unarmed during the cinematics and he has a preset behavior. Like Random said, sometimes Adam's actions in cinematics doesn't reflect your playstyle during the actual game. Let's pretend. You are a stealthy type, you are tracking Sevçenko's signal and you infiltrate the gang's fortress in Beijing, crouching, using the cloak aug, never engaging in combat and whatnot. But in the cinematic, Adam justs casually walks at the door and opens it, and everyone around Tong point their guns at him. Now what in the name of **** is that? A stealthy Adam would never open that door like that. Just the same, Adam just walks to bosses, and bosses always "die" at the same spot no matter where and how you best them. Speaking of bosses...

4. Boss fights. After all the marketing hype about four pillars, I don't know whose bright idea was it to add mandatory boss fights where the "four pillars" **** doesn't fly and combat is the only possible approach. Sure they require different tactics instead of being boring battalions with high damage and health, and they are fun, but still it could be amazing if we could avoid the bosses altogether, or turn them, empathize, whatever. Overall, boss fights feel like they were added in the last month of development by someone who thought they would be "cool".

5. The story is too focused on the clash between transhumanism and purity, to the point where other possible story elements are disregarded. Yes we get it already, it's a hot topic at that time, but it surely cannot be the only topic.

In the end, DX:HR is great but it still has some room for improvement. If the same team can work on Deus Ex 4, I'm sure it will be even better.

vallux
29th Aug 2011, 14:49
Goddamn you pha. I'm starting to see faults.

Also, what's up with people writing and saying Dues. Gosh.

Tusc
29th Aug 2011, 15:36
The story is a little disappointing. I thought Invisible War's story was a good bit better, having several different factions who had different views. There wasn't a clear good vs evil bad guy, but shades of grey, and deciding who to support, or whether to even do a quest for them or not, was not an easy decision.

This game, you just do all the missions and there are clear cut bad guys.

I was also a little disappointed in the maps. I was hoping for something that approached an Assassin's Creed meets Bladerunner type city that was big and open. What we got was like Invisible War or Mass Effect with a few more levels of complexity, but lots of loading screens.

The combat is pretty decent, and the graphics are nice, except for the spastic jerking that the characters have in conversations. Overall, I think Alpha Protocol was the better game, and it got panned by critics.

jd10013
29th Aug 2011, 16:32
Well, I'm not very far into it (only finished the first mission) but so far I can say I'm both happy and surprised. The game definitely has a very "deus ex" feel. in just the first mission I've done there has been plenty to explore, plenty to read, and plenty to find. I was also impressed with the free roam nature of the level design. yes, there's been a few corridors and confined spaces, but so far I haven't encountered any doors that lock behind you, or fires that prevent you from going back from where you came from. it's also definitely a thinking mans game with a little bit of a learning curve. there simply isn't enough ammo laying around to be a bullet sponge and shoot your way through. I'd also say the AI is smart enough (not saying it's the greatest), and damage balanced enough that run and gun just isn't practical. Hacking takes some getting used to, as does some of the screens involving the inventory, augs, map, and so on.

as for being surprised, that comes from some of the features I thought would ruin the game. I find the health regen no problem at all. the way it's done, with the 2 two health bars works well I think. It helps keep you from constantly getting killed, but doesn't allow you to play the game as a shooter. the radar was also a pleasant surprise. another thing I thought would be cheesy and ruing the game. but I've found it very useful and well done. it makes stealth work much better. cause unlike the original, you can't so easily re-hide, or just take them out. guards do give up, not so easily. the one shot take downs are ok also. A little disclaimer though, I've never been a big fan of melee weapons, so I'm not missing them. I always played the original with sun gun and tranq darts when I wanted to go non lethal. and lastly, and perhaps the biggest surprise, I think the cover system is actually pretty good. I really thought the third person thing would ruin the game, but It's done very well, and works well with the stealth system in the game. It's kind of hard to explain, but I think it has a lot to do with the very limited movements you can make while in 3rd person, and the inability to attack from there.

anyway, I know I'm early into the game, so it will be interesting to see how these systems progress as the game goes along. it will also be interesting to see if all the stuff I'm finding and reading (not a whole lot so far) is just fluff, or will actually mean something later on. but so far, I'm enjoying it, and I think EM has done well. It's better and more faithful to the original than I thought it would be.

ZakKa89
29th Aug 2011, 16:37
I am more than 40 hours in (just finished the dlc tong's rescue mission)

I think it is amazing, easily the best game I've played 5-6 years :) It's shortcomings don't matter that much because what's left is so incredibly good!

It definitely feels, looks and plays like Deus Ex

Daedatheus
29th Aug 2011, 17:13
More importantly, I just can't get warmed up to Adam Jensen. When you first start Deus Ex, you immediately connect with J.C. because of his relationship to his brother. That relationship becomes a major axis around which the game revolves. For J.C. it's not just about uncovering some plot, it's also about family. And that relationship gives the game an emotional center.

The JC/Paul Denton brothers dynamic is one of the best things about DX1 (It's why I always thought that Paul dying made the plot soooo much stronger, didn't even know he could be rescued until recently). Especially since I have an older brother I'm close to. What they needed to do was flesh out Megan a lot more. She was there, got a little exposition, even a few seconds of a tender moment with Adam, and BAM Pritchard walks in, Sarif HQ gets attacked, nothing about Megan for 20 hours. Something needed to be done there.

Like the guys at RPS said, Adam might have ruminated on his condition more, too. I thought the subtle scene-storytelling in Adam's apartment the first time you get there was incredible. It said a lot about what happened to Adam and how he feels about his changes. Could have been extended, in relation to Megan as well.

Like people are saying though the execution of the gameplay is now pitch perfect, you know how to do things and you know they're going to work, controls are tight, shooting makes sense, etc. All those issues about switching into 3rd person ended up not bothering me in the slightest.


It might not be as smart as the original Deus Ex, but thats like saying Einstein wasn't as smart as Tesla; either way you dice it, they're both smarter than Snooki.

Okay, I cracked up. :lol:

DeusEdt
29th Aug 2011, 17:23
The game is very good until around the halfway point in the return to Detroit. It feels like this is where it should've expanded into a complex and multifaceted story, and it just kept trudging along.
The characters were nowhere near as well written and expanded as in the original. Where were the memorable plot moments? It was all pretty straightforward, even the revelation about Megan being alive didn't feel like it was delivered well enough.

The last section of the game too I really didn't enjoy, and that's probably tainted my view of it somewhat. The whole of Pangea just seemed rushed, and the enemies really began to grate away at my immersion. The final boss fight too was too straightforward, which is surprising because in the original such an effort is made to not have a typical final boss fight. And the three buttons? It really annihilates any sense that your previous actions have had any effect when you can choose any of the endings so straightforwardly. It's lazy, at least in the original each of the endings required a different path through the final area.


I really hate the end of this game. It's a real shame, because the whole first half of the game blew me away.

numinous
29th Aug 2011, 17:32
I haven't enjoyed a game this much since the original. I'm already on a third playthrough. I was initially pretty worried when the game was announced, given the lackluster Invisible War, but I'm more than happy with the finished product here.

The thread is directed towards fans of the original, bro. You're not it. Get out.

numinous
29th Aug 2011, 17:37
It's not a patch on the original. Overall it's a better game than Invisible War, though I'm not sure it's a better Deus Ex game than Invisible War.

HR is designed in such a way that it becomes a designer-driven game instead of a player-driven simulation.

It's a good game for what it is; it's just not anything particularly special compared to other modern games. I know there are commercial pressures to make a 'modern' game with all the modern trappings, but at the same time the Deus Ex licence should give people who truly understand Deus Ex a chance to demonstrate that a lot of modern conventions are crap. But that was probably never going to happen with this development team, several of whom also worked on Splinter Cell Conviction which I've heard (have not played it myself) abandoned a lot of what made SC Chaos Theory really good, in favour of a more action oriented game. You can see a similar result here. And it sounds like the same is being done to Hitman now. I await news of Thief 4.

I just don't like the changes that make HR more like Metal Gear Solid, which includes things like


the cover system
the 3rd person cinematic takedown nonsense
the stealth system which is more like problem solving (which crate has the level designer provided me with to hide behind here?) rather than organically hiding in the environment
the cutscenes (particularly the ones in which Adam behaves counter to how you've been playing, like barging into a room to converse with a boss character, placing him in great danger)
the boss fights of course
the way situations are sometimes dealt with by choices in the dialogue wheel instead of through the simulation (Think of the situation with Anna and Lebedev in the 747 in the first game. In HR that would be handled through a dialogue wheel, not organically purely through your own choices at the time.)
the level design that funnels you through a number of fairly boring environments; Eidos is capable of creative environments so it's a shame they shoved so many generic offices in there, even if they have some nice decorations on the walls; there are no real world locations which I think is a major failing it shares with IW and something I expected them to address
along with the level design, the lack of consumables like multitools and lockpicks in the first game is a downside because it tends to make paths through levels more rigid: hacker goes through this door, fighter goes through enemies, or you can use the vents if you want. Consumables open up more possibilities regardless of your build, allowing you to play how you want at any particular time, which is important in a DX game
most importantly, the reduced potential for emergence. The engine is designed so that emergence is possible, but other systems like the augmentations are not very creative in this regard. The lack of resources (things like explosive or gas barrels, few grenades and mines etc), the poor power management system that means you're often low on power for using augs, the terrible inventory design where many items take up way too much space, restricting your ability to carry tools with you -- all this restricts the creative possibilities.


All that said, what's there is good quality. It was still engaging to play (I didn't have to force myself) except for one stretch of time through the middle section when I got very frustrated by the poor pacing: lots of running around, reading similar emails, talking to NPCs that repeat the same things, and very little 'action'. It took me around 35 hours to finish which is a good about of game time, but a great deal of it was spent readings emails most of which I honestly could have skipped without missing anything of importance. But I wanted to read everything because sometimes there are interesting tidbits or references to DX1.

As for the story, I agree with everything psikoticsilver said above. I felt the focus of this game was just too narrow. It focuses entirely on the augmentation debate, the haves and have nots. It's not philosophical about this like DX1 is; the issue is front and center and dealt with in practicalities. That would be okay if there were a couple of missions or side missions that dealt with it, but basing the whole game on this one issue -- and making almost every NPC line, every email, every newspaper related to it -- just means the issue is well and truly done to death. I loved the sprawling nature of DX1, how it seemed like a grab bag of every conspiracy they could think of (which it was) and yet it somehow managed to draw them all together coherently. HR by contrast is very narrow, and it almost seems embarrassed by this conspiracy stuff that was the basis of DX1.

For all its narrow focus I don't think HR explored the themes around transhumanism, and the ongoing context of the themes, in much detail anyway. Towards the end there are some references to Prometheus (taking fire from the gods) and Frankenstein which is nice. I would have liked more of this stuff because it places the ideas in context: it's not an entirely new thing but it deals with philosophical issues humans have been discussing for millennia.

Something that interests me in the debate is the Ship of Theseus concept: basically how we would feel about replacement limbs and stuff. If we replace an arm, is it still 'ours'? Both arms, both legs, eyes, organs? Is there a point when we stop thinking of our body as 'ours' or does it still remain 'us' even if most of it has been gradually replaced? This isn't dealt with in HR beyond simple lines of dialogue like 'I never asked for this'.

Some people think philosophical discussions with barmen in DX1 were 'pretentious' (even Kieron Gillen said he liked that HR was 'less pretentious' than DX1, for god's sake) but they were interesting and they gave the game extra weight. It was something to think about. DX1 is clearly a smarter game than HR in this regard because the writers had followed these ideas through instead of leaving it at the surface level. I just got the feeling the HR writers didn't do enough research. In a few pre-release interviews when asked about their sources and inspirations, the best they could come up with was Kurzweil and some journalist who wrote a book about this stuff. DX1, by contrast, not only understood current debates, but knew how it fit in the context of human history. That's almost entirely missing from HR.

Great post, nailed it. I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing these things. Combined with posts such as these, and the content found on RPS, I'm quite satisfied that I'm not the only person in the entire world scratching my head about poor design and wondering why nobody agrees with me.

Though, I have to say, DXHR has a heart and soul. That alone puts it far above pretty much everything else released since the Xbox360 came out. Besides games like Demon's Souls, Bayonetta, MGS, etc. High praise indeed.

nomotog
29th Aug 2011, 17:46
I like it. There are a small handful of nagging things, but DX1 had nagging things too. What kind of clinched it was playing thought the first part of the game then watching my friend play through that same part only completely differently. Also you can still open doors with shotguns, so good for that too.

ranmafan
29th Aug 2011, 17:54
Great post, nailed it. I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing these things. Combined with posts such as these, and the content found on RPS, I'm quite satisfied that I'm not the only person in the entire world scratching my head about poor design and wondering why nobody agrees with me.

Though, I have to say, DXHR has a heart and soul. That alone puts it far above pretty much everything else released since the Xbox360 came out. Besides games like Demon's Souls, Bayonetta, MGS, etc. High praise indeed.

Presumably the Devs at EM had dozens, even hundreds of people coming in to playtest this long before it was released, taking comments and taping player reactions and processing them through the core team to see if the responses garnered were favourable with regards to whether the game was 'Deus Ex' enough, then making decisions on whether to keep, modify or toss a given design element.

Just my informed opinion. Not like I speak from experience or anything. :whistle:

But I agree - this game was built with no small degree of love. It feels like DX. It feels right. Maybe the story wasn't as highbrow or philosophical, but if it was then we'd just have people coming in complaining that they didn't understand the story, ergo it sucked, etc. etc. etc.

needlesurfer
29th Aug 2011, 18:33
boss fights, that is all.

They screw the entire game, do not get fooled all your augments must first go in boss fights (typhoon and dermal armor), then maybe you can select some fun stuff. I played stealth and now I am at second boss fight, been trying it for a total of 6 hours at "give me deus ex" difficulty level, I am beyond frustrated and fed up, I want to play the game, to move beyond where I am but I cannot and the only way I can get out of the mess I am in is to restart the whole game from shangai and that is a LOT of drawers to open again, computers to hack, walls to break, vent to open... I cannot believe they are even trying to justify it.

Will it get fixed? I doubt it Eidos is even trying to bull**** people on how it advances the game plot but I really fail to see how, it is just bad design. The game is out and now they are raking money in, why would they even take the time to patch it? It won't affect their sale either. so those of us who didn't pick the typhoon and dermal armor are screwed and their answer is essentially: "screw you".

Other than that the game is magnificent (how else would I bother doing an obviously badly designed boss fight for hours), just plain superb, I guess if I would have been told about the typhoon and armor when starting the game I would be enjoying it greatly right now but Eidos thought it would be cool to give a choice to their players that would completely screw them at some point and that is just insulting. So get the right upgrades and you will greatly enjoy the game, just don't see it as an rpg, the rpg part is an illusion, this is a boss fight game.

Daedatheus
29th Aug 2011, 20:38
The thread is directed towards fans of the original, bro. You're not it. Get out.

He just said he hasn't enjoyed a game as much since the original. That's a fan if anything. I don't get what you're saying.

psikoticsilver
29th Aug 2011, 20:38
Tuttle and ranmafan: I understand your opinion and though you may not enjoy being smacked in the face with philosophy, unfortunately that's what the original game was about. Philosophy, politics, storyline, intrigue, conspiracies. It WAS about storyline, it was story driven and not meant to cater.

Without being smacked in the face by these issues, it is NOT a real Deus Ex game. Even Invisible War did a better job in this respect, granted it failed miserably in just about every other (even taking into account it's age).

Human Revolution is still fun in it's own right, but that's the major issue here. It's OWN right, not the on coat-tails of Deus Ex.

WildcatPhoenix
29th Aug 2011, 21:07
Tuttle and ranmafan: I understand your opinion and though you may not enjoy being smacked in the face with philosophy, unfortunately that's what the original game was about. Philosophy, politics, storyline, intrigue, conspiracies. It WAS about storyline, it was story driven and not meant to cater.


This has been the biggest obstacle between me and DX:HR. Not gameplay mechanics (no matter how much I loathe cinematics or third-person or no melee weapons), but just the overall different philosophical approach to the game that I've detected from Dugas and others throughout this entire development process.

The original Deus Ex opened my eyes to so many things. I went out and bought a copy of The Man Who Was Thursday. I read about Thomas Aquinas, the Illuminati and the Knights Templar. I began studying transhumanist ideas, exploring all of the rich subtext that was just barely hinted at in the gameworld. It wasn't pretentious- it was literate. It was developed and thought-provoking (even pseudoscientific nonsense like "Universal constructors" and "non-Mendelian organisms" was rooted in enough real world theory to suspend my disbelief for a while).

I can't bring myself to buy DXHR. Not yet. I've waited 10 years for a real, genuine successor to the game that showed me what video gaming can really be. DXHR is no doubt a lot of fun, but I have enough entertainment in my life already. I want to experience something truly special again. This just doesn't look like it.

Dead-Eye
29th Aug 2011, 21:48
To me, the game simply feels unfinished. Far too much time was spent on cinematics and marketing, not enough time was spent on building epic levels and in-game systems to handle plot elements.

The gameplay is good but the game is way too short for anything to really shine. The last level was ridiculously short and there just wasn't anything along the way that really attached me to the world. The plot felt stale after awhile, and although the characters were all well thought out, they never really did anything interesting to flush out their character to the player; and thus remained uninteresting and I didn't really care for any of them at the end.

I would say it's a good effort, but it's missing a lot of key elements to make it as good as Deus Ex. Epicness being the primary factor here; the game just doesn't feel Epic, I didn't feel like I was saving the world or fighting the man. I felt like I was about to save the world or fight the man, and then the game ended and I kinda felt jiped.

Oh well; There's always the real world Illuminati to fight if you want a REAL challenge.

ZakKa89
29th Aug 2011, 21:54
You can say what you want, but saying the game is too short is simply a lie!

Dead-Eye
29th Aug 2011, 22:00
@ranmafanThe second boss is actually pretty easy if you anticipate her moves, just run at her when shes about to use claymore, and chase after her when she's in hiding.

jd10013
29th Aug 2011, 22:29
Too short? according to steam, I've been playing for 8 hours and and just left my apartment after having uploaded that chip to my personal computer

CarpeNukemXVIII
29th Aug 2011, 22:59
About the only things I thought DX did better than HR is the health system, and melee. Everything else HR has the original beat in spades.

sugaki
30th Aug 2011, 00:35
Loved the original (although I liked System Shock 2 more, tbh), so here's my take of this one:

- It's a lot more refined. Refinement doesn't mean it's a better game, but it has more polish, more streamlined, less hassles.
- Stupid boss fights. I actually don't mind the concept of boss fights, but the cinematic leading to it is ridiculous. I'm always sulking in corners, and next thing you know I'm brazenly approaching the boss char head on. Considering how the game is heavily biased towards non-lethal takedowns, don't see why they made the cut scenes this way. The transition to the boss fight should be in-game.
- Take downs are meh. Not only that you get more experience, but that I don't get to have a melee weapon. I hate getting taken out of the game for the animation sequences.
- Augmentations should force you to choose certain progressions. Hate to bring up World of Warcraft, but like WoW's talent trees I think augmentation would be more compelling if taking a certain skill would lock you out of taking something else. For example, if i choose to maximize inventory space, that would prevent me from getting the silent-running aug.
- Flawed energy system. Should either have your energy never recharge, or have it recharge to full. For the former, there's a perfect way to address that: being able to purchase candy bars from the vending machines for credits. More immersion, and you have ample supply for consumables (which were very lacking).
- And I actually *like* how the politics/ethics were dealt with in this game--it leaves you to ponder the questions yourself, instead of pretentiously beating you over the head with it. In that sense, I thought this game was more intelligent--it gave your morsels of information to chew on.

But what surprised me is that the game does feel very Deus Ex. I don't get the sense of it being thoroughly dumbed down for consoles, like how I felt with Bioshock. Think it's the best PC-like game to come out in awhile.

psikoticsilver
30th Aug 2011, 03:57
- And I actually *like* how the politics/ethics were dealt with in this game--it leaves you to ponder the questions yourself, instead of pretentiously beating you over the head with it. In that sense, I thought this game was more intelligent--it gave your morsels of information to chew on.

But what surprised me is that the game does feel very Deus Ex. I don't get the sense of it being thoroughly dumbed down for consoles, like how I felt with Bioshock. Think it's the best PC-like game to come out in awhile.

I know this is going to come off poorly, but I can't think of another way to phrase it (my intent is not malicious).
Translation: "it's not like Deus Ex, thus it is Deus Ex."

I'm sorry, but Deus Ex was about the storyline--conspiracy, politics, morality, philosophy and trans-humanism--with gameplay layered on top like icing.

Human revolution is built with gameplay (ie their insistence on us seeing COOL THINGS) and trans-humanism as it's foundations, with morality as the icing. How can they gut the entire foundation of the game and replace it with superficial niceties (albeit FUN superficial niceties :p), but still call it is a Deus Ex game?

They should have simply called it HUMAN REVOLUTION and left the Deus Ex part off, I wouldn't be frustrated. :p

Oh... to cut off this possible counter argument before it begins: saying it's the same as Deus ex because it is a stealth shooter with RPG elements is silly. We might as well have called it FALLOUT or METAL GEAR SOLID.

Tuttle
30th Aug 2011, 04:20
I'm sorry, but Deus Ex was about the storyline--conspiracy, politics, morality, philosophy and trans-humanism--with gameplay layered on top like icing.

Really? I thought Dues Ex was all about global conspiracies. Politics and philosophy were explored but it wasn't a core part of the game. You could get along just fine not knowing what "The Man Who was Tomorrow" was and still understand what was going on and have an opinion on how you're meant to go about it.

I mean, looking at one of the posts above a person refusing to play the game simply because it doesn't have Philosophy and what-not being quoted right out of a book? Sounds a little closed minded to me.

One of the hardest things when it does come to games like these is not getting the "common audience" to just have their eyes glaze over when they hear politics/philosophy it is to PUT THEM INTO the situation and hope they put the controller down and think. Would they be willing to "mutilate" their body for the sake of getting a better quality limb? Do they think it could truly change people, can augmentation remove your "humanity"?

Renegen
30th Aug 2011, 04:39
I love HR. Hengsha is epic, it looks so beautiful, though a tad bit too futuristic for 2027 :whistle:

The game simply captures the essence of Deus Ex, I'd say to 80%. It lacks some of the free roaming, some of the sandbox feel of killing anyone, anytime, some of the deep philosophical stuff and the discussions on world politics. But HR handles the discussion on transhumanism very well. It should be understood that the theme for Deus Ex was different than the theme for HR, they 2 games cannot ressemble themselves exactly. Warren Spector said that for Deus Ex he wanted to gather every single conspiracy theory and put them all in the game. That's where all the craziness comes from, and eeriely the game felt very realistic and close to home. HR doesn't tackle that.

Besides that, the gameplay was a bit different here and there. No melee weapons, but the social mini-games were really intense and amazing. The combat is also probably better, though Deus Ex had a tad bit more roleplaying.

GreyMouser
30th Aug 2011, 05:15
On the boss fights that everyone has complained about: Has everyone forgotten that Deus Ex had boss fights too? First, you HAD to kill Navarra. No way to avoid it. And most everyone had to take down Walton Simmons in the underwater base as well, unless you happened to have had a walkthrough with you to show you the EXACT dialogue steps to take to avoid the fight (only one path would let you avoid combat, everything else forced you to fight him.)

alanschu
30th Aug 2011, 06:55
I reloaded. Who in their right mind would deliberately put themselves at a disadvantage by losing these battles? Roleplayers? People who want to discover all dialogue options? Please.

Ever since I've stopped reloading and actually accepted the consequences of my actions (something I did around the Deus Ex time) for stuff like this, my level of enjoyment in gaming shot up exponentially and the game experience always feels a lot more personal as a result. You do have an interesting point though, and I think emphatically points out that gamers really don't want consequences, no matter how much they say that they do. What they want is different ways to achieve success, preferably in a cost neutral environment (no solution is more ideal than the other). They definitely don't want consequences and if something less than ideal happens, they'll go back and get the consequences that they actually want.

I think this is unfortunate, and while there are situations where I would find myself still reloading because I screwed something up due to user error, I tended to not do it because I was spotted and the **** hit the fan, undermining my stealthy playthrough. I was playing a nonconfrontational hacker type with decent stealth approaches for my first playthrough, but wouldn't reload because the stealth aspect had been compromised, and had no problems being more than lethal because the circumstances made sense for Adam to do so. I did this knowing full well that I'd get less xp than being stealthy and taking people down, because the journey and experience itself is a reward itself.

I save the excessive save/reloads for the prescribed playthrough for my subsequent playthroughs (although the shoot 'em up type rarely needs as many reloads as the stealthy ghost ninja ones XD)


4. Boss fights. After all the marketing hype about four pillars, I don't know whose bright idea was it to add mandatory boss fights where the "four pillars" doesn't fly and combat is the only possible approach. Sure they require different tactics instead of being boring battalions with high damage and health, and they are fun, but still it could be amazing if we could avoid the bosses altogether, or turn them, empathize, whatever. Overall, boss fights feel like they were added in the last month of development by someone who thought they would be "cool".

I don't mind the idea of "forced" boss fights. Frankly there are many times I think it's absurd to allow every possible iteration for every situation and helps remove the verisimilitude from the setting. Someone like Bull is specifically contracted out to kill Jensen, and if you find yourself in a situation where you're stuck with him in a room, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have Jensen have to fight him (and even kill him). It would be stupid to reason with him, implausible to sway him, and I can't see any reason why this character would NOT try to kill Jensen, and in this situation it makes sense that Jensen's best outcome is to fight back as his options for flight are limited. Flight itself not being particularly ideal because realistically Jensen is going to have to deal with him eventually, and from a game development point of few it becomes very cumbersome to account for those types of situations. There's zero reason for Bull to NOT endlessly pursue you, and I felt it was pretty silly that if you evade Gunther (and Simons) in Deus Ex, they basically just say "oh well" and stop pursuing you.

Where the boss fights struggle is that they don't fully appreciate the variety of play styles that can exist, and that they should have better catered to how players played in their approach of defeating and killing the big players.



3. Cinematics. It is practically impossible to create different cinematics for different playstyles, or for people who equip different weapons. Thus Adam is always unarmed during the cinematics and he has a preset behavior. Like Random said, sometimes Adam's actions in cinematics doesn't reflect your playstyle during the actual game. Let's pretend. You are a stealthy type,

Your cinematics complaints are pretty valid though. While I find some situations are a bit nitpicky by some, the one example you mention from Hengsha is pretty good example of what not to do for sure. Although some situations where the cinematic is Adam walking in and then encountering a key character while in an exposed position is not necessarily bad if you think of the alternative, which would be keeping the player in game and just having nothing happen until the player attempts to actually interact with the object or whatever in the room, and the cutscene firing then.

Random
30th Aug 2011, 07:22
On the boss fights that everyone has complained about: Has everyone forgotten that Deus Ex had boss fights too? First, you HAD to kill Navarra. No way to avoid it. And most everyone had to take down Walton Simmons in the underwater base as well, unless you happened to have had a walkthrough with you to show you the EXACT dialogue steps to take to avoid the fight (only one path would let you avoid combat, everything else forced you to fight him.)

1. You can avoid killing Navarre, though yes you need to exploit the mechanics a bit (though I actually like this because it's a celebration of DX1's robust systemic design). But yes, okay, the intention is certainly for Navarre to die and it's a small misstep. One that Eidos has no excuse repeating multiple times 11 years later when player expectation is for a nonlethal option.

2. Even though you're supposed to kill Navarre you don't have to do it by full frontal assault. Explore and you will find a kill phrase and get past her without engaging in combat.

3. You don't need to do anything special to avoid killing Simons. You just leave. Run away from him. You don't need to do anything special with dialogue. The only reason people might not know this is because they're so programmed into the VIDEO GAME BOSS BATTLE mindset. The mindset that HR follows to the cliched letter.

4. Even if you like the idea of boss fights the ones in HR are terribly designed. Dumping you out of a cutscene with the boss right in front of you ready to shoot, then having an absurd arena battle with a boss that absorbs dozens of bullets and throws multiple grenades at you at once is just awful.

5. There is no reason why the story should be considered an excuse for these boss battles. Gameplay comes first. Forced boss battles like these should never have been in the design document for a Deus Ex game. If that conflicts with the story, you rewrite the story. It's a bad idea to write a Deus Ex game as a revenge drama in the first place.

6. Even if you like the story and think story should come first for some reason, there is still no reason for these bosses to exist. They are soulless. They are empty. They might as well be robots. You learn nothing about them. One of them doesn't even have a single line of dialogue. You could seriously remove these bosses from the game entirely and change nothing else and no one would notice or care. The characters are that inconsequential, which totally destroys Eidos's rubbish assertion that the boss fights are there for narrative reasons. The game would be better served in both gameplay and story if the bosses were simply excised. At least Navarre in the first game symbolised your break from UNATCO. If you put story first, that's an example of doing it right. The bosses in HR, on the other hand, are just there because Eidos is trying to follow some scriptwriting rules that say story = conflict and they figured they needed some Setpiece Boss Battles because That's What Video Games Are All About or whatever.

In short, the boss fights are a failure in both concept and execution and anyone defending them does not have a single argument in their favour.

Rindill the Red
30th Aug 2011, 07:40
I'll start things off with a brief overview. When I have time to write a full review I'll post it later.

Grading: C is average, B is above average, A is nearing perfection, D is below average, F is unacceptable

Final Verdict: SO CLOSE!!!! It's painful.
Grading as...
Modern cyber-punk RPG/FPS: B+
Worthy Sequel to Deus Ex: D+

Human Revolution’s “Deus Ex quality” story, settings, and (superior) visuals strike a soul-rending discord when packaged with painfully inadequate game “play and design” and narrative delivery. The former brings to mind the Deus Ex experience, only to be dashed violently upon the latter. Human Revolution begs for the whole Deus Ex package, which has been violently ripped from it by poor design decisions: most notably, cutting out original Deus Ex mechanics and ignoring the design philosophy that gave rise to the remarkable experiences of the original.

For Dugas: “Never was it a good idea to take things out or “simplify” a game design for a sequel; as it could have been any one of, or all together, the game mechanics and design philosophy of the original which made it great for any particular player. Game design does not mean you have to control every aspect of the player’s experience. In fact, it is one of the virtues and strengths of video-games that the player can interact with the medium in personal and unique ways, while the game design itself creates the means and world in which this happens. Designing hard-core games for the casual-gamer is a mistake. A casual gamer will not play hard-core games, and diluting the experience for the audience who will play the game in an attempt to attract an audience that will never play the game only subtracts value from the world. Designing a game by what everyone else in the industry is doing is likewise a mistake: prominence is only achieved by leaving the crowd behind.”

Was the Paul scene there? Yes, there was Malik. Was the bathroom scene there? Yes, there was Pritchard. But they mean nothing because they are only throw-backs to the original.

Ask yourself this, would these elements have been in DX:HR had they not been in the original? No. Whereas Paul’s apartment scene arose as a consequence of Deus Ex’s design philosophy, EM’s approach to DX:HR would have precluded its existence.

This is why Dishonored is likely to be Deus Ex’s true spiritual successor. During DX:HR’s development, Dugas and Anfossi were pleased to announce that one of their players “threw boxes at mines”… thus proving the emergent qualities of DX:HR. Colantino and Harvey were pleased to announce that one of their players “stopped time, possessed a guard, walked him in front of his own bullet, and resumed time”, thus proving the emergent qualities of Dishonored. One of these games demonstrates what Deus Ex could have been like now, 10 years later, one of them does not.

Story: B+
-- Main Arc Plot: A (Philosophy, conspiracy, ties to original, cyber-punk) -- A little too predictable and obvious - no subtlety here.
-- Character Design: B (Inconsistent)
-- Narrative Implementation: C (suffers from lack of original design philosophy -- choices in dialoguical structure -- characters appear once and disappear forever -- choices leave no lasting mark nor come back to affect Jensen later)
-- Sub plots: C+ (Side-narratives too frayed and shallow)
What I would have liked to see:
Better pacing
More characterization and exploration of supporting characters -- better integration with main arc
Organic player-directed narrative growth in consistent “simulation” -- as opposed to cut-scene heavy linear designer-dictated paths

Graphics: A
-- Visual Design: A+ (Black and gold cyber renaissance really works for me)
---- Environmental Design: A+ (Oh my god, that convention center needs to be a real place, and walking through Heng Sha blew my mind)
---- Character Design: A (I love the character design, memorable and unique, some of the characters didn’t translate to 3d models as well as could have been hoped)
-- Animations: D (While the idiosyncratic robotic dialogue animations grow on you, smoother more defined animations would have worked wonders with the visual design.)
What I would have liked to see:
Better animations

Game-play: C-
-- Level design (mutli-path: hacking/stealth/combat/social): C (Too many corridors and clearly-designed paths create a dissonant world-player relationship, this world has been crafted for the player, rather than having an objective and challenges to overcome organically, the player simply has an objective and may choose different pre-set paths to get to it: genuine player exploration and creative limit-pushing is discouraged if not right out prohibited. However, the city hubs approached true Deus Ex quality by nature.)
---- Stealth: C+ (Smooth stealth, great aug choices complement stealth gameplay... often way too easy -- over-reliant on visual information)
---- Hacking: C- (as mini-games go... not bad--it's EVERYWHERE though and over-incentivized)
---- Combat: B- (Combat is good... difficult and well-balanced... tiered enemies and above-average AI - skills missing though)
---- Social: B+ (I really loved this addition to the Deus Ex formula (the only thing they actually added))
-- “Quest” design: C (Linear journal tracked quests rather than a reactive world simulation – EM copped out and used artificial states and barriers to shoe-horn the player into a “mediocre” experience of their design, rather than creating a world and letting the player write his own story by exploring and interacting with it himself)
-- Game mechanic diversity: F (Every mechanic (augmentation, weapon, device) has a clear purpose, and each purpose has a clear mechanic, and each purpose-mechanic has clear application for the designers to put in a level and check off their list)
-- Experience mechanic: C (Unbalanced. Certain activities are over-incentivized)
-- AI: B+ (The AI is excellent: not perfect, but excellent).
What I would have liked to see:
Everything from the original + more:
Skills
Utility devices (lock-picks, re-breathers (swimming), multi-tools, therm-optic camo, etc.)
Melee combat (energy-independent stealth take-down)
CASIE-independent persuasion outside of boss-battles
Organic level design
Immersive sim design principles
Less frequent, more difficult, and heavier consequence hacking (an example would be a single hack gives player access to different levels of control of entire building/level)
Over-lapping applications


Role-play: C
-- Augmentations: C- (Limited)
-- Skills: F (Non-existent)
-- Mechanical choices for play-style: D- (One way to tackle each pre-designed path)
-- Immersive setting: B+ (Nailed cyber-punk right on the head, suffers from game-play and quest design mediocrity)
What I would have liked to see:
More and varied augmentations – optionally installed in LIMB clinics
Skills – all from original + more
Over-lapping applications
Better “side-quest” design

Sound: C
-- Music: C (McCann scores bland, repetitive, unmemorable tracks—still works with game)
-- Sound Design: C (Sounds seem okay and where they should be. Nothing remarkable.)
What I would have liked to hear:
Melodic ambience: subtle and numerous motif integration

Other:
--Gun design: C
What I would have liked to see:
Higher-tech weaponry – more and varied modability – ammo types – removable mods – skill based specialization
--Unreactive NPCS: We actually saw a demo where an NPC reacted to have a gun pulled on him... what the hell happened to that?

I don't think I'll ever be able to play DX:HR again.
Not because the game is bad at all... it's a decent game by modern standards... if it were farther away from Deus Ex I might be able to enjoy it... but it's so close to achieving the truly remarkable experience of Deus Ex that I cannot play it without a little piece of my soul dying in disappointment.

sugaki
30th Aug 2011, 08:45
I'm sorry, but Deus Ex was about the storyline--conspiracy, politics, morality, philosophy and trans-humanism--with gameplay layered on top like icing.

What are you talking about? 90% of the game is gameplay in DE1--you're not spending the majority of the game waxing political discourse and ethics, gimme a break. Think some people have an inflated view of what DE1 was. It was a video game, not some philosophical treatise.

Jordasm
30th Aug 2011, 09:40
I liked it, I think it's a worthy title to the series. Probably the best game I've played in a long time. But, I feel the story could have been better, as could the endings, it felt like Adam didn't really...change anything. I didn't like that NOTHING you did during the game actually affected the ending (Much like the original) Plus I would have liked to have known what happens to each character instead of Adam giving a monologue over stock footage. It isn't as good as the original (Not to say the original didn't have its flaws) and it seemed more like Metal Gear Solid at some points. There were a few pointless augmentations (Aim stabilizer, the stealth augmentations - with the exception of cloak)
Avoidable Bossfights would have also been great, they REALLY broke up the flow of the game, and unlike the bosses in the first game, you didn't really feel any hatred for them, they were just those guys that were stopping you advancing in the game.
And THIS is something I really agree with:


In the original Deus Ex more time was spent interacting with people, books, and the in depth, breathtaking storyline with grand foes hell bent on dominating the world. The types of conversations present in the Original Deus Ex existed to present the player with deep philosophical and political choices, or at least to make them think about it. This is a great example of what was missing from Human Revolution. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-bijO3uEw)
Here is another. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO8DET8-vBk)

I would have also loved the option to kill Megan. She's a terrible person and a horrible judge of character
1. Oh Hugh is going to betray the illuminati!
He tries to commit mass genocide
2. "Is that you Namir ^^"
first name terms with a person who killed her coworkers, kidnapped her, kept her hostage for 6 months, and tried to kill her ex boyfriend
3. Working with Bob Page on the virus
At that point, Page is just known as a very generous philanthropist, but seeing as Megan says she'll be working on the virus, she obviously knows he'll eventually be doing some very bad things, and is happily helping an evil man

Paxcorpus
30th Aug 2011, 10:55
I'm a huge Deus Ex "fanboi", have played the original many, many times. I consider the Hongkong mission one of the best missions ever to be designed. The original Deus Ex was revolutionary, Deus Ex HR is at best evolutionary. Sure, it's a step up from Deus Ex IW (which I also enjoyed, surprisingly), but it's just not in the same league as the first one, for all the reasons already mentioned. The original had a philosophical depth that expressed itself wonderfully in the various characters and your interaction with them: Manderley, Lebedev, Morpheus, Tracer Tong - these were all vividly drawn characters. At the same time, the game was fun to play, and gave you almost absolute freedom on how to complete missions and work your way through a level. It didn't really have boss fights. All the "bosses" in the game were dispatched easily.

I give the developers credit for trying to recreate the magic of the first one, but they don't quite succeed. Environments feel cramped, interaction with non-mission critical npcs feels superficial, the story seems to have a lot less depth, etc. I do not like that the game favors a specific play style and rewards you for that.

More importantly, I just can't get warmed up to Adam Jensen. When you first start Deus Ex, you immediately connect with J.C. because of his relationship to his brother. That relationship becomes a major axis around which the game revolves. For J.C. it's not just about uncovering some plot, it's also about family. And that relationship gives the game an emotional center.

In a sense, family is the important overarching theme of the entire game. In the beginning, UNATCO is your "family". You return to HQ from having accomplished and solved your first big mission. Everybody is friendly with you, greets you, makes reference to what you have accomplished. Janice, the secretary, is warm and welcoming, you meet Manderley who gives you your reward. You meet Jamie Reyes - everyone likes you, gives you stuff, accomodates you. You trust and are being trusted. You are part of something bigger and larger. All of this is established early in the game.

The reversal and betrayal later, therefore, is also a betrayal of your [B]personal[B] values. It feels like your family has abandoned you. And you spend much of the rest of the game trying to find new connections - who to trust, who should you listen to and follow....it was all so clear in the beginning....you and your brother had a purpose, you were working for an organisation whose values you endorsed and, as Manderley says, "takes care of their own."

Deus EX HR, IMHO, just doesn't create those same kinds of emotional connections. Yeah, ok, you're Chief of Security at Sarif Industries, but so what?

I wasn't really going to post in these forums, but I was interested in reading what the hardcore fanbois thought, since I am one of the fans from the original game.

Although it isn't completely up to spec, HR is still one of the best games I've played in a while, right up there with Mass Effect.

In response to what you're saying here though - the connection - I guess you missed the very beginning of HR where you're introduced to Jenson's Ex-girlfriend, the person you see in questionable danger right before you're shot in the head? Excuse me if I'm wrong, but you sound like you're being a little biased here.

I mean, I'm sure most of us have been in relationships before and we all know what those emotions feel like, right?

popej
30th Aug 2011, 11:47
My thoughts pretty much mirror the opinions of most others in this thread. I'm less perturbed by the storyline and background issues than many of you though. It doesn't match the original in terms of depth, variation and scene-setting but it's still done pretty well.

My gripes are mainly with the gameplay, some of the mistakes they've made are inexcusable with the budget they had and in a game of this reputation;

1) Takedowns - It's all been said before but this mechanic is simply awful. "It's balanced" people are saying and while relevant balance isn't everything, or even the most important point. The suspension of belief required is just too big for me, for reasons said previously. "Why can't he just punch him in the face without needing to eat a bag of crisps first!?" I feel like shouting at the monitor. Sure it recharges but that's hardly the point. I still think it's ludicrous that you could find yourself in a situation where you have no ammo and no energy, at which point you're as helpless as a babe short of throwing cardboard boxes, yeah right! It should be 'Click to swing' like the original or perhaps a variation on Batman: AA's system. Either way 'pressing Q to escape problematic situation for 1 energy' is lazy and inexcusable in this game. That's why I'm playing it through with the takedown key unbound.

The second irritation is the 'warping actions' of you and the target when you run up to them and press Q. As someone else mentioned, the baddie can be actively shooting at you when you run up to them hammering the Q button. Despite this you'll still get the 'tap on the shoulder takedown' cut scene! Simply inexcusable!

2) The illusion of free will - Again some good points have been made about this. Eidos Montreal seem to be convinced that; a) Go through the vent, b) Go through the bad guys, c) Hack the door, is some kind of revolution in choice and free will. Unfortunately theres still that inescapable feeling that you're being funneled into making one of these 3 choices with the same outcome.

I'll give an example of where this succeeded in the original game *SPOILERS* On Lebedev's Plane - I remember being blown away by this particular part of the game. I remember asking myself "Did I just do that?" and then watching in amazement as the game reacted to my decisions.

First of all I refused to kill Lebedev, I then kept questioning him to get as much info out of him as possible, as you'lll probably remember, Navara then assassinates him and berates you for not doing your job. Amazing I thought! I was then about to leave the plane before I thought "What if?". I didn't really think my idea would do anything, tbh I was expecting Navara to be scripted and therefore invulnerable for continuity reasons. Nevertheless, I went back to Lebedev's bedroom and planted a LAM on the bed post next to Navara before legging it. Boom! and a shower of guts and gibs. YES, I thought, you can kill her! I then left the plane expecting a message to come up saying "The games storyline is borked, please reload", but no. Instead Alex Jacobson is on t'blower saying "Jesus JC, I can't believe you just did that!" I distinctly remember exclaiming out loud at this outcome. I couldn't believe the game was intelligent enough to incorporate my actions at that specific point into the storyline. I'm willing to bet theres still a fair few vets that haven't done this and perhaps think it isn't possible! No other game has come CLOSE to providing this much freedom in choice.

Tbh I never really expected the new game to provide anything like this level of freedom & choice as nothing else has managed it in the last 12 years.

3) Interactive environment (or lack of) - Simple this one. Why can't I pick up that keyboard, turn on that hand drier in the toilet or get a reaction when I stand on someones desk? Ok the original wasn't amazing in this respect but it was definitely better. In this day and age you expect a certain amount of environmental interactivity and Eidos Montreal have been lazy again here. At the very least you expect some half realistic physics with exploding papers, jars and computer monitors in a firefight. Nope.

4) No mod tools - ARRRRGGHHHH! In the long run this will be seen as the largest of Eidos Montreal's crimes. Of course there is still time....

There are other points but these are currently the 4 big ones doing my head in.

Despite all this I'm still enjoying it. It's a good game in it's own right and requires a bit more brain action than the usual 'dumbed down for majority market share & limited by console hardware and audience attention span' bull**** that gets released these days.

Ta

WildcatPhoenix
30th Aug 2011, 13:40
I don't think I'll ever be able to play DX:HR again.
Not because the game is bad at all... it's a decent game by modern standards... if it were farther away from Deus Ex I might be able to enjoy it... but it's so close to achieving the truly remarkable experience of Deus Ex that I cannot play it without a little piece of my soul dying in disappointment.

Summed it up for me, right there. That's exactly how I feel about DX:HR.

Thanks for the detailed breakdown, Rindill. I know not everyone on this board feels the same way about the game, but I'm pretty sure your experience with it would mirror my own.

NapalmLemon
30th Aug 2011, 13:48
I don't get the people making these dramatic posts about not liking it or having a meltdown about the boss fights.

I liked it better than the original, and to say I loved the original would be an understatement. I played the original through over 5 times in an effort to see every possible outcome and option.

Anyone claiming their soul dies playing human revolution needs to give their head a shake.

CarpeNukemXVIII
30th Aug 2011, 14:23
I don't see the big deal about the bosses. Who cares if the first game didn't have them(not in this form), they are there to break the game up a bit and show us some cool things and I'm fine with that. You can still approach the fights different ways, you just can't sneak by them or avoid them. They were not that hard either, as they stood as the easiest parts of the game for me, on Hard.

As for the cinematics....I thought they looked awesome and told the story well, but I agree they can't account for actual player choices. Hopefully this is something that can be fixed on the next DX game.

NapalmLemon
30th Aug 2011, 14:50
I don't see the big deal about the bosses. Who cares if the first game didn't have them(not in this form), they are there to break the game up a bit and show us some cool things and I'm fine with that. You can still approach the fights different ways, you just can't sneak by them or avoid them. They were not that hard either, as they stood as the easiest parts of the game for me, on Hard.

As for the cinematics....I thought they looked awesome and told the story well, but I agree they can't account for actual player choices. Hopefully this is something that can be fixed on the next DX game.

Negativity is a circular thing. Forums are a hotbed of that negative spiral. The Internet itself for that matter is.

Someone plays the game, maybe doesn't like a few aspects about it, and then they come to the forum...

Well a forum by it's nature is a bunch of people gathered together and squealing like stuck pigs about each and every little thing they don't like. I would be willing to wager that more than a few people go or have gone from "hm that was a pretty good game but there were a few areas that could be improved" to "OMG everything sucks, the boss battles ruined it, my soul is destroyed and Eidos has raped my childhood!"

Adding a non lethal resolution to boss fights would have been the KISS solution to things. If anything to me the boss battles serve as something to think about as far as a more elegant and innovative solution in a potential sequel. They are not however the end of the world and some game breaking monstrosity.

What was funny was the bosses actually got easier as you went through them, as you were more augmented as you went along. By the time I got to Jaron I came through the fight feeling like I had toyed with him and basically destroyed him. Barret on the other hand was more of a struggle because I was augmented for hacking and stealth, and on Deus Ex difficulty he knocks your health down really fast.

WildcatPhoenix
30th Aug 2011, 15:03
Negativity is a circular thing. Forums are a hotbed of that negative spiral. The Internet itself for that matter is.

Someone plays the game, maybe doesn't like a few aspects about it, and then they come to the forum...

Well a forum by it's nature is a bunch of people gathered together and squealing like stuck pigs about each and every little thing they don't like. I would be willing to wager that more than a few people go or have gone from "hm that was a pretty good game but there were a few areas that could be improved" to "OMG everything sucks, the boss battles ruined it, my soul is destroyed and Eidos has raped my childhood!"


Give it a rest. Seriously. Some of us have been here on this board for years. Not a few weeks, years. We've been voicing our concerns/expectations/disappointments about the game for a long, long time.

If some of us want to express disappointment or displeasure with some of the game mechanics, we should be free to do so on the official game forums.

Decard
30th Aug 2011, 15:11
...but it's so close to achieving the truly remarkable experience of Deus Ex that I cannot play it without a little piece of my soul dying in disappointment.

This. I'm sinking in sadness right now.

The story is half baked (barely a few illuminati references, no Bob Page except for intro and easter egg at the end, no conspiracies, no philosophy debates other than that concerning augs) characters are not memorable by any means (except Sarif) and it seems that at least 50% of the content is missing from final release. Let's all thank Square Enix for 2011 deadline. I knew they would fk things up.

My only hope lies in the DX1 modding community and Dishonored now.

Lundra
30th Aug 2011, 15:20
I personally enjoy HR more, but I didn't play DX1 for years and years until it was way too outdated to fully enjoy.

WildcatPhoenix
30th Aug 2011, 15:24
My only hope lies in the DX1 modding community and Dishonored now.

Join us (the DX1 modding community) in our desperate prayer vigil for an SDK from Human Revolution. I know it isn't going to happen. I know it. But oh man, just imagine...

Sadly, I missed out on the heyday of DX modding (2001-2004), with mods like RedSun2020 and Hotel Carone. Been struggling for years to get my own "Man in Black" mod released, but the pool of available modders for the old Unreal engine is just miniscule at this point. People just can't/won't spend that much of their lives working on something that was looking a little dated even back in 2000.

But with the new tools, and this fanbase? Would be glorious. (wishful sigh)

Rindill the Red
30th Aug 2011, 15:35
This. I'm sinking in sadness right now.

The story is half baked (barely a few illuminati references, no Bob Page except for intro and easter egg at the end, no conspiracies, no philosophy debates other than that concerning augs) characters are not memorable by any means (except Sarif) and it seems that at least 50% of the content is missing from final release. Let's all thank Square Enix for 2011 deadline. I knew they would fk things up.

My only hope lies in the DX1 modding community and Dishonored now.

I too, am awaiting the release of an SDK. The game cries out for user modifications. So many little things could make the game a lot better.

About the story...

There are a bunch of great ideas (if most stolen from other media). The main thread running through the game is really good. It's just been implemented poorly.

It does feel a little cut up and patched... almost like they had a really amazing (long) story to tell, but it got destroyed while being pushed through the game design and cutting boards.

They missed out on the strengths of returning to locations... being able to see how your actions before have changed it. A dead pimp. A gang-war.

NapalmLemon
30th Aug 2011, 15:53
Give it a rest. Seriously. Some of us have been here on this board for years. Not a few weeks, years. We've been voicing our concerns/expectations/disappointments about the game for a long, long time.

If some of us want to express disappointment or displeasure with some of the game mechanics, we should be free to do so on the official game forums.

Statements like I'm sinking in sadness, and my soul is dying when I play are a little bit beyond the pale to me as far as "expressing disappointment or displeasure with some of the game mechanics."

I'm a huge deus ex fan too, but I guess I must have played a different human revolution than everyone else, because I liked it better than the original and definitely am not sinking in sadness or suffering the death of my soul.

So with that, Seriously, give the emo routine a rest.

WildcatPhoenix
30th Aug 2011, 16:04
Statements like I'm sinking in sadness, and my soul is dying when I play are a little bit beyond the pale to me as far as "expressing disappointment or displeasure with some of the game mechanics."

I'm a huge deus ex fan too, but I guess I must have played a different human revolution than everyone else, because I liked it better than the original and definitely am not sinking in sadness or suffering the death of my soul.

So with that, Seriously, give the emo routine a rest.

You'll note I didn't say "sinking in sadness" or anything like that. Whatever, I'm not going to engage in a back-and-forth flamewar with you over this. You like Human Revolution more than DX1. That's perfectly fine. You're entitled to your opinion as well as the right to voice that opinion here on the forums. No one is disputing that.

But stop deriding those of us who don't share that opinion. I'm not on here calling you a "sycophantic slobbering n00b," so stop calling us "emo fanbois" and whatnot. Elevate the discourse, comrade. :hmm:

NapalmLemon
30th Aug 2011, 16:14
You'll note I didn't say "sinking in sadness" or anything like that. Whatever, I'm not going to engage in a back-and-forth flamewar with you over this. You like Human Revolution more than DX1. That's perfectly fine. You're entitled to your opinion as well as the right to voice that opinion here on the forums. No one is disputing that.

But stop deriding those of us who don't share that opinion. I'm not on here calling you a "sycophantic slobbering n00b," so stop calling us "emo fanbois" and whatnot. Elevate the discourse, comrade. :hmm:

Many people seem to be getting extremely dramatic. Sinking in sadness, as well as the imminent death of someones soul are paraphrases if not direct quotes of other replies in this very thread.

Somewhere out there when human revolutions teaser trailer was released I created a forum account with a different username. If a date is that important to you, I could have perhaps logged in with that account. However I don't find it all that valuable to judge someones personal worth based on their joined on date as opposed to what they have to say.

Regardless what your position is on the game it is, negativity is a highly worthless and self sustaining spiral. Especially despair on the level of claiming ones soul is dying after playing a very solid game.

WildcatPhoenix
30th Aug 2011, 16:29
Regardless what your position is on the game it is, negativity is a highly worthless and self sustaining spiral. Especially despair on the level of claiming ones soul is dying after playing a very solid game.

Incorrect. Negativity (criticism, critique, judgment, whatever you want to call it) breeds higher quality. Nothing would ever improve if we all just sat back and slobbered over everything that was spoon fed to us.

Now that doesn't mean people should be insulting, bigoted, or downright hateful toward EM or anyone else on this board. But we have a right (and dare I say, an obligation?) to criticize something. You know why? Because Eidos Montreal expects me to pay for their services.

Very few people on this board are claiming that DX:HR is complete and total garbage. Most of the so-called "whiners" or negative reviewers have prefaced their opinions with statements like "DX:HR still has more care and effort put in to it than 99% of what's out there on the modern gaming market." But this game has the words Deus Ex in the title. A "good game" is not enough, not for me. A "fun game" isn't enough either.

It needed to be great. Deus Ex should be special, a landmark, something games will build off of for decades. My opinion, yeah, and worth just a little bit less than $60 to Eidos in the long-run. But that's where I (and some others of us) stand.

Jenson
30th Aug 2011, 16:34
Was it too easy? YES
(no where near as challenging as the original)

Did i feel it was still somewhat cutdown version of what made deus ex original awesome? YES
(depth of the mechanics were no where near as deep as the original)

Unpolished game? YES
(AI lmao, script bugs and other bugs, those non cgi renders ..gross)

Graphics? DISSAPPOINTED
(should of liscenced UT3 engine if they couldn't build a nice one of their own)

Art Direction? AMAZING

Story? id say on par with original

Bosses? boring
-----------------------------------------------------

was it worth paying for? ofc
(LMAO if Call of Duty can charge £30 and get away with it..i think DE:HR has problem)

Did the Dev team do the job? The game satisfied my general expectations...although it wasn't the game i wished it to be

Overal thoughts: It really would of helped if they pushed it back till january to MASSIVELY fix the AI, polish the game more and INCLUDE SOME HIGH RES TEXTURES...(e.g interiors seemed to have higher res textures than the outdoor environments), improve the boss fights and make them more interesting.

BUT...albeit all this ranting....the game was still awesome :) ...NEXT TIME MAKE IT PERFECT...maybe set the timeline 200 years in the future?

NapalmLemon
30th Aug 2011, 16:47
Incorrect. Negativity (criticism, critique, judgment, whatever you want to call it) breeds higher quality. Nothing would ever improve if we all just sat back and slobbered over everything that was spoon fed to us.

Now that doesn't mean people should be insulting, bigoted, or downright hateful toward EM or anyone else on this board. But we have a right (and dare I say, an obligation?) to criticize something. You know why? Because Eidos Montreal expects me to pay for their services.

Very few people on this board are claiming that DX:HR is complete and total garbage. Most of the so-called "whiners" or negative reviewers have prefaced their opinions with statements like "DX:HR still has more care and effort put in to it than 99% of what's out there on the modern gaming market." But this game has the words Deus Ex in the title. A "good game" is not enough, not for me. A "fun game" isn't enough either.

It needed to be great. Deus Ex should be special, a landmark, something games will build off of for decades. My opinion, yeah, and worth just a little bit less than $60 to Eidos in the long-run. But that's where I (and some others of us) stand.

There is a very important difference between positive and constructive criticism and a negativity spiral. The majority of the internet and forums at large have a tendency to fall into the destructive category. Nothing good comes out of wallowing and commiserating in misery.

There were things I would improve upon in the game as well. However you will have a long road ahead of you in attempting to convince me that wallowing and whining can ever yield a positive outcome.

Many people I talk to have the position of "I don't read forums" and that's why, because anything constructive has a tendency to become obfuscated in a torrent of negativity and complaints.

There was a time when I let myself get right into the complaining on forums and one day I realized, you know, game X wasn't really all that bad till all the whiners in the forum told me how bad I should think it is.

Suggest improvements for next time yes. Make grandiose and ludicrous statements about how the game is some kind of affront to the ideal you have stuck in your head about the original, no.

Paxcorpus
31st Aug 2011, 00:00
There is a very important difference between positive and constructive criticism and a negativity spiral. The majority of the internet and forums at large have a tendency to fall into the destructive category. Nothing good comes out of wallowing and commiserating in misery.

There were things I would improve upon in the game as well. However you will have a long road ahead of you in attempting to convince me that wallowing and whining can ever yield a positive outcome.

Many people I talk to have the position of "I don't read forums" and that's why, because anything constructive has a tendency to become obfuscated in a torrent of negativity and complaints.

There was a time when I let myself get right into the complaining on forums and one day I realized, you know, game X wasn't really all that bad till all the whiners in the forum told me how bad I should think it is.

Suggest improvements for next time yes. Make grandiose and ludicrous statements about how the game is some kind of affront to the ideal you have stuck in your head about the original, no.

/thread

jtr7
31st Aug 2011, 04:32
Heh. Don't you see the irony of negative and destructive name-calling and making demands insultingly of forum posters in order to somehow fix social tendencies, which is harder to accomplish than fixing game development tendencies through the same methods?

ricardosamuel1961
31st Aug 2011, 06:11
In response to what you're saying here though - the connection - I guess you missed the very beginning of HR where you're introduced to Jenson's Ex-girlfriend, the person you see in questionable danger right before you're shot in the head? Excuse me if I'm wrong, but you sound like you're being a little biased here.

I mean, I'm sure most of us have been in relationships before and we all know what those emotions feel like, right?

I'm about half way through the game, so maybe it'll come together later, but I never got much of that connection between Jensen and his ex-girlfriend. The original does a much better job, IMHO, establishing J.C. as a character with emotional weight.

ZakKa89
31st Aug 2011, 07:20
There is a very important difference between positive and constructive criticism and a negativity spiral. The majority of the internet and forums at large have a tendency to fall into the destructive category. Nothing good comes out of wallowing and commiserating in misery.

There were things I would improve upon in the game as well. However you will have a long road ahead of you in attempting to convince me that wallowing and whining can ever yield a positive outcome.

Many people I talk to have the position of "I don't read forums" and that's why, because anything constructive has a tendency to become obfuscated in a torrent of negativity and complaints.

There was a time when I let myself get right into the complaining on forums and one day I realized, you know, game X wasn't really all that bad till all the whiners in the forum told me how bad I should think it is.

Suggest improvements for next time yes. Make grandiose and ludicrous statements about how the game is some kind of affront to the ideal you have stuck in your head about the original, no.

Well said

sugaki
31st Aug 2011, 08:53
As for the cinematics....I thought they looked awesome and told the story well, but I agree they can't account for actual player choices. Hopefully this is something that can be fixed on the next DX game.

It's not about accounting for player choices--what really ticked me off about the cutscenes is that all of a sudden Jensen transforms into a grade-A retard. If you notice, in every single pre-boss cut scene except the last he gets caught by surprise.

First boss: Waltzes into middle of the room, not seeing somebody behind him.
Second boss: Again, has no clue there's another aug soldier in the room until Eliza mentions it.
First encounter with Zhao: Not boss scene, but Jensen starts acting like an 80s movie action hero idiot, being swayed by Zhao's words (who's not at all convincing).
Third boss: Again, Jensen waltzes into room, not noticing Jaron.

It doesn't matter what style you play as Jensen, he acts like a moron with every cutscene, that's my problem. Okay, so Jensen in the cutscenes isn't the stealthy type. Fine. But he doesn't even have his gun out when spotting Jaron in the first pre-boss cutscene? How stupid is that? The transition to boss battles are done by Jensen having a brain fart, which is annoying.

tsaweeos
31st Aug 2011, 08:53
I'm happy I bought Human Revolution and the ending left me satisfied. In terms of how good the story was, I'd say it's up there with the original but I did expect more of the overall game.
By this point, I expect most threads to contain spoilers and that the people coming here are posting to give their final verdict after completing the game so I don't see any need to add a spoiler tag to the entire post so here I go:

- I expected the riot to be on a grander scale where a ton of buildings would be ruined, paths un-traversable while newer ones are opened, windows smashed and the streets to be flooded with people rampaging as well as stealing.
I thought/was hoping to stealth it up just to move around the crowd but instead I just get a tiny window of a walled off area where I can look at the riot from a safe distance. :(

- The "cyber zombies" if you can even call them that, were cool but weren't a threat at all. I was hoping their movements would be more unpredictable like jumping over obstacles just to claw at me or jumping off higher platforms or even throwing bricks or random things lying around at me.

- The sky-boxes were gorgeous except for the last part you see in the Arctic ocean below with ice burgs and the structure with the pit (forget its name). It looked like a cardboard cut out and felt as if the dev's were rushing to get the game done.

- One thing I miss is the strange creatures from the original game and even IW. Those Gobb lizard things, aliens, Omar and other weird creatures made the conspiracy theme feel more deep and involving since you're living in a world where strange things are always possible. In human Revolution however, it's purely human npc's which left me a little disappointed.

- Another thing I missed was the individual health of arms and legs. Crawling around with legs at 0 health was hilarious. Crawling around looking for anything to get me back up on my feet was intense. :p


So yeah... excellent game but I'd love to see an expansion pack which allowed the dev's to improve the single player experience (I wouldn't consider it "just an update" as the game is fine as is) by making the AI more intelligent, add more foreign creatures and any other things you guys would suggest. Maybe even multiplayer support now that the single player is completed?

remmus
31st Aug 2011, 10:46
personally I love the game, sure it´s no revolution like the first was, but it is a solid built game that in my mind captured the core of what a Deus Ex game should be, a game where you can play it pretty much the way you want. A few minor comment points

* vastly better none lethal then the first game, Deus Ex 1 none lethal was atrocious and HR makes a good job making it viable, frankly only grief I have is the lack of mid range none lethal options, a bit annoying consider I came up with ways to make 2 of the 3 none lethal weapons in the game viable for mid range in 2 seconds flat

*stealth is also vastly improved, the first games stealth was bare bone and relied more on half blind and stupid guards then your own skill, here you really have to rely on your skills, your smarts, and one or two good augs.

* lots of freedom how to tackle a area just like the good old first game, if I have to give this game a minus it tend to be to promoting tho of stealth, with big exp bonuses, but hey, as I personally like to play the ninja hacker I dont mind.

overall in my mind a game worthy of carrying the name Deus Ex, lets just hope Eidos don´t do a Invisible War fiasco with a future sequel.

technobuddha
31st Aug 2011, 16:31
I am usually a lurker, but I had to get my 2 bits in here. I am a huge fan of the original, not only have I played it multiple times back 10 years ago, but I still play it every 5 or 6 months to this day. For those that are calling it outdated, I play for the enjoyment not the graphics. Unlike many of you I am not a FPSer, I have never played Splinter Cell, Call of Duty, the closest I get is Fallout: New Vegas (where I mainly use VATS), Vampire: Bloodlines and such. I am a RPGer who loved the original because of story and character development. I have just killed Barrett but so far I am disappointed in HR. I am enjoying some of it, but what I find irritates me is:


Boss fights, as has been said
I Miss skills, augs are nice, but seem to dumb the game down.
Consumables, I miss lockpicks and multitools and having the skills to use them. As much as I enjoy the hacking mini-game (reminds me a bit of Sega Genesis's Shadowrun) I don't like it as the only way to unlock things. Again without the consumables and the skills to go with them, I feel it dumbs the game down.
No real storyline
Cramped feeling in areas


This is from a role-player's experience, I understand that those of you that enjoy shooters, having upgradable weapons and augs mixed in with some dialog is roleplay. For me, that is not true, rpg's (and this is labeled as a rpg just like the first one was) have a world, character growth and the good ones have some bit of non-linear (not all, especially the old school can be very linear) This game, along with Mass Effect and other so-called RPG's/Shooters are showing me how sad the game industry has gotten.

xeoncat
31st Aug 2011, 16:54
The types of conversations present in the Original Deus Ex existed to present the player with deep philosophical and political choices, or at least to make them think about it. This is a great example of what was missing from Human Revolution. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-bijO3uEw)
Here is another. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO8DET8-vBk)

The game to have any dialog that surpasses this Morpheus dialog is still to be made. I expected they would do something like that with HR's Eliza, but no.

CarpeNukemXVIII
31st Aug 2011, 17:05
It's not about accounting for player choices--what really ticked me off about the cutscenes is that all of a sudden Jensen transforms into a grade-A retard. If you notice, in every single pre-boss cut scene except the last he gets caught by surprise.

First boss: Waltzes into middle of the room, not seeing somebody behind him.
Second boss: Again, has no clue there's another aug soldier in the room until Eliza mentions it.
First encounter with Zhao: Not boss scene, but Jensen starts acting like an 80s movie action hero idiot, being swayed by Zhao's words (who's not at all convincing).
Third boss: Again, Jensen waltzes into room, not noticing Jaron.

It doesn't matter what style you play as Jensen, he acts like a moron with every cutscene, that's my problem. Okay, so Jensen in the cutscenes isn't the stealthy type. Fine. But he doesn't even have his gun out when spotting Jaron in the first pre-boss cutscene? How stupid is that? The transition to boss battles are done by Jensen having a brain fart, which is annoying.

I agree. I think it would have been a lot better if the cinematics were done in real time, ala MGS or Mass Effect. Them being pre-rendered however, would mean that if in a cinematic he pulls out a pistol, and you're not using a pistol at all, it would be quite odd and immersion breaking. However, more immersion breaking still was how dumb Jensen did act in the cinematics, and that could have totally avoided.

7h30n
31st Aug 2011, 17:21
Time to give my part in this topic. It was a mistake for me to replay Deus Ex just before starting Deus Ex: Human Revolution... Damn you New Vision mod! You can see where this is going, yes I was dissapointed. In the end it's not all the "dumbing down" that gives me a bad taste but the level design and story-telling issues like cutscenes. Some cutscenes are fine but some should have been gameplay which would make the game more immersive. The main sore in my eyes is the level design which feels unnatural, forced and simply makes me not want to replay the game. It's not the look of levels which is excellent (littered with so many details, references etc.) but the layout and approach to multi solutions. Another minor issue that ties to level & quest design is inability to finish certain side quests without hacking skills.

Overall it is better than Invisible War. Special praise should go to developers for filling the game with so many details, references to previous Deus Ex, popular culture and ofcourse to the writing team who did the background story and scientific research. Things like that are so rare in todays games!
I hope they will improve on this Deus Ex and inspire others.

P.S. I haven't finished the game yet. I'm taking it a bit slower, trying to get every detail (unlike IW which was a pain to playthrough so I did it as fast as humanly possible).

simonpm
31st Aug 2011, 17:39
I played the original Deus Ex to death and have been on the edge of my seat for the last couple of years waiting for DX:HR to be released.

Firstly, it's a great game. There's no doubt about that. One of the finest games to be released in the last 5 years. I do however have a few misgivings which I would hope the developers would consider for future content / sequels:

1) Gameplay is superb apart from one pretty big issue (imo), and that is the game is way, way, way too easy, even on the highest difficulty mode. The highest difficulty in DX:HR is roughly equivalent to Medium difficulty in the original Deus Ex imo. An example of this is that even on the highest difficulty level, Fedarova and Namir only take 2 or 3 successive typhoon attacks to take them down, and Barrett falls over with a couple of grenades and rockets. I beat all the bosses within 20 - 25 seconds on the highest difficulty level. That's not really acceptable for what are supposed to be major fights in the game imo.

2) Seeing as the the Tyrant mercs comprise 3 out of 4 boss fights, I would like for them to have been "fleshed out" a little more in-game. I understand that they are covered pretty comprehensively in the Icarus Effect novel, but you shouldn't have to be forced to buy a book to find out who they are. The game itself offers nothing on their backstory. I also felt a little let down with the almost complete absence of Bob Page in the game. Apart from the opening sequence and the post-credits scene, along with 1 or 2 emails, we learned nothing further about him.

3) I really enjoyed all of the games locations, but with one exception - Panchaea. I thought Panchaea was a huge cop-out, and seemed "half-done" - almost like it was a rush-job and recieved about 50% of the effort of the other locations in terms of content. Just populating it with insane human/zombie types made it feel like I was playing Dead Rising in the Arctic. Felt really dissappointed with this location.

4) Needed more of Bob Page's evilness - nuff said. He was amazing in the original. I understand that in DX:HR he's not made his move with MJ12 etc yet, but the Bob Page character is so damn charismatic I would have loved to experience some more of his nefariousness first-hand.

Other than those few gripes, It was a blast to play and I'll definately be having a few more replays out of it.

One last thought is that I'd absolutely love to see a Deus Ex Redux made with the same gameplay as DX:HR. What a game that would be!!

Rindill the Red
31st Aug 2011, 18:34
1) Gameplay is superb apart from one pretty big issue (imo), and that is the game is way, way, way too easy, even on the highest difficulty mode. The highest difficulty in DX:HR is roughly equivalent to Medium difficulty in the original Deus Ex imo. An example of this is that even on the highest difficulty level, Fedarova and Namir only take 2 or 3 successive typhoon attacks to take them down, and Barrett falls over with a couple of grenades and rockets. I beat all the bosses within 20 - 25 seconds on the highest difficulty level. That's not really acceptable for what are supposed to be major fights in the game imo.

It's not just too easy, it's too simple. The boss fights were poorly done all around--a combat oriented character destroys them easily while a stealth, hacking, or social based character has a lot of trouble. The game features extremely rich, deep, and complex story and setting, yet provides game-play shallower than spilled milk.

Daedatheus
31st Aug 2011, 19:51
Cramped feeling in areas

I get this with a lot of modern shooters. It's the FOV. If you're playing on PC, crank it up to 90 at least.

There aren't as many WIIIIDE open areas as DX1, and Hengsha is supposed to be a little cramped, but it feels much better when you're not zoomed in I think.

InGroove2
31st Aug 2011, 21:47
this whole thread is a giant... as they say, FacePalm.

I went to this thread cause i'm trying to get a feel for what real DX fans think of the new DX game....
the what i've learned here is that:

DX HR is probably an amazing game as long as i allow myself to see it on its own terms and not the terms of my flawed memory, my overwrought nostalgia, my ever-contradictory-expectations and the 20/20 of my hindsight.

Rindill the Red
31st Aug 2011, 22:43
this whole thread is a giant... as they say, FacePalm.

I went to this thread cause i'm trying to get a feel for what real DX fans think of the new DX game....
the what i've learned here is that:

DX HR is probably an amazing game as long as i allow myself to see it on its own terms and not the terms of my flawed memory, my overwrought nostalgia, my ever-contradictory-expectations and the 20/20 of my hindsight.

We play Deus Ex frequently; likely more than once a year since release. Nostalgia doesn't play into it. DX:HR fails in comparison to Deus Ex for many reasons.

remmus
31st Aug 2011, 22:50
We play Deus Ex frequently; likely more than once a year since release. Nostalgia doesn't play into it. DX:HR fails in comparison to Deus Ex for many reasons.

no nostalgia? Hard time believing that since ya seam to act like the first game didn´t have it´s own failings.

Random
1st Sep 2011, 00:11
It's not about nostalgia. I can load up Deus Ex right now (which I did yesterday actually) and I'll be playing a better game than HR, for the reasons that numerous people have posted in this thread. That's not nostalgia talking.

pha
1st Sep 2011, 01:18
DX HR is probably an amazing game as long as i allow myself to see it on its own terms and not the terms of my flawed memory, my overwrought nostalgia, my ever-contradictory-expectations and the 20/20 of my hindsight.

More power to you then, I'm sure you'll enjoy HR because it really is amazing.

But how can you be "nostalgic" about a game you still play from time to time, with almost the same passion you had when you played it back in the day? If you think about it, most of us spent our childhood/adolescence with super old school games but can you imagine playing those ancient NES or C64 games today, with the same passion? Saying that the original DX surpasses DX:HR in some aspects (which it does) has little to do with nostalgia.

jtr7
1st Sep 2011, 02:05
no nostalgia? Hard time believing that since ya seam to act like the first game didn´t have it´s own failings.

Wrong.:hmm:

Rindill the Red
1st Sep 2011, 05:13
no nostalgia? Hard time believing that since ya seam to act like the first game didn´t have it´s own failings.

Saying that Deus Ex is an amazing experience and one of the best games ever does not mean it's perfect. Despite it's flaws it never fails to deliver an experience superior to any other video game in existence.

sugaki
1st Sep 2011, 05:44
3) I really enjoyed all of the games locations, but with one exception - Panchaea. I thought Panchaea was a huge cop-out, and seemed "half-done" - almost like it was a rush-job and recieved about 50% of the effort of the other locations in terms of content. Just populating it with insane human/zombie types made it feel like I was playing Dead Rising in the Arctic. Felt really dissappointed with this location.

Ditto. I feel like it was thrown together and sloppy. I mean, these zombies are supposed to be aggressive to anybody right? Why are they buddy-buddy with all the other zombies? They threw out any semblance of believability out of some misguided "hey, zombies are hip, let's put em in the game!"


4) Needed more of Bob Page's evilness - nuff said. He was amazing in the original. I understand that in DX:HR he's not made his move with MJ12 etc yet, but the Bob Page character is so damn charismatic I would have loved to experience some more of his nefariousness first-hand.

What's disappointing is that the intro seems to be setting up Bob Page to be a major character in the game... yet the antagonist shifts to become Zhao. The story never quite comes together, and was scatterbrained. A shame.

Laputin Man
1st Sep 2011, 05:58
Wait till you get to run around in Heng Sha. It's overwhelming, and makes Detroit look silly in comparison. I was so impressed by that city hub, they really "knocked it out of the park" as Sarif would say.



Oh my god. You nailed it, you absolutely nailed it. I felt that something deeply important was missing in HR, and you've managed to verbalize it.

For me, the core of Deus Ex was actually never really about the "gameplay" elements. HR has been compared to the original so much due to its options and choices during much objective-based gameplay. But the thing that really GRABBED me when I played the first game was the immersion into a truly philosophical line of questioning, a game that actually EDUCATED me. In HR, it felt like the augmentation debate was all that was going on, all that anyone ever talked about, and as if the audience was so dumb they had to see crazed augmented zombies running around just to get the point of the abuses of technology. All of the media including newspapers, books, and conversations never tapped into the true philosophical depth that its first predecessor did.

Even a slight technical point - in Deus Ex there were many conversations where you have a choice of dialogue options, conversations that did not further any objective or sidequest, they were just there for the sake of the conversation. In DXHR every conversation that gives you dialogue options is part of some objective in the main plot or sidequest. The rest are all just short lines that people say to you. I missed stuff like donating to bums and helping girls get into a club. :D

To put it frankly DX1 made me think, and made me want to keep playing. Unfortunately, DXHR only did the latter. However, it did it really damn well, and I think it deserves much better than your 7/10 score. It really is an excellent game in its own right, and I'd give it AT LEAST 8/10 but probably 8.5 or 9 for the art direction and presentation, a world that you just want to keep going back to. (DX1 would receive a 9.5 to a 10, for transcending what any game has ever done and changing my life in an educational way)

Compared to the FPS-RPG greats of our time, it lacks the intellectual punch of DX1, the emotional pull of VtmB, but it's a stunning technical achievement, is downright entertaining and expansive, and oozes strong atmosphere most of the time. To be honest the execution of the (objective-based) combat/stealth/hacking/social gameplay is a massive improvement, an area where DX1 and VtmB were very clunky and faltered badly. DXHR is a truly excellent game, and while now with your thoughts posted here I realize that it has not surpassed DX1, I hope the high sales the title seems to be experiencing will influence more games of its kind, and we'll finally get an FPS RPG that when launched is better than DX1 was when it launched in 2001. It just seems like AAA titles aren't allowed to be "too" intelligent anymore...

For me a large part of Deus Ex WAS the gameplay, which is exactly why I loved VtM:B so much, because it was so similar to the way Deus Ex played. There are people here who complain about the shooting aspect of the first game but there are some of us who really liked how that was handled in the first game. I really don't like how it is in this game. I am shooting and missing with the tranq rifle at about 15 feet away. Why? It's not like the weapon has heavy recoil and even if it did that would only effect it after the first shot, but the weapon is single shot only anyways so it makes absolutely no sense for a rifle to be so inaccurate for no apparent reason. I am playing a stealthy play through and I don't see how the stabilizer aug would help this as it seems like it would be geared more towards a fully automatic weapon. At least in DX I knew that if I wanted to be better at firing a rifle I just needed to increase the rifle skill.

Now I do like this game. It is a pretty good game and I don't regret buying it. But it isn't as good as the first. The switching to 3rd person really is obnoxious to me. And I resent that the game plays more like MGS than DX as far as stealth goes. I loathe the MGS series. This game to me has more in common with Alpha Protocol than DX as far as gameplay goes. Though I really loved AP, I wanted something a bit different from what I got.

I don't like the health regen or the health system period. I miss the locational damage, the med kits, the situations you'd get into because of these, the medbots. I could just go on and on.

I really hate the take downs. I don't like that they rip you from FP into 3rd person. I don't like that the stealth take downs actually make quite a bit of noise yet the guy right next to the guy I slammed onto the floor doesn't even notice, or that it takes energy from my aug to punch a guy in the face. It just doesn't make sense. I find myself just hiding behind cover trying to solve a puzzle instead of really sneaking around.

I really really miss melee. I loved playing a stealth/combat character that would enter cloak, run up and slice a guy up with the DTS then re enter cloak and run off. Not possible here. I really miss smashing open crates and doors, etc. You just can't do that in this game at all.

There hasn't been much reward for exploring around so far in the game. Though I am still in Detroit due to the game constantly crashing. So maybe that gets better later.

I don't know I have more issues with how things were done but I am enjoying the game.

Tuttle
1st Sep 2011, 08:42
2) Seeing as the the Tyrant mercs comprise 3 out of 4 boss fights, I would like for them to have been "fleshed out" a little more in-game. I understand that they are covered pretty comprehensively in the Icarus Effect novel, but you shouldn't have to be forced to buy a book to find out who they are. The game itself offers nothing on their backstory. I also felt a little let down with the almost complete absence of Bob Page in the game. Apart from the opening sequence and the post-credits scene, along with 1 or 2 emails, we learned nothing further about him.

Take into account that one of the things people disliked the most was the jarring boss sequences. It was the few sections that stood out like a sore thumb and a lot of people disliked it. It is possible they were toned down before release.

As for Bob Page, while awesome for what he did get, shouldn't get much more imo. The "Big characters" from Dues Ex 1 (or 2) should stay in Dues Ex 1 (or 2) lest the argument that HR just becomes 'fan wank'; a game that only copies and says "Hey look, IT'S BOB PAGE! LOOK, LOOK, BOB PAGE GUYS! AND LOOK, HERE HE IS AGAIN! Oh, lol, a JC Denton Reference." and not having the game stand up on it's own two feet (There is a fine line between just doing a throwback and 'fan wank')

HellKittyDan
1st Sep 2011, 10:21
It's not about nostalgia. I can load up Deus Ex right now (which I did yesterday actually) and I'll be playing a better game than HR, for the reasons that numerous people have posted in this thread. That's not nostalgia talking.

That we can still play an old game now doesn't mean we aren't affected by nostalgia. If a song I loved as a teenager comes on the radio I'm not just hearing a song I loved 15 years ago, I'm hearing a song with the power to take me back to where I was and how I felt at that time.

Playing Deus Ex or Thief for the first time today isn't the same as playing them for the upteenth time since release. These are games I have a history with and that history will always colour the thoughts and feelings I have concerning these games.

nathanj
1st Sep 2011, 10:24
overall i though it was an excellent prequel to deus ex.

some issues like takedowns and extra exp for playing the easy way (nonlethal) irked me but i had tons of fun with this game and i plan on doing lots of playthroughs.

MoreDread
1st Sep 2011, 10:32
spoilers!

ok i wanna rant about alot of things, even tho i do enjoy the game and think its one of the best that has been released this year. i'll focus on the bad elements, many of which have been mentioned already.

i miss the skill system.

its odd that the aug system now relates to alot of things that you wouldn't really need augs for.
for example it doesn't actually make you run (much) faster, it just increases your endurance.
the default sprinting duration is extreemly short... lots of people with augs can do better than that.
and its not very fast either.
it makes absolutely no sense that hitting someone in the face depletes your energy... even sprinting doesn't do that and it would require far more energy since it requires alot more muscle movement.
its stupid that having more than 2 energy cells is really quite useless, because the snacks are rare, and if you don't eat them just right before using up the energy you just waste it on takedowns or tearing down walls.
they couldve just made the takedowns use up only half of an energy cell... that way you would only waste it if you do 2 takedowns in quick succession. also more energy cells could be recharging, but at a slower rate.
i can see how having infinite takedowns would be unbalancing.. as every enemy could be defeated just by pressing Q.
but that just shows another flaw. theres nothing dynamic about melee.. it just looks cool.. but theres no skill required to master it. the only thing that requires a little bit of skill is luring 2 enemies to the same spot to do a double takedown for the highest xp turnout.

the takedown animations are nice, but it gets old very, very soon.. you've seen them all several times once you've completed the first real mission... and people teleporting around really doesn't help.

in DX1 the animations were terrible.. but at least you were able to hit different body parts and also miss of course. there was something you as a player could become better at.
i also miss the mini crossbow with tranq darts. the 2 tranq weapons are pretty bad.

it doesn't really seem to make a huge difference whether you kill your enemies or let them live save for very few optional missions that require you to do nonleathel takedowns and a meaningless virtual trophy.

DX1 didn't really reference this much either so in this case its not a big surprise. but it wouldve been nice to be able to overhear a discussion between 2 enemies saying something like
'better watch out, i've heard that adam jensen has been spotted nearby'
'pah what are you afraid of then? i hear that wussie never kills anyone'
'well yea sure, but a broken nose aint fun and theres something really scary about a guy taking on a whole armed squad with heavy weapons using only his fists...'
'now that you're putting it that way, it's sending shivers down my spine, better watch out'

the other big thing with augs is that you basically have everything from the start, but unlock it with praxis points... that doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense either. i miss having to actually find different types of augs and having to make choices about which ones to install.
i haven't even finished the game yet.. i guess i have about 3/4 done, but i already have almost all augs unlocked and at full strength and get praxis points and kits like crazy... i even stopped buying the extra praxis kits. i'm not really sure how much of an effect you can have on the story...
thats the next thing, and for me its the real issue. DX1 gameplay mechanics weren't really that great if you compare it to most of DXHR's... the RPG system was much better, but the overall gameplay wasn't as fluid.
it was not a great shooter, it was a great RPG with the most exciting story ever in gaming history.
in DX1 it was great to realise that you could basically figure out that UNATCO are really part of the problem and not the solution very early on and actually start sabotaging them before you even met lebedev.
and there was sooo much to be discovered.. even after more than 10 replays i still haven't found all the different ways of going through the story. its like every time i replay it i uncover another layer that i hadn't seen before.
the whole 'conspiracy theory stuff' was deeply researched and felt so.. believable.
and it wasn't just cliché stuff like here are the bad guys, kill them to save humanity. all the characters had a human side and a believable motive.
in DXHR there are just some glimpses of that.. like the rogue belltower squad leader who sets out to avenge the people he had to kill for corrupt officials.. i really enjoyed patting him on the shoulder, giving him the thumbs up and saying 'go on, do your thing!' ^_^

there were some serious weak points in the story.
the worst part was the scene with the dragon queen and the following level with the AI that was created to spy on the whole world and twist everybodies actions for the interest of a hidden sinister cabale, but after years of doing this now has seen the light because of what you've done and turns around. and then doesn't really help you much.
everything about that bit was wrong. the dragon queen giving you a clue that allows you to proceed, then beeing all pathetic just to flee to her panick room, AJ falling for it, the weak defense team that you can just run past.. nobody following you to the hangar. the obvious trap in the next level. the pointless boss fight with a character that doesn't have a single line of dialogue. the fact that all you have to do to beat her is hit er with the stun gun and place a few explosives at her feet. and that boring AI character.

DX1 hit you with little history lessons and thought provoking bits of info here and there... stuff about the federal reserve and the income tax, the american constitution and FEMA. thats not to say that all the conspiracy theories in the game are exactly whats happening in our world today. but it really did relate to works of investigative journalists. (and of course what is generelly referred to as 'conspiracy theorists')
some people said that they enjoy it more without these extras.. well you were never forced to read all the emails and go into all the details in dialogue. alot of it was hidden so that you actually had to keep talking to certain people, or find secret rooms. but it was there for those who were curious.

in DXHR so far i've only seen stupid generalisations, for example mr. sarif mentioning the illuminati and the bilderberg group as if they were one and the same thing.. that one powerful group that controls the whole world.
when in fact the so called bilderberg group is a pseudo secretive (private) group of powerful people from the fields of politics, big corporations and media. they have been meeting for 50 years and are still doing it these days, once every year in a different country every year.
and the illuminati was an offshoot of the freemasons a couple hundred years ago, trying to replace the power of the church with a worldview based on belief in science and a socialist power structure.

so yes that part was seriously dumbed down. and it takes away a great deal of depth, making the whole game feel very superficial in comparison.

in DX1 i kept searchign for more hidden things on every playthrough.. kept solving missions in different ways to see the different outcomes, and kept beeing amazed at how many things that i had done were actually referenced by the game.

in DXHR i find myself just skipping through all the mails because theres never really anything interesting in them..
i haven't even finished my first playthrough, but i'm getting the feeling that not much is going to change story wise if i ever get to even do a second playthrough... since i'm probably going to max all my augs on this one the only other thing i might be able to experiment with is using different weapons... but none of the others are appealing to me. also i cannot upgrade them in different ways. and most missions have an obvious best way to solve them.

so heres my conclusion.

best game this year: witcher 2
second place: DXHR

BUT its not because these are exceptionally great games.. everything else is just much worse.
its sad really... as many others have said before, i too do enjoy playing the game and i don't feel like the money was wasted. (the extra preorder mission and equipment were a bad joke tho)
but it still leaves alot to be desired.

there is a chance to adress these issues by releasing some DLCs which go deeper story wise and fix some of the holes in the gameplay (that would be the easy part)

InGroove2
1st Sep 2011, 14:11
More power to you then, I'm sure you'll enjoy HR because it really is amazing.

But how can you be "nostalgic" about a game you still play from time to time, with almost the same passion you had when you played it back in the day? If you think about it, most of us spent our childhood/adolescence with super old school games but can you imagine playing those ancient NES or C64 games today, with the same passion? Saying that the original DX surpasses DX:HR in some aspects (which it does) has littl
3fe0
e to do with nostalgia.

are you serious? Nostalgia does NOT require one to have not experienced something in a long time. Nostalgia can occurr even when something remains current FOR YOU. The nostalgia comes from a connection with feelings from long ago.

I watch the Goonies often, and now that my daughter loves the movie, i watch it even MORE often and I watch it largely because of how nostalgiac i feel about the movie. How it connects me with those feelings from being a child. Mainly, how i over look things in it which, if i were watching abrand new movie that I hadn't seen before, i would consider short-comings.


EDIT: sorry i missed HellKittyDan's post... so yeah... what HE said.

Random
1st Sep 2011, 14:24
Saying Deus Ex is a better game than Human Revolution is not nostalgia. It's fact. There are identifiable design differences that make HR an inferior game. Except perhaps to 15 year olds for whom Mass Effect 2 is the quality standard.

InGroove2
1st Sep 2011, 14:38
Saying Deus Ex is a better game than Human Revolution is not nostalgia. It's fact. There are identifiable design differences that make HR an inferior game. Except perhaps to 15 year olds for whom Mass Effect 2 is the quality standard.

i didn't way it WAS nostalgia. If you read in context it'll make more sense. The point is, also, it's not a fact. And the primary problem with this thread is that it specifically asked for opinions and most people tend to speak of opinions in the same way that they would speak of facts. They do this despite the numberous factors which affect ones opinion especially with regard to intangible elements like "mood" or "what maikes a DX game" or "the emotional viability of the characters". The result is that most posts are filled with complicated ways of trying to prove that their opinion is not biased and distorted by nostalgia, unreliable memories, contradicting-standards etc...

in the plainest english possible: this thread lacks honesty.

Tuttle
1st Sep 2011, 14:40
Saying Deus Ex is a better game than Human Revolution is not nostalgia. It's fact. There are identifiable design differences that make HR an inferior game. Except perhaps to 15 year olds for whom Mass Effect 2 is the quality standard.

Saying Dues Ex is a better game than Human Revolution is not nostalgia, it's opinion and please do not say otherwise :)

Edit: As that guy had elaborated above...

MoreDread
1st Sep 2011, 20:13
Saying Deus Ex is a better game than Human Revolution is not nostalgia. It's fact. There are identifiable design differences that make HR an inferior game. Except perhaps to 15 year olds for whom Mass Effect 2 is the quality standard.

well actually its an opinion...
one that i don't disagree with entirely... both have pros and cons, dxhr has things i like better than DX1, but overall DX1 is a far deeper and more complex and thus more enjoyable game (for me and others)

feeling nostalgia for something great isn't something that anyone needs to be ashamed of... even if others make it look like people who feel that way are somehow blind to 'the facts' or 'living in the past'

people have different tastes and thats not a bad thing...

its just sad that there are almost no games that actually make you think about something and present a real challenge anymore because almost all of them try to reach a larger crowd than before.

1helios1
1st Sep 2011, 20:52
overall i think its great. i really enjoyed the game, and consider it one of the best games i have played. that being said, there are some elements that could have been done better. to name a few

1. the plot of the original deus ex felt much more nuanced and far reaching, there were a lot of different elements and factions at work, loose alliances and complete unknowns. most of human revolutions plot worked, but a few more locations and some more unexpected twists would have been nice.

2. all the levels and the hubs were great, in particular i liked that we came back to the hubs later and saw the effects of the larger events on these now familiar places. but it would have been nice to contrast the building interiors and busy streets with something remote and more open.

3. finally, and this has nothing really to do with comparison to the original deus ex, but it cant be ignored. you showed us a two layer city, and we only got to explore the lower layer...come on.

edit. enemies in human revolution were not particularly varied. i think an opponent to fill the role of the MiB in deus ex would have been nice. but thats more of an observation than an actual complaint.

MoreDread
2nd Sep 2011, 00:06
well now i finished it.. what a lame ending.. i feel kinda let down.. towards the end it was building up and seemed to be interesting... talking to darrow was somewhat interesting at least...

but..
aug zombies? really? ... a boss that is defeated by hacking a few computers?
and then that stupid submissive AI just presents 3 buttons and asks you what the future of mankind is supposed to be?
damn i'll pick the 4th option.. just blow everything up so that lousy tale can be forgotten.
all the choices are bad choices...

EDIT:
if sarif gets his way, evolution will be controlled by big corporations and the truth about what happened is not revealed. the rich will become even more powerful and the poor will suffer
if darrow gets his way, then all of humanities progress is simply discarded and the next generation will have no real understanding of what really happened, lots of people will be sacrificed for this decision.
if taggart gets his way, then the general public will recieve further restrictions, while shadow projects continue in the background, giving a select few godlike powers for malicous purposes and keeping the general public in a powerless state
and if you just self destruct the whole installation, nobody will learn what happened, adam jensen will be a mass murderer and whatever you did throughout the whole course of the game becomes meaningless.

either way you are either directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of many people ... even if you tried not to kill anyone in your playthrough.. thats just great.

add to that the fact that it doesn't matter how you played the game.. all you gotta do in the end is to choose a button and press it

i probably won't touch it again

Grimesy
2nd Sep 2011, 00:29
Not going to say much, it's all been said already AND I'm typing on my phone right now...
Just want to ventilate my opinion in numbers, so here goes nothing:

As a game: 9.5/10, played 30 hours within 45 hours after release, nuf said...

Within the DX universe: still 9.5/10, but with DX as 12/10 and IW 5/10...

May be biased by nostalgia, but that nostalgia gets to me every other month,
still finish DX at least 6 times a year....

Random
2nd Sep 2011, 00:43
No, saying Deus Ex is better than HR is not an opinion.

If I said Chinatown is a better film than 2 Fast 2 Furious, would you say that was just an opinion?

This is not just about what appeals to modern audiences most. There are identifiable differences that make Deus Ex a better and more accomplished game.

djtanng
2nd Sep 2011, 01:18
This is my first week on any Deus Ex forum ever. I am shocked that everyone hated Invisible War. I've played both the original and IW and thought IW was better. I know this is a bit off topic, but can someone please explain how this is, so I don't feel so out of place? Lol.

BTW, I really think DXHR will be a good inspiration on future games.

exmachinad
2nd Sep 2011, 02:37
To summarize what I feel about HR (feeling that is quite similar to what a bunch of posts talks about on this thread), I'd say that, for me, the gameplay is a lot more rigid and narrowed by design ("so, this crate I can move, but that identical looking crate I can't"... :hmm: , to give a simple example) and simplistic plot with bland dialogues with no single line or character that stands out - only Sarif, perhaps (opposed to DX, that oozes thought provoking conversations and memorable, fully realized characters).


I personally enjoy HR more, but I didn't play DX1 for years and years until it was way too outdated to fully enjoy.

Not to be a fanboy, but, for me, the very only thing that is outdated (badly) about DX is the the graphics.

Really.


No, saying Deus Ex is better than HR is not an opinion.

If I said Chinatown is a better film than 2 Fast 2 Furious, would you say that was just an opinion?

This is not just about what appeals to modern audiences most. There are identifiable differences that make Deus Ex a better and more accomplished game.

Bravo. :worship:

jtr7
2nd Sep 2011, 05:20
This is my first week on any Deus Ex forum ever. I am shocked that everyone hated Invisible War. I've played both the original and IW and thought IW was better. I know this is a bit off topic, but can someone please explain how this is, so I don't feel so out of place? Lol.

BTW, I really think DXHR will be a good inspiration on future games.

Not everyone hates IW.
How do you know a lot of people hate IW yet you don't know the reasons? The reasons are explained a lot. Go back to the posts where you saw "everyone" hating IW and read the reasons many of them no doubt wrote out. It comes up so often new posts aren't necessary.

Brockxz
2nd Sep 2011, 06:05
Saying that Deus Ex is an amazing experience and one of the best games ever does not mean it's perfect. Despite it's flaws it never fails to deliver an experience superior to any other video game in existence.

^ I can sign under this.

All in all DXHR is good game and compare to this generation games I can say it is great game and surpasses almost all other games I have played since 2006 but if I have to compare DXHR to first DX i can say 100% sure DX wins over DXHR. And it has nothing to do with nostalgia because I have played DX since it's release every year at least once. Yes, it is that great that i can play old tech game even now and I will enjoy every little bit of it. Yes, there is things a little better done in DXHR than DX and mostly that is because of newer technology but overall experience is better in DX. In a little bit more detail review of DXHR i will go after I will complete my 2nd playthrough so that I can sum up a little more correct what I liked and what i didn't like at all.

1helios1
2nd Sep 2011, 06:25
No, saying Deus Ex is better than HR is not an opinion.

If I said Chinatown is a better film than 2 Fast 2 Furious, would you say that was just an opinion?

This is not just about what appeals to modern audiences most. There are identifiable differences that make Deus Ex a better and more accomplished game.

...an opinion does not graduate into a fact just because it has majority support, or even complete support.

i am a long time fan of the original deus ex (one of the first games i can recall playing to completion multiple times, the latest of which was a few months ago) and in my perfectly valid opinion human revolution is the better game. it has stronger more natural gameplay. the characters are more nuanced and interesting, and sympathetic. the locations are detailed and believable, and the style whether you like it or not, is striking. now its plot could be better, and some more open environments would be nice, but in just about every other criteria i can think of human revolution does it better.

and thats not unexpected, cause deus ex was their source material.

now i dont need anyone to agree with me, but dont try to tell me your side is any less of an opinion.

xAcerbusx
2nd Sep 2011, 07:08
Played the original at launch back in '00.
My hat goes off to Eidos Montréal for the amount of care and consideration that obviously went into this game. It isn't perfect (nothing is) but it is far and away the best game I've played in almost a decade. Just looking around the environment, what struck me is that every minute detail in every room seemed carefully considered. That's attention to detail that I dare say the original didn't even completely embrace. They deserve every bit of their resultant success.

Now if we could just get some details on Thief IV... *wink wink nudge nudge*

Tuttle
2nd Sep 2011, 07:57
all the choices are bad choices...

It's great isn't it? All the choices in the game have a gray-and-gray morality to them and depending on how "good" depends on how well you trust humanity to work in the best interests of itself instead of working for the best interest of myself.

Well, to me, it's better than the "Ubur good guy" ending and "Ubur bad guy" ending some other guys have.

ngene
2nd Sep 2011, 09:07
Having completed the first game, I can safely say this game breaks most of my expectations. The devs managed to blend oldschool conventions with modern gaming styles and it turned out AWESOME. I like how health regeneration is slow enough to warrant the use of healing items, how the dialogue portions are renewed, and how the level design isn't compromised to accommodate the cover system (shame on you, GoW). I also like how- for once- the CGI trailer isn't a cop out and most of the scenes in it actually do happen in game.

What I didn't like- the final portion of the game and how rushed it felt.

The sudden color change from golden to whitewashed was refreshing at the start and talking down Hugh Darrow felt so boss once I managed to get it done, but the portion after was just... meh. After the extensive buildup with the biochip implants the Hyron project coming out of left field just threw me for a loop. What is this Hyron project? Why am I supposed to care? Why do they need three women to power that- never mind.

The endings were also meaningless. I want to know what happens so that I can see where either of them would lead, not further speculation on that. If Adam didn't destroy Panchaea, then I wanted to at least get a ride back to Detroit, see the fallout from which message I chose to send, and also tell Cassandra Reed what a colossal tool her daughter actually is. I needed some form of closure to Adam's story, at least. Not counting the aftercredits scene, the endings made me go "that's it?"

Sadly, most of my complaints of the game stem from the fact that a lot of gameplay was cut. I get the feeling you could bypass the first Barrett fight DX1 style and fight him in Hengsha instead. Or that you could bypass Fedorova, and she would turn up in Detroit slaughtering civilians... etc. You could actually do that ingame with Narhari Khan (the big black Belltower guy) where you knock him out instead and he would keep showing up later, so maybe the skippable boss fights were left out in the final product?

There's a rumor where Montreal and Singapore were meant to be city hubs, too, and not just a mission location. Oh well. I can only speculate why the cuts were made, but I would've gladly waited longer to play the full game as it shouldve been.

Props to the developers for sticking to their promises though and delivering an excellent game despite all the drawbacks.

~Psychotic~
2nd Sep 2011, 09:28
I wrote a crappy (in regards to my style, not the game) review of it on my personal blog (http://randomtastic.com/2011/08/the-year-is-2027/) but simply put, Deus Ex was my favourite game. Human Revolution is second only to the original.

I was highly sceptical when the game was first announced, being the fan I am I was highly worried it wouldn't live up to my own high expectations and that it'd be another Invisible War. I enjoyed DX:IW but DX:IW had far too many wrongs than it did rights; DX:HR feels far more like a "Deus Ex" game than DX:IW ever did, even if DX:IW was created by Ion Storm.

The game has it's flaws (like the horrible boss fights) but so did Deus Ex. Nothing is perfect and whilst both games are extremely solid in regards to gameplay, storyline and narrative dialogue, both games still have flaws, naturally.

In spite of the flaws, Human Revolution still proves to be one of the better games to come out of the genre in the past 5 years. Other developers should have a look at what it's done right and take note, because most other games in the genre are just plain horrible.

Tjeerd84
2nd Sep 2011, 10:27
I like how health regeneration is slow enough to warrant the use of healing items, how the dialogue portions are renewed, and how the level design isn't compromised to accommodate the cover system (shame on you, GoW). I also like how- for once- the CGI trailer isn't a cop out and most of the scenes in it actually do happen in game.


The health system is still faster then I hoped it to be. If I get hit, I just wait a bit behind cover to regenerate. In my opinion you should only be able to regenerate when there are no enemies aware of your presence anymore (not suspicious nor alerted nor hostile).

Really, you should look better regarding the cover sytem. Every place where you need to infiltrate or fight or sneak has the convenient placed coverobjects. Most places use the square shape of cover around the room. Even worse is that patrolling guards stop patrolling exactly at the point where they still cannot see behind the coverobjects. The coversystem itself is actually a very good one, but the only thing bad about it is the obvious placement of the cover and the patrol waypoints.

Headstriker
2nd Sep 2011, 11:00
It really reminded me of "Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines", the same gameconstruction, like city hubs, conversations, the characters, so i instantly felt at home there. I like this type of game with these characteristics. The vampire games had it and Deus Ex 1 had it and i consider Deus Ex HR a worthy prequel to the previous games and i HOPE Eidos doesn't fall asleep now and expand on this success!

ngene
2nd Sep 2011, 11:36
The health system is still faster then I hoped it to be. If I get hit, I just wait a bit behind cover to regenerate. In my opinion you should only be able to regenerate when there are no enemies aware of your presence anymore (not suspicious nor alerted nor hostile).

Really, you should look better regarding the cover sytem. Every place where you need to infiltrate or fight or sneak has the convenient placed coverobjects. Most places use the square shape of cover around the room. Even worse is that patrolling guards stop patrolling exactly at the point where they still cannot see behind the coverobjects. The coversystem itself is actually a very good one, but the only thing bad about it is the obvious placement of the cover and the patrol waypoints.

Tbh the only one that stood out was the (early spoilers) surface elevator entrance at the FEMA facility. ..and the Barrett boss fight, but that was probably added in after too many people complained of dying >>
But other than that it did feel like I was fighting through offices, warehouses, whatnot. Untidy ones :/ Maybe it's a result of the nonlinearish map design, but I prefer this over ME2/GoW's random concrete blocks in the middle of nowhere approach.

Blackbird SR-71C
2nd Sep 2011, 12:04
I'd give the game a 7/10 with the following negative aspects:

- Bland, small level design with obvous and repetitive ways to progress
- Repetitive enemy design, including their fighting styles (In DX you had Men in Black, MJ12 Troopers immune to headshots and gas grenades, different bots, grays, greasels, bosses with augmentations and different weapons)
- Enemy AI and difficulty: AI could be way less forgiving for stealth players, smarter and more aggressive for lethal players
- Boss fights: Not only were they forced, but I didn't think they were even good. Either too easy (first two) because of the environment or way too hard (3rd boss, one-hit-kill). Even then it boils down to: Boss shoots at you, either use environment items or cover to fight back.
-Graphics weren't bad, but I expected better. When replaying DX you have to cope with really old and outdated graphics, I hoped I wouldn't be reminded of that feeling when playing the new one
- I think the game was too short, especially compared to the original

All in all it's a good game worth playing. Despite that I'm really disappointed that it's not on the same level as the original when I was hoping it could even surpass it.

MoreDread
2nd Sep 2011, 13:05
It's great isn't it? All the choices in the game have a gray-and-gray morality to them and depending on how "good" depends on how well you trust humanity to work in the best interests of itself instead of working for the best interest of myself.

Well, to me, it's better than the "Ubur good guy" ending and "Ubur bad guy" ending some other guys have.

it kinda eliminates choice... even tho superficially it seems that you can decide the fate of the world, if you really think about the ramifications of your choice they are all very similar... and bob page won't give up his project, no matter what choice you make (theres a sequel after all)
in any case whatever you have done becomes meaningless.


now i don't like the extreme good vs extreme bad games either.
but lets compare it to a game like witcher 2....

quite often there is no obvious good way to solve things...
but almost every choice you make has a consequence.
its a dark and sinister world, but at least you can fight for yourself and choose your friends and decide where your priorities are.
in the end DXHR doesn't seem to have that

in DXHR you can either choose 1 of 3 characters with a very questionable outlook of the world/ plan in mind or you can just kill them all.. them and all the innocent people that happen to be around
so instead of really fighting for a certain principle or ideal, you end up choosing the lesser of 4 evils.. and it seems to me that it involves killing lots of innocent people(no matter what choice you make)... which is just terribly wrong if you played the whole game as a pacifist.. it ruins the whole game for me...
to me the obvious good choice would have been to ask eliza to blow it all out in the open and let people decide for themselves... expose the crimes of all 3 groups but don't kill anybody(of course it wouldve been hard to explain how the original deus ex can then be a sequel.. but its the same for most aother endings, too.. actually none of the 3 deus ex games really connect well)

czm
2nd Sep 2011, 16:00
now i don't like the extreme good vs extreme bad games either.
but lets compare it to a game like witcher 2....

This. Anyone who says "zomg this is best game since the original!!!111oneone" obviously hasn't played any other game since the original. Whatever DXHR does, Witcher 2 does it better, and it's a game that came out this year, developed by a polish studio, who doesn't have nearly as much resources at their disposal - but they have grand vision, talent and love for the world of The Witcher universe. 16 different endings people. 16. and NONE of them involve pushing "I win" buttons at the end.

Rindill the Red
2nd Sep 2011, 19:32
This. Anyone who says "zomg this is best game since the original!!!111oneone" obviously hasn't played any other game since the original. Whatever DXHR does, Witcher 2 does it better, and it's a game that came out this year, developed by a polish studio, who doesn't have nearly as much resources at their disposal - but they have grand vision, talent and love for the world of The Witcher universe. 16 different endings people. 16. and NONE of them involve pushing "I win" buttons at the end.

The Witcher 2 has a different setting and vastly different game play mechanics. So if cyber-punk rpg/fps is your thing, The Witcher 2 is not going to satisfy that itch.

MoreDread
2nd Sep 2011, 19:55
well the debate was not about DXHR or witcher 2 beeing the better game.. it was about witcher 2 having done a few things better that are lacking in DXHR.

to compare things they don't need to be identical in every aspect...

surely witcher 2 is much more similar to DXHR than a racing game.

both games are RPG action games with a darker theme and a choice driven story.

SageSavage
2nd Sep 2011, 20:33
I haven't finished it yet but I feel like I am able to say this: it is worthy of the Deus Ex-name! Much better then IW, inferior to the original but mostly in the right spirit. There are some major design flaws (boss fights, FMVs, "augs vs non-augs" too dominant, etc.) but overall I feel greatly relieved to see this one actually respecting its roots, something I was more and more doubting over the last few years. I intend to write a far more detailed review in the near future but so far a thumps-up from me! :thumbsup:

jd10013
2nd Sep 2011, 20:47
I'd give the game a 7/10 with the following negative aspects:

In DX you had Men in Black, MJ12 Troopers immune to headshots and gas grenades, d.

MiB's weren't immune to headshots ;)

Rindill the Red
2nd Sep 2011, 22:04
MiB's weren't immune to headshots ;)

They just had really really hard heads.

MoreDread
4th Sep 2011, 02:05
ok when b i t ching about the endings i didn't realise

that there is an additional secret ending that you only get to see when looking at the credits. it puts things in perspective and actually makes the game connect to DX1 pretty well.. even tho its a not a happy ending, the whole story makes alot more sense having seen that and i'm alot less disappointed now. technically it means that there are no 4 different endings at all.. which i'm not really angry about tho since it really improves the whole story

elchakan
4th Sep 2011, 03:32
I always used to visite this forum, but i never posted, but since this topic come out, i felt i should post some thing or rant lol, i played the 1st deus ex alot, so im a big fan.


I felt cheated.

The short version:

- Good game, could be great/epic
- I though that the take down were useful and nice
- the emails, i love the emails
- i liked the mini games(hacking), it could be more hard, also it was the best way to crank up XP, i hacked every door, every computer, even if i had codes or my own computer. LOL.
- In game, i felt that i was in a sort of game from the abovetopsecret.com and i loled alot.
- The bad: short, **** boss, **** ending, small maps and heavily consolized :(


The long version:


The 1st thing i noticed was that it was heavily consolized :(, it could have been so much more, if they had a little bit more love for PC.

I also hate the ppl that were saying that this game would have 20 hours or 40 hours of game play, fcing BS!

I did every mission, i went through every vent, i did the plus mission "Aug edition", i played stealth taking out everyone by take down or whatever and it was much more short than 20 hours...

The boss sucked, i was a "stealth hacker", since i already read about the boss thing, besides stealth and hack Aug, i got typhoon to deal wtih the boss and lol sure enough it worked, bom bom no boss, but then, at the 3rd boss, i didnt pay attention to the **** bio chip thing and i had no aug, i loled, i kind liked it(the bio chip), then i had to deal with him without augs.

Then the "final" boss, imho it was too easy, much better if no boss;


Then for my surprise, i go into a room with 4 buttons, omg, my 1st thought "DX 1! now i need to make a choice and deal with the consequences of my choice by playing it, so i save now and i can play through the different endings" AND WTF the game ends, there is no play through the choice i made, all i have to do is save and keep pushing each button to see the ending, WOW, coming from a recent play through DX1, i felt cheated and that it was uber retard.

I never asked for this.

Anyway, overall it was good, nowhere near the experience of DX1, which had so many options and a much better process of ending the game, instead of a button and a video.

I dont feel like playing it again, if it were like DX1, where every option still had more game to play and different consequences, then i would, that would be fun, but every time it will end at the stupid room with these buttons to see the ending, i felt that this game could be epic, even though it was heavly heavily consolized, the "small areas", boss and the ending killed it for me., though i like it more than IW, also i cant believe im going to say this, but Stalker which is a simillar game, did the ending much better, which was similar to DX1 and imho was overall also a better game than DX:HR :/

jd10013
4th Sep 2011, 11:56
They just had really really hard heads.

I never tested it, but you probably needed you riffle skill on expert. but I do remember sniping them from the roof of that first building Jock sets you down on in Paris. and pretty much everywhere from then on.

Rindill the Red
4th Sep 2011, 23:03
I never tested it, but you probably needed you riffle skill on expert. but I do remember sniping them from the roof of that first building Jock sets you down on in Paris. and pretty much everywhere from then on.

Yeah, the thing is that your guns had damage ratings, that could be improved by skill and by weapon mods. Shooting a bad guy in the head will do MORE damage, but if your weapon damage (base + skill + mods) isn't high enough though you'll do more damage with a head-shot against a heavily armored enemy, you may not kill him in one shot.

KingNL
4th Sep 2011, 23:06
For me, this is just as great and epic as the original.

jd10013
4th Sep 2011, 23:35
Yeah, the thing is that your guns had damage ratings, that could be improved by skill and by weapon mods. Shooting a bad guy in the head will do MORE damage, but if your weapon damage (base + skill + mods) isn't high enough though you'll do more damage with a head-shot against a heavily armored enemy, you may not kill him in one shot.

so long as your using the sniper riffle, a shot in the head will kill a MJ12 rocket trooper in one shot. I really can't tell if your arguing for or against that. I was just correcting someone who said you couldn't head shot kill them. upon further thought, I don't think it was necessary to upgrade your skill, but rather it was very difficult to keep the sight steady enough to hit them in the head if you didn't. by contrast, one shot with the sniper riffle anywhere but their head did not kill them in one shot.

Rindill the Red
4th Sep 2011, 23:56
For me, this is just as great and epic as the original.

Just as good? Surely you jest?

Shorter game, smaller linear levels, simpler mechanics, worse story?

Ashpolt
5th Sep 2011, 00:03
OK, OK, OK....as much as I think the original Deus Ex is better than Human Revolution, I don't see how you can say it's longer. DX took me 20 hours on my first playthrough - not 100% comprehensive, but not far off, and it's since taken me roughly the same time on each play to do a fully comprehensive run. DXHR on my first play, again not entirely comprehensive but close, took me about 35 hours. (And to complete the set, Invisible War usually takes about 10 hours...which is probably a good thing, any longer and I'd chuck Alex D off a cliff.)

Rindill the Red
5th Sep 2011, 00:19
OK, OK, OK....as much as I think the original Deus Ex is better than Human Revolution, I don't see how you can say it's longer. DX took me 20 hours on my first playthrough - not 100% comprehensive, but not far off, and it's since taken me roughly the same time on each play to do a fully comprehensive run. DXHR on my first play, again not entirely comprehensive but close, took me about 35 hours. (And to complete the set, Invisible War usually takes about 10 hours...which is probably a good thing, any longer and I'd chuck Alex D off a cliff.)

It may not be longer in terms of pure play-time but it sure as hell feels longer. There just seems to be more in the game. DX:HR feels more padded and slower paced, and there are less maps, and less narrative advancement per unit time.

Deus Ex:

Liberty Island
Unatco HQ
Hell's Kitchen
Warehouse
Unatco HQ
Battery Park
Mole people tunnels
Lebedev's airfield
Unatco HQ
Hell's Kitchen
Warehouse 2
MJ12 Base --> Unatco HQ
MJ12 Base --> Hong Kong
Versalife --> Hong Kong
Versalife --> Hong Kong
Catacombs/sewers
Paris
Chateau
Cathedral
Graveyard
Hell's Kitchen
Naval Base
Vandenberg
Gas station
Underwater lab
missle silo
Area 51

DX:HR:

Sarif HQ
Sarif HQ
Assembly Plant
Sarif HQ
Detroit
FEMA base
Sarif HQ
HengSha
Tai Yong
Picus
Sarif HQ
Detroit
Convention Center
HengSha
Docks
Omega Ranch
Panchaea

Ashpolt
5th Sep 2011, 00:33
DX:HR feels more padded and slower paced, and there are less maps, smaller maps, and less narrative advancement per unit time.

This I can definitely agree with (except for the part about the maps being smaller - compare Hell's Kitchen to Detroit, Hong Kong to Hengsha, and DXHR comes out on top in that regard.) DX certainly has more places to go but is ultimately still a shorter game.

jd10013
5th Sep 2011, 00:36
shorter? I just finished the first boss fight and am sitting at 19 hours according to steam. I can't imagine I'm any more than half way through.

KingNL
5th Sep 2011, 00:41
My profile shows

Deus Ex: Human Revolution
158.5 hrs last two weeks / 158.5 hrs on record


I am in heng sha first playthrough...yes I love exploring and talking to each and every person...twice...
Also I think reading every ebook/pda/pc in my own time has contributed to this

Nastro
5th Sep 2011, 01:06
From an Invisible War fan...

I think it is a calculated mix between the original and invisible war. Invisible War seemed to go much more quickly than Original. And HR seems to go as fast as you want it to. If you want it to drag on, it will. If you want to follow the story quickly it will. I am still playing it and look forward to my next play through. Which is a MAJOR compliment to games nowadays. Who the hell wants to play Crysis again?

jd10013
5th Sep 2011, 01:11
It may not be longer in terms of pure play-time but it sure as hell feels longer. There just seems to be more in the game. DX:HR feels more padded and slower paced, and there are less maps, and less narrative advancement per unit time.

Deus Ex:

Liberty Island
Unatco HQ
Hell's Kitchen
Warehouse
Unatco HQ
Battery Park
Mole people tunnels
Lebedev's airfield
Unatco HQ
Hell's Kitchen
Warehouse 2
MJ12 Base --> Unatco HQ
MJ12 Base --> Hong Kong
Versalife --> Hong Kong
Versalife --> Hong Kong
Catacombs/sewers
Paris
Chateau
Cathedral
Graveyard
Hell's Kitchen
Naval Base
Vandenberg
Gas station
Underwater lab
missle silo
Area 51

DX:HR:

Sarif HQ
Sarif HQ
Assembly Plant
Sarif HQ
Detroit
FEMA base
Sarif HQ
HengSha
Tai Yong
Picus
Sarif HQ
Detroit
Convention Center
HengSha
Docks
Omega Ranch
Panchaea


that list is meaningless. a good bit of the dx locations were very, very short. in fact, except for the naval base, underwater lab, and area 51 most of them after Hong Kong were extremely short. HR is different (at least what I've made it through so far) in that you do many more things in each location than you did in DX. in dx it was pretty much 1 map 1 mission and sometimes a side quest or two. but even those got fewer and fewer as the game went on. the way the hubs are done is, to me at least, far more like VTMB than DX. heck, it's more like IW than dx, just with much better side quests.

imported_BoB_
5th Sep 2011, 03:20
And if you visit the hubs twice, it's because the designers must take into account all possibilities of augmentations at the start without preventing the player to fully explore it. You have to remember that in the first one, the order and choices of augmentations (yeah it was one or the other but still in a fixed way) was predetermined at the beginning so the level design was created with this fact in mind.
On the other hand, it's also one of the reason that the player kept discovering new things after several playthroughs whereas in Human Revolution, you can more easily find all there is to find on your first go.

Ashpolt
5th Sep 2011, 08:35
My profile shows

Deus Ex: Human Revolution
158.5 hrs last two weeks / 158.5 hrs on record


I am in heng sha first playthrough...yes I love exploring and talking to each and every person...twice...
Also I think reading every ebook/pda/pc in my own time has contributed to this

What? You're one of the biggest fanatics about the game on here, going so far as to proclaim EM "the team that saved gaming", and you haven't even got halfway through the game yet? OK, you've pumped the hours in, sure (and congrats on that - jeez!) but really, complete the game before you fully form an opinion. Things can go downhill later in the game (and in this case unfortunately they do, to a degree at least.)

ColBashar
8th Sep 2011, 04:23
SPOILER ALERT: This post contains spoilers. Since I think the big blue boxes are aesthetically unappealing, I advise anybody who does not wish to be exposed to them to scroll past this wall of text.

I started writing a comparison of Human Revolution (DXHR) to Deus Ex; however, I think it's almost turned into a review. Anyway, here it is.

__________
Takedowns:

Unlike some people, I don't really have a problem with takedowns. VTMB pretty much saw to that. It's a lot more satisfying to having twenty guys zero in on me in Deus Ex because I swung my stun baton a few pixels too far to the left. That said, I didn't think they were very well implemented in DXHR. For me it was frustrating to knock out some goon, sneak up on his friend and get a warning about low energy. Granted, I could just eat a candybar but that just seems tedious and unrealistic. Besides, how much bioenergy does it require to put somebody in a choke hold? I'm pretty sure it can be accomplished without the benefit of augmentation.

It would have been much more reasonable if EM had simply followed the VTMB model and made takedowns only available under the conditions that you're behind the target and undetected. That would have provided enough of a challenge not to need the artificial limitation of bio-energy as well as made the animations more logical (no more knocking someone out from the front when you were previously behind them) and eliminated the forced teleport issue.

The other thing I didn't like about takedowns was the noise factor. I could swing a guy over my shoulder and break his arm (crack!) without his buddies five feet away noticing. But slashing a guys lungs or vocal cords immediately alerts the goons in the next room over. It just felt arbitrary and, again, unrealistic. I would have preferred a static noise factor regardless of whether you chose a lethal or non-lethal takedown. I know that knocked out enemies can be revived by their mates but given the XP bonus and the silence, there never really seems a reason -not- to use a non-lethal takedown. In my playthrough of the game I think I've only twice had to face a revived enemy.

_____________
Cover System:

It took some getting used to at first but once I got the hang of it, I felt that the cover system added a new dimension to combat. I enjoyed the choice of firing blindly or leaning to take a few aimed shots. There were some battles that would have been almost impossible to overcome in DX1 that I managed to squeak by in thanks to strategic use of the cover system in DXHR. By about 1/3 into the game, I stopped missing the ability to lean left or right altogether. That said, it would have been nice if EM had implemented the leaning feature for those players who prefer the classic experience.

__________________
Gameplay & Design:

Here's where I think DXHR deviates from DX. It's not obvious because in many ways the games seem to play out identically, but I think those similarities are actually superficial. To me, DXHR felt less like an RPG and more of an action game, almost a platformer where the cover system takes the place of jumping. Deus Ex by contrast, to borrow a phrase from Clausewitz, treated action/platforming as problem solving by other means. By this I mean that combat and stealth are core elements of the game, but they're not what the game is about.

In DXHR I never really felt challenged because anything that I wanted to do, the designers seemed to accommodate me. In fact, I hardly needed augmentations at all. As a personal challenge, I decided to see how far I could go without them. I only took two ranks of increased inventory space, the social augmentation, and five ranks of hacking skill. In hindsight, I could have used auto-keys in place of the hacking skill; however, since this was my first playthough, I didn't want to deny myself access to any e-mails.

With this setup I was able to complete the game on normal difficulty. Only the boss fights were a challenge, but even these I was able to overcome with the careful appreciation of my environment and available resources that Deus Ex had instilled me ten years ago. I found the augmentations to be unnecessary and therefore failed to contribute a sense of roleplay. I look forward to playing again with the hard difficulty setting (something I have -never- done with the original) just in the hope that I might be forced to make a decision.

And that's why I say the similarities between Deus Ex and DXHR are superficial. Unlike the former, the latter isn't about emergent gameplay or puzzle solving so much as picking one of the two or three options laid out for you by the designers. Compared to more liner games of the same vein, this is certainly a step in the right direction, but EM seems so focused on its "four pillars of gameplay" that it overlooked the one that helped make Deus Ex classic: innovation. I doubt very much that any action I took in the game was -not- pre-conceived in the design process.

For example, the parking lot of the Hengsha shipyard. There were three entrances that I found to get into the loading bay: the gate, the hole in the fence, and the roof of the shed. As a stealth player, I wanted to avoid the gate since that would alert the guards, and I didn't have the augmentation to move the crate that was blocking the hole, so that left the roof of the storage shed. I had shut off the electrical discharge and now all I needed was a way to get up there. Since I didn't take the jumping aug, I couldn't just hop up there so I needed some other way to gain access. There were two crates behind some cargo containers so I figured I could use these to create steps. Unfortunately the crates were blocked and I was only able to get access to one of them. One wasn't enough to get to the roof of the shed, and there weren't any other objects around to use as a step. Then I noticed that in one corner of the shed there was some inanimate junk piled. Aha, I thought! Perhaps I could put the crate on this junk and it would give me enough elevation.

So far this scenario was playing out just like Deus Ex, and I was pleased. Just for giggles, though, I decided to see if I could jump off the junk even without the crate. To my surprise, I could. The crate was unnecessary... which made me wonder why it was on the map in the first place when in so many other maps crates and boxes that might actually be useful are nailed to the ground (Detroit, I'm looking at you)! That made me displeased because there was no skill involved in this solution, no triumph. The same thing happened on the Panchaea map when trying to access Taggart in the server room. I could either blast my way through the zombaugs or sneak past them on the cat walk. In this instance the crates were already positioned for me to jump on them or crates were unnecessary at all, because I could climb up the fallen server tower just as easily. Another opportunity for puzzle solving (in the form of Deus Ex's legendary crate stacking mini-game) was lost. Who would want to waste ammunition fighting the zombaugs when the means of avoiding them were so blatantly obvious?

Likewise whenever I saw a heavy rifle and some ammo boxes lying around the map, particularly close to a door, I knew that I would be facing either a boss or a bot. I appreciate the fact that EM wanted to ensure that players never got into a situation that they simply were incapable of overcoming; however, I am disappointed that the solution provided by the designers always amounted to heavy firepower. It telegraphs to me, at least, that EM's primary focus was on combat.

__________
Resources:

And then there's resource management. I'm talking here about multitools and lockpicks. These worked in Deus Ex because they provided different means of overcoming different obstacles. It also gave the player additional means of specialising their character, making them more unique and endearing. It additionally created more means of rewarding the player and greater opportunity for strategic decision making. Because the lockpick and multitool serve separate functions, the player individually weighs their value, and therefore might choose a different course of action from another player who is acting under a different set of circumstances and has a different perspective on the value of these tools.

For example, in Morgan Everett's Paris hideout, there was a locked door to Lucias deBeers or a keypad lock to Morpheus. Depending on whether you valued lockpicks or multitools more, you would either pick the former or hack the latter obstacle. Once beyond those initial obstacles, Lucias' room would uncover the code to Morpheus' room and Morpheus' room has the softkey to Lucias' locked door. Gaining access to one would give you access to the other, so the approach you took was a strategic decision based on your individual circumstances as a player.

In DXHR, the lockpick, multitool, and hacking skill have been more or less consolidated into the unlock "grenade". Moreover, this tool can be ignored completely if you happen to be adept at hacking. That reduces the variety of obstacles you, as the player, will encounter, which in turn reduces the number of possible solutions you can use to overcome these obstacles. To emphasise my point, let me ask you, have any of you bothered to open a door by means of explosives? I don't even know if it is possible in DXHR, because I never had a need to try it. In Deus Ex, many combat oriented players utilised the GEP gun as a universal lockpick. That kind of strategic decision making is unnecessary in DXHR because doors and lasers can be accessed with relative ease, be it via the hacking augmentations, the unlock grenade, or, in the case of beams, the cloaking device (i.e. candybar).

Having said that, you might be surprised when I think we should go back to the good ol' LAM. I know that it's easy for people to find reasons to beat up on Invisible War, but one of the design choices I didn't like there, and dislike here, was to separate grenades from mines. Unlike multitools, grenades and mines essentially serve the same purpose: to explode. That one is a thrown, timed device and the other is a static proximity device strikes me as falling more under the condition of being an "alternative fire mode". I enjoyed the versatility that LAMs gave me in Deus Ex because otherwise I never would bother wasting precious inventory space on mines since I regard grenades as much more useful. I grant that that is my subjective opinion as a player and not necessarily a flaw in the design but I have yet to use a mine in either Invisible War or Human Revolution, where I have used them in Deus Ex.

________
Hacking:

On a whole I enjoyed the hacking mini-game. It's more engaging than Deus Ex's passive hacking timer and also gave me the opportunity to read e-mails at my leisure, a refreshing and welcome change. If I have a complaint about hacking it's that I was unable to see the defeat timer prior to the countdown starting, which meant I had to guess as to how much time I would have to reach the right nodes if detected.

I am aware that some people felt that the hacking mini-game was boring or quickly became tedious. Personally, I think that would have been less of an issue had DXHR stuck to the Deus Ex model and left hacking to computer consoles and security nodes, and allowed lockpicks and multitools to deal with opening doors and containers. I understand that hacking is intended to be one of the "four pillars of gameplay" however, it seems so prevalent that I think it's less of an option and more of a mandate. If you intend to complete subquests then the ability to hack becomes a requirement.

_____
Maps:

I want to start in praising Human Revolution's absolutely stunning atmosphere. The level of detail, the variety of locations, and the sheer determination displayed in EM's efforts at map development are simply magnificent. Many of these maps I enjoyed exploring, just to soak in the landscape, and EM was very conscious about not cutting corners. The lift sequences, be it at Sarif HQ, the FEMA bunker, YTM, or Panchaea, were delightful. Bethesda's procedurally generated environments simply can't compete. At all.

While the map design is an improvement over most titles, I still feel it is to a certain degree sub par to the Holy Trinity of Deus Ex, Thief, and System Shock. Much of it is still very linear, and lacks the expansiveness of Deus Ex's maps. With exception to Hengsha, the player spends very little time on rooves and a smaller pool of locations have multiple points of ingress. That's not to say that the game rides on rails (in some cases it does, but so also did Deus Ex) but that the degree of choice given to the player by EM exists more on a micro rather than macro scale throughout most of the game. It's as if EM looked at the Molepeople tunnels and chose that to be the basis for map design throughout most of Human Revolution. Yes, there are multiple avenues toward achieving success, but you're still forced to go from point A to B to C.

On a different level, I don't like how the player had available an automatically generated map for each level, particularly ones that Adam would have no in-character way of knowing. Deus Ex lacked a map, but not because the technology wasn't available or because the developers at Ion Storm were lazy, but as a conscious design decision. Navigation and plotting a course of action were part of the challenge of Deus Ex. In locations that could be potentially confusing, the designers were wise enough to aid you with static maps as a reference, but in most cases an auto-map wasn't required because the levels were designed with a spacial logic. As long as you had a general idea of the layout, you could reasonably figure out where you are in relation to it.

Moreover, Deus Ex provided the player with a tool that I think EM's omission of is inexcusable. That is the compass. As long as I know that, say, the police station is to the north-east, then I know I'll probably get there as long as I keep heading in that direction. DXHR tried to overcome this with the objective marker, which is handy, but doesn't give you an idea of where you are going without consulting the auto-map. Moreover, the objective marker reduces the necessity of exploration because it tells you precisely where you need to go, even when there is no reason why Adam should have that information. Even in the cases where there is an alternative available, there's no need to search for it because one is clearly marked for you. But I'm not sure that DXHR could do without the marker just because the maps, the hubs in particular, are unnecessarily convoluted and confusing.

______________________
Mini-Map (i.e. Radar):

Another feature I wasn't too keen on was the mini-map. Combined with the cover system, it started to feel like cheating. Having the minimap shows you precisely where your enemies are in relation to yourself, and their directional facing. That means you'll never be surprised by an enemy and actually diminishes the need for the cover system to look behind corners before passing them. Moreover, it almost eliminates the need to listen for footsteps or chatter, which has been a key strategy in every previous title of the genre.

I wouldn't mind the minimap if it were featured as an active augmentation with a bio-energy cost. It could be rationalised as a sonic emitter, each energy/candy bar giving you the enemy's position for thirty seconds, with that time limit improved by upgrades. That would have turned the mini-map into a useful tool rather than a crutch.

______
Story:

DXHR actually succeeds Deus Ex and Invisible War in one important story element: pacing. By about 2/3 of the way into both previous titles, you pretty much knew everything that was going on and there were no major surprises left in store. DXHR by contrast gives you drips and dribbles of information as you progress through the narrative. It may not have been the most interesting narrative, and certainly doesn't compare to KotOR, but it nevertheless kept me engaged in the story. Moreover, there was enough information provided in e-mails and notes that I could play detective if I choose and make a reasonable guess as to the outcome without it being made obvious. By contrast, I know there are a number of people who stop playing Deus Ex once they complete Hong Kong, and I don't think any game in history ever had an introduction that contained more spoilers.

Where DXHR falls down, though, is in its characterisations. It seems to have failed to learn the lesson of Deus Ex in keeping the dramatis personae reigned in, or Bioshock's example in keeping NPCs interesting and relevant to the story. Anonymous X is simply no match for Harry Filbin and I've already forgotten the Hive's bartender, while I'm not going to forget the political warnings I heard in the Lucky Money. The only characters I actually like are Malik and Prichard, and the only reason for that is because these characters remain relevant throughout the game.

Eliza and her revelation was largely wasted. Before anybody argues that she is "only an AI" remember that NG Resonance was probably the most interesting character in Invisible War, and Daedalus was elusive enough to even fool Tracer Tong, the undisputed expert in hacking and cybernetics, into believing he was a human being. I would have preferred Eliza to take a more involved role in the game, perhaps passing along cryptic information and advice to Adam.

As for the sense of betrayal that defined the most poignant moment of Deus Ex, there was only really one in DXHR and it came at the end, in the form of a character we've encountered only a handful of times and have no personal attachment to. Sarif may have betrayed you to an extent, but he was acting more as an opportunist than a villain and there seemed to be no tangible consequence of it. Even Adam, who many here claim to be more assertive than JC in projecting his opinions, didn't seem to care.

I was also disappointed in the ending, but not for the reason as most people have stated. While I enjoyed the final boss battle, it seemed disjointed with the rest of the story. With exception to an e-mail I read in the Panchaea's server room, I didn't notice any reference to the Hyron Project's OMCs. Again, it feels like an opportunity here was wasted. I would have been interested in investigating these "drones" or having some knowledge of their disappearance/existence rather than have them suddenly dropped on me in a cutscene. Moreover, it would have been much more dramatic if Megan's kidnapping wasn't for her research but because she had been selected as a drone. This would have made the merc's statement that Adam had "already lost her" much, much more poignant if Adam had finally found her only after she had already been integrated into the Hyron project, heroically telling him to destroy the computer, and her with it, in order to stop Zhou. (a possible ending could have been to collude with Zhou and broadcast her signal, living happily ever after with Megan at the expense of consigning humanity to slavery)

Finally, and I'll probably take some flak for this, but I was actually disappointed in all the references to Deus Ex characters. I would have preferred that they were either fleshed out and made pertinent to the narrative or not used at all. Now, if there is ever to be a Deus Ex 4, characters like Elizabeth DuClaire and Joseph Manderley will already have a background established, and this may limit their viability in future installments of the franchise. It seems to me that these characters were plugged solely for the purpose of shouting, "Hey, look at me, I'm a Deus Ex game! Really, I am!". The one exception being, if you have the pre-order mission, Tracer Tong, who actually plays a role in the game, albeit a small one.

_____________________________
Choice & the "Social" System:

EM has routinely stated that DXHR is to be a game about choice. What they failed to realise is a lesson that Ion Storm understood in Deus Ex, and actually implemented with even greater success in Invisible War. That is that a choice with only one option is no choice at all.

The most flagrant example of this is the choice to accept to decline quests. Is there really any consequence to accept? No, there isn't. So why bother ever declining? The only reason I can think of is for the sake of roleplay. I know that in my case I didn't accept the Hive bartender's quest because I decided that my Adam Jensen was not an extortionist. But there was no reward for my not accepting, in fact I was penalised in that I missed out in an opportunity for experience points, loot, and an extra mission.

Invisible War took a much more elegant approach in always having the protagonist be non-commital. "I'll think about it." is one of Alex Denton's most common sayings. You reaped your consequences based not on the ticking off of a bullet point but by your actions. Both the Order and the WTO made it perfectly clear what they expected of you in the Mako weapons lab, it was your actions there that determined how these NPCs would respond to you later, who would reward you and who would spit in your face. A dialogue tree was superfluous and might even have limited the player's ability to make an informed decision.

This brings us to DXHR's innovative "Social" mini-game. You're basically offered three choices, one good and two bad. Why would anybody choose one of the bad choices, except perhaps for the sake of roleplay? I respect the people who have made wrong decisions and stuck to them, bearing their consequences; however, even those players who don't reload after failure have only to wait until their third replay before they know the correct answer to every dialogue option. At that point, where is the "choice"? Where is the risk? The only choice then is between making the game a little easier or a little more difficult.

Contrast this to Deus Ex's form of "social" gameplay. One of my favourite examples is the Versalife building. Both the manager and the clerk will tell you what they want in return for the code to enter the MJ12 labs. Each choice carries a consequence, spend 2000 credits to bribe the manger and you might not have enough money to buy upgrades or biomod canister later on in the game. If you decide to instead kill or knock out the manager for the clerk, you risk prematurely alerting security to you intentions. Likewise in Invisible War, if you support one coffee shop manager, he'll give you a weapon upgrade, while if you support another, you'll get a biomod canister. But both rewards are mutually exclusive of one another. Roleplaying aside, you as a player will probably choose a side depending on which reward you personally value more.

The only real example of such a choice in DXHR that I can think of offhand is whether to make the hit for O'Malley or arrest him. The problem here is that the game fails to telegraph what the reward or consequence of either choice is, thus preventing the player from making an informed decision. This leaves the player in the position of trying to guess the designer's intention, which is the antithesis of what Deus Ex is supposed to be about.

In turn, the only real "choice", that is to say a decision where two or more options of comparable value are available, in DXHR's social system is whether or not to invest the praxis points into the social augmentation, which would introduce an additional means of persuading NPCs that would not otherwise be available. Given my stated opinion on the value of augmentations and praxis points, though, I regard this choice as decidedly weak.

I'm not saying that the Social mini-game should be ditched. It was interesting and an experiment worth the effort of trying. But as it stands now, without any real replayability or mechanic by which the player can imbue himself upon the game world, this mini-game does not fit within the traditional Deus Ex model.

___________
Experience:

I'm not going to go into this much because, as I've stated above, I found augmentations to be largely unnecessary and since experience only applies to their acquisition, experience stands also to be unnecessary. That said, I feel in a Deus Ex game, experience should only be awarded for achieving objectives. Yes, the original game also rewarded players for exploration, but I feel in hindsight that this was a mistake.

Deus Ex is a game about letting the player solve problems in their own way. The designers should not be casting judgement on the player's actions, and that's essentially what this experience system does. Nobody has the right to tell another person that their method is better or inferior to another's. Players should determine the merit of certain courses of action, of various strategies, according to their own values, their own perceptions, their own circumstances. There should never be a single optimal way to play Deus Ex, that's not what the game is about. Whether you use a LAM, a lockpick, a softkey, or a computer terminal to open that door, each method is equally worthy in that you've succeeded in achieving the goal set before you.

Deus Ex is -not- Fallout.

___________
Conclusion:

To get back to the subject of this thread, I feel that this game could have been a brilliant sequel, one that would have been a clear and true successor to the original title if EM had made only one simple change: that is, to rename it "Project Snowblind: Human Revolution". Okay, maybe that's a little bit harsh, DXHR does have more open maps and greater emphasis on stealthy play than Snowblind, but I felt a greater similarity between these to games than I did between DXHR and their common progenitor. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, either. Both games had great atmosphere, their narratives were well paced, and both stored great emphasis on cinematic storytelling.

Human Revolution is a good game. It might even be GOTY material. I can even accept the game as part of the Deus Ex family, provided that you also include Project Snowblind in that family, with VTMB (and potentially Alpha Protocol, though I have never played it) as a permanent houseguest. But it's not Deus Ex. EM seemed to try to copy the original game without appreciating the design philosophy behind it. That's why I say the similarities between the two are superficial, EM has created a game in the form of the original, but without a true synthesis of its function.

Having said all that, it's possible that Human Revolution might actually be a better game than Deus Ex. It's a subjective call, one determined by each individual's values and perspective, and that -is- what Deus Ex is all about.

unbeatableDX
8th Sep 2011, 04:39
For me, this is just as great and epic as the original.

nope. its great and epic for sure. but the original is still the best- GOTYAY

unbeatableDX
8th Sep 2011, 04:42
What? You're one of the biggest fanatics about the game on here, going so far as to proclaim EM "the team that saved gaming", and you haven't even got halfway through the game yet? OK, you've pumped the hours in, sure (and congrats on that - jeez!) but really, complete the game before you fully form an opinion. Things can go downhill later in the game (and in this case unfortunately they do, to a degree at least.)

ha ha ha HA this game tricked everyone at first. its such a shame that the last part of the game is a mess. why were we not warned of this in all them reviews? yet another conspiracy.....oh well it caused the game to sell well so we can get a sequal! just hope they add more depth

Random
8th Sep 2011, 06:01
Having said that, you might be surprised when I think we should go back to the good ol' LAM. I know that it's easy for people to find reasons to beat up on Invisible War, but one of the design choices I didn't like there, and dislike here, was to separate grenades from mines. Unlike multitools, grenades and mines essentially serve the same purpose: to explode. That one is a thrown, timed device and the other is a static proximity device strikes me as falling more under the condition of being an "alternative fire mode". I enjoyed the versatility that LAMs gave me in Deus Ex because otherwise I never would bother wasting precious inventory space on mines since I regard grenades as much more useful. I grant that that is my subjective opinion as a player and not necessarily a flaw in the design but I have yet to use a mine in either Invisible War or Human Revolution, where I have used them in Deus Ex.

Nice to see someone mention this. I don't understand why more games, especially IW and HR, don't follow the design of the original Deus Ex in this regard. Having grenades double as mines depending on where you use them is such an elegant, quick and efficient system. Inventories in IW and HR aren't large enough to carry grenades and mines of all types, and it's especially annoying in HR because mine templates take up two slots and don't stack.

I agree with most of your critiques of the gameplay. The lowered focus on emergence, and the reduced complexity and choice afforded by consumables like multitools and lockpicks, are both major downsides to HR.

I don't agree that the story is better paced though. HR's is slow to begin with and then dumps everything on you at the end. I actually thought it was some of the worst pacing I've seen in a game. It would be interesting to approach HR with no knowledge of the first two games. I imagine the point at which the Illuminati is first mentioned would be a huge 'What the hell' moment -- and not in a good way. It comes out of nowhere and isn't explored at all.

I also disagree that HR could possibly be considered a better game overall than DX1. It's not in the same league.

Jordasm
8th Sep 2011, 07:51
After replaying HR like 6 times, my only criticisms are the awful bossfights, rushed ending, panchaea in general, and the extreme lack of character development, the fact that none of Adams choices in the game affect anything, except for maybe a mention in the paper. And it only really scraped the surface of "Conspiracy"

Otherwise, I thought it was alright, hasn't got **** on Deus Ex, but It was better than Invisible War.

Edit:
Oh and I would have liked more than 2 hubs. Detroit and Heng Sha were both filled with hobo's and stuff, I'd have really liked to have seen the other side of the spectrum with Upper Heng Sha and Montreal

imported_BoB_
8th Sep 2011, 10:13
Nice to see someone mention this. I don't understand why more games, especially IW and HR, don't follow the design of the original Deus Ex in this regard. Having grenades double as mines depending on where you use them is such an elegant, quick and efficient system. Inventories in IW and HR aren't large enough to carry grenades and mines of all types, and it's especially annoying in HR because mine templates take up two slots and don't stack.


Well, I never used them in Invisible War to be honest, but in Human Revolution, they were pretty useful. First for the bosses, because they move a lot faster than your regular characters. And there was multiple ambush scene also.
Besides, am I the only one that thought that the mines was more powerful than the grenades? Maybe it's psychological, I don't know but the EMP field seemed larger at times.

ricardosamuel1961
8th Sep 2011, 13:28
In my opinion, there is a steep decline in quality after your first visit to Hengsha and your return to Detroit. Subsequent levels in Detroit, Singapore, and Panchea feel really rushed.

Just too many warehouses, offices, climbing through vents, etc.

And who had the silly idea to put zombified augmented folks into the last level? I mean, seriously....

Overall, I think this is a decent game, it does nothing new in terms of gameplay. The story is serviceable but lacks the emotional punch of the first one. There are few memorable characters, and it also lacks the great set pieces that Deus Ex had. (the Hongkong level, saving/or not your brother Paul, your escape from Unatco, etc.)

I could have done without the boss fights. They add nothing to the core gameplay.

My biggest gripe is that the game just isn't written very well. To give one example:

The second boss you have to dispatch is Fedorova. After wounding her critically, Eliza Cassan who turns out is not a real person but a hologram asks you whether you wish to save her life. Jensen's answer: I'll think about it." This could have been an interesting choice to set up, maybe with consequences later, but the game just drops the issue.

WildcatPhoenix
8th Sep 2011, 13:55
Great review, ColBashar. Very well said.



It would have been much more reasonable if EM had simply followed the VTMB model and made takedowns only available under the conditions that you're behind the target and undetected. That would have provided enough of a challenge not to need the artificial limitation of bio-energy as well as made the animations more logical (no more knocking someone out from the front when you were previously behind them) and eliminated the forced teleport issue.


No kidding. Such a simple fix, one that could incorporate melee weapons AND takedowns. Make takedowns unlimited, but your character must be undetected and you must be precisely behind them to do so. And for god's sake, give us a crowbar or baton to use as a backup!





Another feature I wasn't too keen on was the mini-map. Combined with the cover system, it started to feel like cheating. Having the minimap shows you precisely where your enemies are in relation to yourself, and their directional facing. That means you'll never be surprised by an enemy and actually diminishes the need for the cover system to look behind corners before passing them. Moreover, it almost eliminates the need to listen for footsteps or chatter, which has been a key strategy in every previous title of the genre.

I wouldn't mind the minimap if it were featured as an active augmentation with a bio-energy cost. It could be rationalised as a sonic emitter, each energy/candy bar giving you the enemy's position for thirty seconds, with that time limit improved by upgrades. That would have turned the mini-map into a useful tool rather than a crutch.


Again, a simple fix. Just make the radar/minimap an aug. Would anyone be complaining if the game had too many augmentations?



By contrast, I know there are a number of people who stop playing Deus Ex once they complete Hong Kong, and I don't think any game in history ever had an introduction that contained more spoilers.

Heh, amen to that. When I introduce Deus to new people, I usually insist they skip the opening cutscene. While I agree that Hong Kong is the apex of the first game's greatness, I still have very fond opinions of Paris, Vandenberg AFB, and the Ocean Lab. Still, the absolute core of Deus Ex's design brilliance lies in the New York and Hong Kong segments.



Where DXHR falls down, though, is in its characterisations. It seems to have failed to learn the lesson of Deus Ex in keeping the dramatis personae reigned in, or Bioshock's example in keeping NPCs interesting and relevant to the story. Anonymous X is simply no match for Harry Filbin and I've already forgotten the Hive's bartender, while I'm not going to forget the political warnings I heard in the Lucky Money. The only characters I actually like are Malik and Prichard, and the only reason for that is because these characters remain relevant throughout the game.


^This. So, so, so much this. I can't even count how many incredible characters, including simple, plot irrelevant NPCs, from the original game who stand out as great, fully developed, unforgettable characters. Moments like the infamous "orange soda incident" with Gunther and Anna, or Simons interrogating the NSF prisoners, or Manderley chastising you for going in the women's restroom. Filben and his double-triple crossing informant ways, claiming "Heh, you can't afford that [secret]." Maggie Chow and her shady relationship with your brother. Hell, the fact that you have a brother whom you trust more than your employers, even when he's asking you to commit treason! This is fabulous characterization, and it's sorely missed in DX:HR.



Eliza and her revelation was largely wasted. Before anybody argues that she is "only an AI" remember that NG Resonance was probably the most interesting character in Invisible War, and Daedalus was elusive enough to even fool Tracer Tong, the undisputed expert in hacking and cybernetics, into believing he was a human being. I would have preferred Eliza to take a more involved role in the game, perhaps passing along cryptic information and advice to Adam.


Agreed. I'll never forget my initial playthrough, sitting in the MJ12 cell, no weapons, no items, wondering "WTF just happened?"....and then a voice comes in over my infolink. And you spend several missions wondering "just who is Daedalus, and how does he know all this information, and what does he want with me?" The mystery of Eliza seemed telegraphed from the get-go (maybe this is just a case of the AI concept getting a bit long in the tooth, but Daedalus was a great character, and Icarus is absolutely amazing...I still get chills thinking of walking around the DuClare Chateau, with Icarus hissing angrily in my ear "WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FORRRRR?")




As for the sense of betrayal that defined the most poignant moment of Deus Ex, there was only really one in DXHR and it came at the end, in the form of a character we've encountered only a handful of times and have no personal attachment to. Sarif may have betrayed you to an extent, but he was acting more as an opportunist than a villain and there seemed to be no tangible consequence of it. Even Adam, who many here claim to be more assertive than JC in projecting his opinions, didn't seem to care.


Again, spot on. It's hard to recapture the spirit of the original since it was the first in the series, and now players are going in to a sequel expecting betrayal and conspiracy. So I feel for the designers of DX:HR, in that regard. It's tough to surprise us now that the cat is out of the bag, so to speak.

But when I stepped out of that MJ12 lab, opened the door and found myself...in Level Three of UNATCO, I felt like I'd been sucker-punched. I had known Manderley was covering for Simons, I had known there had been some indiscretions made by UNATCO, but I had no idea how deeply it was involved in these downright evil experiments with nanoviruses and outright murder. It was personal, it was a kick to the gut, and it was GREAT. I don't feel that with Megan Reed, or Sarif, or anyone in DX:HR.

Not even close.

imported_BoB_
8th Sep 2011, 15:35
I completely disagree about the Deus Ex opening sequence. It is one of the best opening sequence in a game because you don't understand it the first time you play the game. Even when you are in Hong Kong, you still don't know much about the Illuminati if any so I don't understand how people could stop the game here.

And the opening sequence of Human Revolution has perfectly captured this. You don't understand it the first time, only difference is that you know Page, throughout the game, you get clues that explain it, but it's really only when you finished the game that you realize that there is pretty much the entire game in this sequence, exactly like in Deus Ex.

Again, the opening sequence of Human Revolution in one of the best bit of the game.

ColBashar
10th Sep 2011, 00:11
SPOILERS. Skip post if you don't want to read them.

A lot of people seem to want to beat up on Panchaea, particularly the zombaugs. The zombaugs weren't stupid. In fact, they were a brilliant idea and I always give credit when somebody proves cleverer than myself. What I think many people fail to appreciate is what the Panchaea level really is: a tribute to System Shock. This is particularly poignant because where Deus Ex is a look at the challenges of using technology as a means of achieving human evolution, System Shock is a morality tale of how technology left to run rampant can result in human devolution. It's that lesson that Hugh Darrow was trying to impress on the world at the end of DXHR and EM's correlation between the story they were trying to tell and that told by Warren Spector six years before Deus Ex should have been well received.

Except for one problem.

If you're going to make a tribute to System Shock, it has to be scarey. Panchaea, while impressive and genuinely awesome in the traditional sense of the word, wasn't scarey. The zombaugs weren't scarey. It takes more than some inconsequential sound samples of distant moaning and clanging metal to inspire fear.

In my opinion, the zombaug should have been treated as a kind of mini-boss. Rather than groups of them suffering from myopia worse than an MJ12 trooper's, make them lone predators, capable of fighting mano-a-mano against an augmented super soldier, and scatter them around the map. Make them deadly and fast, very fast, enough to make the player aware that letting one get the jump on him is a quick ticket to the grave. Sprinting isn't an option, the only alternatives are to remain undetected, make clever use of your surroundings, or be prepared to lay down some heavy firepower.

I liked the fact that the zombaugs were unarmed. That made them a unique opponent in the game. But it's no fun to be disabled, there's no enjoyment in sitting at your computer, punching buttons to no effect as you watch enemies beat up on you. Instead, the zombaugs should have packed a punch, a heavy, Barret style punch, capable of knocking you back a few feet, possibly incurring additional damage if you should be knocked against an obstruction. That might make you think twice about keeping your back to a wall. It would have also kept the battle fluid, forcing you into a new position but also giving you a brief respite as the zombaug rushed up to continue the assault.

The other problem was that Panchaea was far, far too well lit. If you want to make a level scarey, you have to put as much emphasis into the lighting as you do sound. Deus Ex did this to a small degree with the Ocean Lab level, VTMB did it in the Ocean House Hotel, Thief 3 in the Shalebridge Cradle, and System Shock in just about every level. Why not some corridors illuminated solely by the sporadic discharge of exposed electrical wiring? Or the flicker of fluorescent lights? Of course, lighting doesn't matter much when you have the advantage of the minimap to tell you where all your enemies are, so perhaps rationalise it disabled as a side effect of Darrow's signal?

These are the kinds of things that would have made the level scarey. Not too scarey, of course, because that's not what Deus Ex is about and a tribute need not be outright copying, but just enough to make the level unique and memorable.

- - -

The difference between the introduction to Deus Ex and that of DXHR is that the latter was much more subtle. Darrow and Zhou's faces are not revealed and their voices are distorted enough not to be immediately recognisable. The only person you see is Page and he remains the man behind the curtain throughout the game. Adam is never made aware of Page's existence, so the fact that he's one of the conspirators has no impact. I liked the fact that I was able to piece together Zhou's character from all the third person descriptions I'd read in the YTM and Omega Ranch e-mails and, while I suspected Darrow since his appearance in Sarif's office, I enjoyed a certain satisfaction to finally learn that my suspicions proved legitimate.

Contrast this to Deus Ex, where the villainy of Page and Simons are made immediately evident, and Chow is cast very suspect. Those are spoilers. For my part I would have liked to have had the moment of epiphany when I realised for myself that the director of FEMA was crooked rather than have this outright explained to me before I started the game.

- - -


Jensen's answer: I'll think about it.

I believe that this was intended to be an ironic quip, a joke meant to pass over Eliza's head. Unfortunately, it seems to have passed over everyone else's head as well, my own included until I stopped to think about it. I think it's just a matter of Elias Toufexis reading the line as non-committal, as we'd expect him to if it were leading up to a dialogue choice, when it should have been sarcastic. Adam Jensen does express sarcasm in other parts of the game, particularly exchanges with Prichard.

- - -

I agree that DXHR threw a lot of information at the player at the end. I suspect that this is a result of the game's being cut down to size in the development process. Subjects like the Illuminati and the Hyron project were probably intended to be developed more thoroughly on maps like Montreal and India, but found themselves shoved obtrusively into other parts of the narrative when these maps were removed.

That said, I never found myself being bored, wondering when I would reach the next plot segment in DXHR. There was always something to look forward to, some piece of information yet to uncover, some mystery yet to be solved. Maybe the exposition wasn't handled as well as in Deus Ex, but at least it was consistent.

In Deus Ex, the game seemed to drop off a little each time a revelation was made, without anything new introduced to pick it up again and keep the narrative going. I think part of why some consider Hong Kong to be the "apex" of the game is because that's where the ratio of story to game reaches its climax. Once you've learned about Versalife manufacturing the grey death, the conspiracy is basically revealed in full. Maggie Chow is the last real betrayal in the game. Everett might be holding information back, playing his own game, but he never lies to you and will reward your loyalty in the end. Everybody else is pretty straight forward in their dealings, there's no mystery as to their motivations or intent.

The appearance of Helios at Vandenberg marks the final plot point prior to Area 51. Yet there are still the gas station, ocean lab, and missile silo maps to complete. These are pretty much errand boy missions that don't really contribute to the story and feel a lot like padding. Also, once you completed the Naval Yard map, the only opponents remaining in the game, outside of bots and transgenics, are MJ12. The NSF, UNATCO, riot cops, American and Chinese soldiers, are all behind you, leaving very little left in the way of variety.

The revelations of Human Revolution may have been forced at the end, and they may have come out of nowhere, but at least they were at the end. I always felt that there was some purpose to my missions and that most of them contributed something to the narrative. The last third of Deus Ex didn't do that for me. I felt I was playing just to get to the end and missions like the Hong Kong helipad and the missile silo were just obstacles on my way to the next chapter.

- - -

If there's anything I want people come away from playing Deus Ex with, it's an appreciation and tolerance for the opinions of others. It's a game that judges you on your accomplishments and not the means by which you achieved them. Whether you put a bullet in Louis Pan's head or left every MJ12 trooper in your wake still breathing, the game doesn't care, doesn't arbitrarily penalise or reward you.

More people should take that understanding and apply it on a macro level. It doesn't matter whether you prefer Deus Ex or DXHR, just as it doesn't matter whether you use a multitool or a lockpick. So long as you got enjoyment out of either, your objective has been achieved. Arguments over which game is "better" are unproductive because, just like challenges in Deus Ex, they depend on the individual's values, perspective, and circumstances. These are not universal among players.

That's why there is so much contention about both game's length. It's entirely possible for a person to speed through one game while taking their time on another, while a different person can have the opposite experience. While I personally found the first title to be longer, I respect the fact that others fared differently. Moreover, given that first playthroughs are typically the longest and many contributors to this thread have played Deus Ex multiple times, I think it's too early to make a qualified determination as to which title offers more content.

The point I am trying to make though is that declaring DXHR bad because it's not Deus Ex is just as much a fallacy as saying that DXHR is comparable to Deus Ex because it's great. Neither logic stands to reason. I regard the two games as fundamentally different and I judge each separately based not on what they aren't but in how well each succeeds in what it set out to do. I enjoyed Human Revolution. Is it Deus Ex? No. But I don't let that be an obstacle to appreciating the game on its own, well deserved merits.

But for those of you who still insist in some kind of quantifiable means of passing judgement, there is only one to defy argument: sales. As of 2009, Deus Ex had sold only one million copies, Invisible War tacking on another 1.2 million to the franchise. Compare this to Tomb Raider which sold seven million of the first installment and thirty million as a franchise. Or Hitman, which sold eight million copies spread out over four titles. As much as it pains me to say, Deus Ex may be a work of genius, but it's simply not where the money is, it's not what the public is buying.

Eidos: Montreal and particularly Square Enix are in the business of making money, and there is little doubt in my mind that DXHR will prove to me the most successful title in the franchise. Purists may hate the "kiddies" who play Call of Duty, but those kiddies are the ones holding the purse strings, they're the ones who will be catered to first and foremost. And, in my opinion, that's as it should be. Whatever your opinion of popular culture, it's the most telling barometer of freedom in society and enterprise and I wouldn't trade that for anything.

For myself, there's nothing stopping me from loading up Deus Ex for another playthrough. Or VTMB. Or Master of Magic or Privateer or Tropico or any of the other venerable titles I still enjoy, each a repository of genius yet to be replicated. Maybe they'll never be replicated. I can live with that. It never stopped me from playing chess.

pha
10th Sep 2011, 00:28
Inventories in IW and HR aren't large enough to carry grenades and mines of all types, and it's especially annoying in HR because mine templates take up two slots and don't stack.


Interestingly enough, grenades and mine templates do not stack, but mines do. I don't mind a small inventory which encourages decision making and carrying stuff you need instead of a whole arsenal, but there are some inconsistencies in DX:HR's inventory system.

Rindill the Red
10th Sep 2011, 00:45
SPOILERS. Skip post if you don't want to read them.

A lot of people seem to want to beat up on Panchaea, particularly the zombaugs. The zombaugs weren't stupid. In fact, they were a brilliant idea and I always give credit when somebody proves cleverer than myself. What I think many people fail to appreciate is what the Panchaea level really is: a tribute to System Shock. This is particularly poignant because where Deus Ex is a look at the challenges of using technology as a means of achieving human evolution, System Shock is a morality tale of how technology left to run rampant can result in human devolution. It's that lesson that Hugh Darrow was trying to impress on the world at the end of DXHR and EM's correlation between the story they were trying to tell and that told by Warren Spector six years before Deus Ex should have been well received.

Except for one problem.

If you're going to make a tribute to System Shock, it has to be scarey. Panchaea, while impressive and genuinely awesome in the traditional sense of the word, wasn't scarey. The zombaugs weren't scarey. It takes more than some inconsequential sound samples of distant moaning and clanging metal to inspire fear.

In my opinion, the zombaug should have been treated as a kind of mini-boss. Rather than groups of them suffering from myopia worse than an MJ12 trooper's, make them lone predators, capable of fighting mano-a-mano against an augmented super soldier, and scatter them around the map. Make them deadly and fast, very fast, enough to make the player aware that letting one get the jump on him is a quick ticket to the grave. Sprinting isn't an option, the only alternatives are to remain undetected, make clever use of your surroundings, or be prepared to lay down some heavy firepower.

I liked the fact that the zombaugs were unarmed. That made them a unique opponent in the game. But it's no fun to be disabled, there's no enjoyment in sitting at your computer, punching buttons to no effect as you watch enemies beat up on you. Instead, the zombaugs should have packed a punch, a heavy, Barret style punch, capable of knocking you back a few feet, possibly incurring additional damage if you should be knocked against an obstruction. That might make you think twice about keeping your back to a wall. It would have also kept the battle fluid, forcing you into a new position but also giving you a brief respite as the zombaug rushed up to continue the assault.

The other problem was that Panchaea was far, far too well lit. If you want to make a level scarey, you have to put as much emphasis into the lighting as you do sound. Deus Ex did this to a small degree with the Ocean Lab level, VTMB did it in the Ocean House Hotel, Thief 3 in the Shalebridge Cradle, and System Shock in just about every level. Why not some corridors illuminated solely by the sporadic discharge of exposed electrical wiring? Or the flicker of fluorescent lights? Of course, lighting doesn't matter much when you have the advantage of the minimap to tell you where all your enemies are, so perhaps rationalise it disabled as a side effect of Darrow's signal?

These are the kinds of things that would have made the level scarey. Not too scarey, of course, because that's not what Deus Ex is about and a tribute need not be outright copying, but just enough to make the level unique and memorable.

Thank you for this. I was just contemplating starting a new thread just for this purpose.

The level comes out of the blue with very little set up or fore-shadowing.

And so the player is kind of put off by it.

But when you realize what they were trying to do, you can start to appreciate it.

Of course, they could have implemented their idea much, much better -- in fact, that's pretty much how I would sum up Eidos Montreal's work on DX:HR -- great ideas, but you could have implemented them so much better

1. Deadly zombies -- Like ColBashar said, make them deadly. So that stealth becomes extremely tense.
2. Foreshadowing -- The game should have allowed Jensen to run into a zombie or two at the omega ranch (experimenting on patients before enacting grand plan)
3. Darker -- Darker and moodier atmosphere.
4. Somethings gone wrong, but you don't know what yet... -- instead of having Jensen see how the people all go crazy -- they should have simply had Darrow apologize and then the video feed cut out -- that way the player knows something is going on (Frank might say something like: "Jensen, I don't know what's happened but I've lost all contact with Sarif and panchaea, something weird is going on, I'm getting reports of chaos all over the world." -- etc.) -- that way the starting part where you are walking through an empty panchaea finding dead bodies everywhere will create more mystique
5. Jensen loses equipment in ocean -- Have jensen lose his entire inventory in the ocean, so that he must scavenge and adapt with his augmentations in the face of the threats in Panchaea

unbeatableDX
10th Sep 2011, 00:50
Thank you for this. I was just contemplating starting a new thread just for this purpose.

The level comes out of the blue with very little set up or fore-shadowing.

And so the player is kind of put off by it.

But when you realize what they were trying to do, you can start to appreciate it.

Of course, they could have implemented their idea much, much better -- in fact, that's pretty much how I would sum up Eidos Montreal's work on DX:HR -- great ideas, but you could have implemented them so much better

1. Deadly zombies -- Like pha said, make them deadly. So that stealth becomes extremely tense.
2. Foreshadowing -- The game should have allowed Jensen to run into a zombie or two at the omega ranch (experimenting on patients before enacting grand plan)
3. Darker -- Darker and moodier atmosphere.
4. Somethings gone wrong, but you don't know what yet... -- instead of having Jensen see how the people all go crazy -- they should have simply had Darrow apologize and then the video feed cut out -- that way the player knows something is going on (Frank might say something like: "Jensen, I don't know what's happened but I've lost all contact with Sarif and panchaea, something weird is going on, I'm getting reports of chaos all over the world." -- etc.) -- that way the starting part where you are walking through an empty panchaea finding dead bodies everywhere will create more mystique
5. Jensen loses equipment in ocean -- Have jensen lose his entire inventory in the ocean, so that he must scavenge and adapt with his augmentations in the face of the threats in Panchaea

you should make a thread about that. it will go nicely alongside my "petition to make the final level more challenging" thread

imported_BoB_
10th Sep 2011, 03:24
The point I am trying to make though is that declaring DXHR bad because it's not Deus Ex is just as much a fallacy as saying that DXHR is comparable to Deus Ex because it's great. Neither logic stands to reason. I regard the two games as fundamentally different and I judge each separately based not on what they aren't but in how well each succeeds in what it set out to do. I enjoyed Human Revolution. Is it Deus Ex? No. But I don't let that be an obstacle to appreciating the game on its own, well deserved merits.

But for those of you who still insist in some kind of quantifiable means of passing judgement, there is only one to defy argument: sales. As of 2009, Deus Ex had sold only one million copies, Invisible War tacking on another 1.2 million to the franchise. Compare this to Tomb Raider which sold seven million of the first installment and thirty million as a franchise. Or Hitman, which sold eight million copies spread out over four titles. As much as it pains me to say, Deus Ex may be a work of genius, but it's simply not where the money is, it's not what the public is buying.

Eidos: Montreal and particularly Square Enix are in the business of making money, and there is little doubt in my mind that DXHR will prove to me the most successful title in the franchise. Purists may hate the "kiddies" who play Call of Duty, but those kiddies are the ones holding the purse strings, they're the ones who will be catered to first and foremost. And, in my opinion, that's as it should be. Whatever your opinion of popular culture, it's the most telling barometer of freedom in society and enterprise and I wouldn't trade that for anything.


Well said. Different time, different objectives, different team, hence different games.
Like you said, Deus Ex's sales are bad, and well, Deus Ex wouldn't even be released today (obviously I'm not talking graphics but everything else)

Fuhror
10th Sep 2011, 04:08
Best game i've played since DX1!

Awesome job Eidos Montreal!

unbeatableDX
10th Sep 2011, 04:13
Best game i've played since DX1!

Awesome job Eidos Montreal!
i disagree. fallout new vegas was a superior game. but DX:HR is the next best after that. they still did a great job though

Vozlov
10th Sep 2011, 08:49
The only problem with it is the rather rushed ending.

The ending aren't out of place, just rushed.

Senka
10th Sep 2011, 09:28
This. Anyone who says "zomg this is best game since the original!!!111oneone" obviously hasn't played any other game since the original. Whatever DXHR does, Witcher 2 does it better, and it's a game that came out this year, developed by a polish studio, who doesn't have nearly as much resources at their disposal - but they have grand vision, talent and love for the world of The Witcher universe. 16 different endings people. 16. and NONE of them involve pushing "I win" buttons at the end.

I'm gunna start this off by saying I loved the witcher 2 - it was a good improvement on the witcher 1 in many ways but also not as good as it in some other ways, but that's a long story. As for the point of this post: 16 endings is really 1 ending, 16 different outcomes. Outcomes depending on what main characters you killed off and who you were friends with. Killing or not killing (spoilers and ****) letho aren't two totally different endings. Letting Iorveth die or not? Not 2 different endings. Killing the dragon or not? Not 2 different endings, just 2 different outcomes based on your actions.

It didn't really offer you multiple ways to complete things either. Having said that I have NO idea how I rate HR... I can't even comprehend what I really feel about it, so many mixed feelings.

edit: Watch the making of if you haven't yet, it's quite interesting. I really believe if they had more time Deus Ex HR could've been the best game since DX1. Hopefully they have the chance to make another game (DX or not) that can really show us what they can do without being restricted so much by time or resources... 4 years just wasn't enough for Adam.

jtr7
10th Sep 2011, 09:28
Is it Deus Ex? No.
The truth.^^

But I don't let that be an obstacle to appreciating the game on its own, well deserved merits.
That's not complimentary in the context of Deus Ex gaming, especially after stating the truth. Once a game is admittedly not similar enough to the progenitor of the series it is placed alongside and shares the title of, any and all merits it has is really beside the point. Any game that isn't called Deus Ex has well-deserved merits.



I hope DX:HR brings a lot more people to install and play the original, and marks a shift in gaming purchases and tastes in order to shift the industry, and that DX4 is even more like the original while making full use of the latest tech and resources.

Sulix
10th Sep 2011, 14:45
Sorry, but how is it NOT deus ex? It has exactly the same gameplay fundaments, just with modern game design philosophy applied to it. People just tend to be hysteric over this, as nostalgia googles strike again. DXHR has quite some flaws, with Panchea being the biggest one, but still, besides being an awesome game, it is Deus Ex at it's core as well.

What bugs me most is that people tend to mix up eliminating redundancy with dumbing down. So there are no lock picks. Who cares? In the original Deus Ex there was no first aid and medicine as in fallout, both were one at the same. Wow, fallout was much more complex...oh wait. Actually, it doesn't matter. You need exactly that much skills as are needed to create enough different paths for the player. And well, Deus Ex had a hell lot of redundant things which weren't needed in the first place (and even obsolete ones like swimming). Merging lockpicking with hacking in DX:HR was a good decision, but the level design itself simply wasn't good enough for sufficient diversity.

Same goes for Takedowns, this was a great decision by EM, just that I would have suggested ColBashar's solution. The point of melee weapons was to reward the player for staying unnoticed just until he reached melee distance to his enemy. From there on it doesn't matter how much damage his melee weapon does, nobody is interessted in bashing away the enemy just like in a random hack and slay. So takedowns would have been a natural progression, unfortunately not in the way it was implemented in DX:HR.

I could go on with examples, but I'll stop right here. My opinion is that DX did a hell lot of gamedesign mistakes, but at it's core it still was a masterpiece in that regard. It gave game developers the opportunity to evolve from that point on, instead the industry decided to "go with the flow". EM jumped at the chance and did what should have been done long ago, and they did a decent job. Gamedesignwise the biggest issues are probably the boss fights and augmentations. I like the idea, how they approached the experience system, again, I think it was the right decision. It's just that a lot of the augmentations are either redundant or obsolete. However, the problem isn't the "dumbing down", it's the lack of diversity in the augmentations itself, as well as experience point balancing (the curve should be waaay more exponential). Nevertheless I'm happy, that most of Adams upgrades are not value based, but rather unique features.

Considering the story, yeah DX was pretty complex, but storytelling itself was a mess. A lot of the spoken lines were cheesy, and voice acting was TERRIBLE. HR is pretty much the opposite, but a lot of the characters in DX:HR have a lack of personality. Still, that doesn't mean that both games have a different vibe. In fact, I'm surprised how EM took exactly the same story template, and managed to build something new upon it. It feels like DX, it's just too short, there's not enough conspiracy going on.

That said, in my oppinion the differences between DX and HR are rather of technical nature, but the way how they feel, the way how they play, at core they are the same. Both fail were the other part succeeds (or not).

Considering Panchea : I don't think the suggestions would have helped at all. Making the level even more zombie like would have been a terrible idea. The idea was to convey how the people lose control over themself, while halucinating. This wasn't some type of splatter movie like atmosphere, or some jibber jabber sci-fi, it was a plausible scenario, even for cyberpunk settings in general. I expected inner conflicts, people begging for help, commiting suicide. But as soon as I arrived in Panchea I knew that level would suck. The lines were cheesy, the animations were terrible, voice acting unrealistic and the "crazies" implausible as enemies. Not convincing at all. A Bioshock like atmosphere would have made it even more zombie like, no thanks.

jd10013
10th Sep 2011, 15:50
you probably lost everyone when you decided to pull out the nostalgia card.

if you don't get it, you don't get it.

JacobBHE
10th Sep 2011, 16:25
OK, I haven't finished the game yet but after reading the last few posts in this thread I wanted to respond with what I have experienced so far.

To be honest, Eidos have done a pretty good job, much much better than I expected especially after some of the stuff they said over the past 4 years. Hengsha is beautiful, and environment design in general is very Deus Ex. But even without having finished it, there are some glaring problems that prevent this from being the game I was hoping for.

The key word for me is STRESS. There is no stress in this game, nothing to worry about because I already know it's going to be all right. And why is having no stress a problem? Because stress gives you memories and without it, my memories of this game won't last half as long as those I have of the original.

What do I mean by stress?

The most obvious example is the health system – in the new game,so long as you keep out of the way for the right amount of time(which is too easy to do), you are fine, your health is back up to 100%. No stress.

In the original, health packs made you think before you acted, and therefore gave you a small amount of stress to deal with. Couple that with going through a large level with a small number of health packs = a stressful event. The flip side of this coin is, at the end of the level, your feeling of personal achievement will be that much more intense because it was YOU making those decisions that got you safely through the level – not a game mechanic you don't even have to think about.

Augmentations.

Almost all of the augs simply make your path through the game easier. They do not open up any new type's of game play, they almost seem like an added cheat.

They are way too easy to get, as are praxis kits to upgrade them with.

There is no risk verses reward in choosing one aug over another which again equals a no stress situation, you make choices about which augs to upgrade next, in what order rather than choosing a single aug over another. I think this was a grave mistake.

That's all I have so far. There are some other niggling problems that I wont mention here. The team responsible for HR should understand that I am not having a 'dig' at their abilities, rather I am pointing to areas that can be massively improved.

Sulix
10th Sep 2011, 17:18
you probably lost everyone when you decided to pull out the nostalgia card.

Sadly, true.


if you don't get it, you don't get it.

This I don't understand. I've read through the arguments over here. I've lurked in this forums for 3 years. And while there were a lot of valid complaints, which I partly agree, partly disagree on, none of them lead to a gamedesign shift in it's core.
I mean, yes, even I have learned, that 3rd person is a bad decision. But replacing collectables with automatic regeneration isn't necessary a bad thing. They did it well with the energy pips. They made it too easy with the health system.

And that's the problem. It isn't about changing game mechanics, as long as they follow the same design principle. It's about balancing, and DX:HR has serious problems with it after about 5-10 hours. The augmentation system is unbalanced, the regeneration mechanics are unbalanced and even the level design is unbalanced. It seems to me a lot of people over here confuse this.
In most cases, the only reason why players lack choices for their approach is, that most of the maps are artistically well designed, but not gameplaywise. Especially in large open areas, like the part about the FEMA detention camp or derelict row, there are numerous creative possibilites. It's not the fault of the mechanics itself, it's the fault of the content serving it. There are enough tools to cater for a lot of combinatorial possibilities.
But again, this does NOT mean there has been a design shift from DX to DX:HR. It's simply lazy level design, or, a difficult challenge to coordinate artists and level designers at the same time. Either way, it's technical problem, not one of philosophical nature.

I played it on the hard difficulty level. I don't have any comparison to medium. But to me it felt like Deus Ex, with the aforementioned issues.

PS : I agree on the radar part. In this case this is indeed a result of bad game design, which bugged me a lot.

carbonmutant
10th Sep 2011, 18:08
The people in charge of the plot development were juggling topics that they did not understand. The threat of human augmentation pales in significance to the fact Eliza will still be guiding humanity after the game is over.

jd10013
10th Sep 2011, 18:08
you can't remove skills, lock picks, multitools, health kits, and melee weapons and then add a hundred cut-scenes, 3rd person take-downs and cover, radar, and health regen, and then reduce the augmentations to either more cut-scenes or passive ones that are always active and not say there isn't a design shift. those were significant parts of the original that were just removed for streamlining purposes, and in the case of the augmentations, the "wow" effect. it changes a huge chunk of the game.

I'm not saying (and neither are a majority of people here) that it ruined HR, or even made it bad. but it certainly took it in a different direction.

IMO, HR is the sequeal everybody, or at least I, hoped for back in 2001. when they were making it, I Knew the console market was growing to the point where they couldn't ignore it. likewise, I knew the dual development would force certain compromises on the PC version. I knew we weren't going to get another DX. but I never dreamed we'd get maps 1/4 the size of what we had in DX, or a game that at most would take 8 hours to finish, or a main character that looked like a childish punk holding his gun "gangsta" style or (worst of all) universal ammo. There was no reason they had to do all that to market it to the console crowd (not using that as a pejorative btw)

with HR, we get a game that mirrors what a DX game is, tosses a few bones to the consoles, but not so much as to ruin the core game-play. I can live with the stuff like auto heal, take-downs, 3rd person cover (which I don't really use anyway) and the rest. I can live with it because we still got a pretty immersive free-roaming game with slight RPG element, a huge adventure element, a good story, and 40+ hours of game-play.

JacobBHE
10th Sep 2011, 18:13
slight RPG element...

Thats where the problem is, especially when compared to the original game.

imported_BoB_
10th Sep 2011, 18:42
That's not a problem, that's just not the same game.

Deus Ex was an Action-RPG, Human Revolution is not.

ColBashar
10th Sep 2011, 21:41
Sorry, but how is it NOT deus ex? It has exactly the same gameplay fundaments, just with modern game design philosophy applied to it.

I can't really give you a detailed answer unless you could elabourate on how you define "modern game design philosophy". Otherwise, I think you answered your own question. It's different because the design philosophy is different. If I were to describe those differences in a nutshell, though, I would say that Deus Ex is more of an RPG than Human Revolution while the latter is more of an action game than the former.

The reason I harp on the multitools and lockpicks are because these are a good example of this difference. I challenge anybody here to play Deus Ex without upgrading Lockpicking and then to play it again without upgrading the Electronics skill. The dismissal of one or the other (or both, for that matter) will substantially change your gameplay experience as new obstacles and new opportunities present themselves. Without Electronics, you will have to plan your strategy around alarms, beams, turrets, and especially cameras. Without Lockpicking, your access to additional ammunition, equipment, notes, and upgrade canisters will be limited, forcing you to make the most use of what resources are available to you.

Whether you decide that you want to be "the electronics guy" or "the lockpick guy" or any other defined characteristic alters how you approach each map in Deus Ex. An obstacle to one might be an opportunity to another. That change is what constitutes roleplay. It is even more pronounced by the way augmentations are handled. The person who chooses the speed augmentation is going to have a different experience from the person who chooses the stealth augmentation.

By contrast, in DXHR, the obstacles before you remain basically the same. Whether or not you decide to invest in the hacking augmentations, you can still open the same doors, the same containers, and disable the same electronics by means of the unlock grenades or the stop worm and nuke virus. The choice available to you is whether you want to invest in Praxis points or credits to overcome the obstacle, but the obstacle itself remains unchanged.

Many maps in Human Revolution feature multiple paths. Omega Ranch was one of my favourites. But most of these paths are more or less open to you regardless of what decisions you make, regardless of how you develop your character. Even without combat augs, you're still a killing machine. Even without stealth augs, you're still a super spy. Even without hacking augs, you can still open any door or access any computer. That, to me, constitutes a substantial difference in "gameplay fundaments" between DXHR and Deus Ex.

I think the groundwork exists for Human Revolution to be more of an RPG. The augmentation system isn't inherently bad, it's actually very similar to that in the Witcher II. It's just that the augmentations themselves aren't really necessary. EM seemed so focus on "multiple paths" that you can progress through most of the game without them. Even the ability to break through walls or pick up heavy objects, two augs that would open up pretty much every other path otherwise blocked, only cost a fraction of the total pool of points a decent player can expect to accrue through the game.

The difference between Deus Ex and Human Revolution can really be summed up in two words: Opportunity cost. Deus Ex has it in spades, Invisible War even more so. Human Revolution seems to have taken an entirely different direction. I can't assume that's a matter of "laziness" or a lack of "coordination" on part of EM. With the possible exception of Panchaea, nothing in the game strikes me as either lazy or uncoordinated. I don't think Human Revolution is "flawed". It might be a little too easy, as others here have noted, but I prefer that to excruciatingly difficult boss fights of Witcher II. I just think DXHR is a different game developed for a different demographic of player. There's no shame in that.

JacobBHE
10th Sep 2011, 22:02
forcing you to make the most use of what resources are available to you.

Exactly, making you think long and hard about what you do next. In other words, the decisions you make actually mean something.


DXHR is a different game developed for a different demographic of player. There's no shame in that.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I have trouble with this one. Just how far away from DX do you have to be in a game, before it gets called something else, especially when you understand and accept that HR has a diluted DX formula - some would say very diluted.

jd10013
10th Sep 2011, 22:37
I wouldn't say very diluted. it's definitely close enough to be called a DX game. besides, you can't just make a clone of it. as good as it was, if each new installment were nothing more than "the continuing adventures of JC Denton" it would get old and stale pretty fast. DX was a unique game, I doubt it could ever be equaled. its a great example of the whole being more than the sum of its parts.

DX 8, so very, very tired.

jd10013
10th Sep 2011, 22:41
Exactly, making you think long and hard about what you do next. In other words, the decisions you make actually mean something.


but that only lasts a couple levels. that's one of the problems with RPG's, and skill systems in general. sure, early on when both your lockpicking skill and electronic skill is low you have to make some choices. but by the time you've reached HK, unless your putting all your skill points into everything but lockpicking and electronics, you'll have plenty of both to pick and open anything you want.

it's the same way with health. early in the game candy bars, sodas, health kits, and even water fountains are very important. but once you have the regeneration aug, and especially after you've upgraded it, all those things become meaningless. and that happens pretty early in the game.

JacobBHE
10th Sep 2011, 22:49
I wouldn't say very diluted. it's definitely close enough to be called a DX game. besides, you can't just make a clone of it. as good as it was, if each new installment were nothing more than "the continuing adventures of JC Denton" it would get old and stale pretty fast. DX was a unique game, I doubt it could ever be equaled. its a great example of the whole being more than the sum of its parts.

DX 8, so very, very tired.


but that only lasts a couple levels. that's one of the problems with RPG's, and skill systems in general. sure, early on when both your lockpicking skill and electronic skill is low you have to make some choices. but by the time you've reached HK, unless your putting all your skill points into everything but lockpicking and electronics, you'll have plenty of both to pick and open anything you want.

it's the same way with health. early in the game candy bars, sodas, health kits, and even water fountains are very important. but once you have the regeneration aug, and especially after you've upgraded it, all those things become meaningless. and that happens pretty early in the game.

You are probably right, up to a point, and I think the key word there is balancing. I still found DX a real challenge on the later levels. Careful balancing of what is available to the player and what isn't, especially later on in the game is key to that I think.

jd10013
10th Sep 2011, 22:59
I though it got way too easy after Paris. with a silenced sniper riffle, health aug, aggressive defense (for the rocket troopers and large bots) plenty HE ammo for the assault riffle and you could literally just stand in front of whatever was attacking you and kill it. even the large bots, as menacing as they look, only needed 2 lams or 2 shots of HE ammo while you used the aggressive defense aug to shoot down its rockets.

the only thing that made it slightly challenging for me was the fist play through I screwed up and took the spy drone, and whichever one went in the cloak slot.

CaptainPrice01
10th Sep 2011, 23:28
As a fan of the original game I thought I might put my review forward.

I have finished DX:HR. It is a brilliant game and a worthy follow up to the original. The environments were big and lots to explore. The choices you can make during conversations are great, especially if you need to get certain information out of them. The new hacking system is awesome, really worked well and I actually liked the new praxis augmentation system. Like most people here the cover system took some time to get used to, but I got the hang of it and it was quite good, and of cause the AI is much improved.

My complaints about this game from the perspective of the original game is this:

The lack of lock picking and electronics (multi tools) in the game felt dumbed down a little bit.

The health system was not as good as the original. I preferred the separate health for different body parts, as well as using med kits and med bots. Regenerating health made no sense (realistically).

**Spoiler Alert**
My major disappointment in the game is the so called different endings. The fact that all endings were just a bunch of buttons in front of you was a real let down. In the original game, all three endings required you to do a heap of different things in the last level.

What I wanted to see in Human Revolution was the different endings involved doing different things or making certain choices all throughout the entire game. For example, halfway through the game you are given a choice, which choice you make will affect the game's ending, then you are faced with another choice later on in the game, which will affect the ending again. So to see the different endings you would have to play the entire game again to making different choices. But instead, anything you do in the game will not affect the four choices you get at the end.

Random
11th Sep 2011, 01:16
But for those of you who still insist in some kind of quantifiable means of passing judgement, there is only one to defy argument: sales. As of 2009, Deus Ex had sold only one million copies, Invisible War tacking on another 1.2 million to the franchise. Compare this to Tomb Raider which sold seven million of the first installment and thirty million as a franchise. Or Hitman, which sold eight million copies spread out over four titles. As much as it pains me to say, Deus Ex may be a work of genius, but it's simply not where the money is, it's not what the public is buying.

Eidos: Montreal and particularly Square Enix are in the business of making money, and there is little doubt in my mind that DXHR will prove to me the most successful title in the franchise. Purists may hate the "kiddies" who play Call of Duty, but those kiddies are the ones holding the purse strings, they're the ones who will be catered to first and foremost. And, in my opinion, that's as it should be. Whatever your opinion of popular culture, it's the most telling barometer of freedom in society and enterprise and I wouldn't trade that for anything.

Don't you think this is a pretty sad indictment of the games industry? In the film industry the best studios will churn out safe blockbusters, but they'll use extra money to fund riskier films. Some of those films, maybe most, will flop. But sometimes they'll succeed. And even if they do flop commercially, the film industry still sees the value in making artistically valuable films even if they don't make money.

I'm not saying Eidos can singlehandedly fix this, but nor should we just accept it as inevitable. Deus Ex sold more copies than its 'cousins' like the Thief and System Shock games. I think a new Deus Ex game, a real Deus Ex game, had the potential to make a profit without resorting to cutscenes and cinematic action nonsense. I don't believe that was necessary; perhaps that was the only way they could secure funding for it, or perhaps it was simply what Eidos wanted to make. Would a real Deus Ex game make as much money? Perhaps not. But the original was a classic, and an industry that isn't ruled by unsustainable business practices would be able to respect the legacy and produce a worthy successor.

Again, I don't solely blame Eidos (the developers) for bad industry practices and the decisions of the suits, but I won't roll over and accept the bastardisation of the Deus Ex franchise because the decision makers wanted to make more money.

imported_BoB_
11th Sep 2011, 04:46
Well, we have to accept it because it is inevitable actually. I think everybody knows that we aren't playing the game Eidos intended to release in the first place. If you listened to them, you know they had to take shortcuts, developers don't fund a game, it's the editors role so they have the final decision in their hand. Square Enix had already postponed the game once and developers told that they were mostly free (maybe only because they took decisions for streamlining the game a little in the first place), it's much more that others studios could hope for.

Now that Square Enix has understood the money potential of the franchise, you'll realize how bad an editor can corrupt a game on the next one. Enjoy :D

unbeatableDX
11th Sep 2011, 04:59
Well, we have to accept it because it is inevitable actually. I think everybody knows that we aren't playing the game Eidos intended to release in the first place. If you listened to them, you know they had to take shortcuts, developers don't fund a game, it's the editors role so they have the final decision in their hand. Square Enix had already postponed the game once and developers told that they were mostly free (maybe only because they took decisions for streamlining the game a little in the first place), it's much more that others studios could hope for.

Now that Square Enix has understood the money potential of the franchise, you'll realize how bad an editor can corrupt a game on the next one. Enjoy :D

**** this $hit. i give up on "modern games". im 21, i still have many gaming years ahead of me! i suppose they will be spent playing the old classics. 95% of todays games are just poor. i had such high hopes with DX:HR. sure its better than IW but its not the game it should have been. it is a fantastic game but it should not have deus ex in the title. it should be called InvisibleWar+

jd10013
11th Sep 2011, 10:12
**** this $hit. i give up on "modern games". im 21, i still have many gaming years ahead of me! i suppose they will be spent playing the old classics. 95% of todays games are just poor. i had such high hopes with DX:HR. sure its better than IW but its not the game it should have been. it is a fantastic game but it should not have deus ex in the title. it should be called InvisibleWar+


I don't think it's that. modern games are plenty high quality, and pretty fun. the problem is, DX type games have never been big money makers. SS wasn't, SS2 wasn't, DX wasn't, IW wasn't, VTMB wasn't. the industry has tried on and off to make this genre work, but the closest it's come are the BS games.

unbeatableDX
11th Sep 2011, 10:15
I don't think it's that. modern games are plenty high quality, and pretty fun. the problem is, DX type games have never been big money makers. SS wasn't, SS2 wasn't, DX wasn't, IW wasn't, VTMB wasn't. the industry has tried on and off to make this genre work, but the closest it's come are the BS games.

yeah i know. depressing aint it EDIT: DX:HR has done well also. yet it is lacking depth compared to dx1. however it is more than biosuck could ever be.

jtr7
11th Sep 2011, 10:49
Well, we have to accept it because it is inevitable actually.

BS. All you consumerists are causing it, and you don't have to do anything, like I don't have to accept it or feed money into it. We all have a say, dammit.

imported_BoB_
11th Sep 2011, 12:02
No, you don't. Because old school gamers are now 10% of the market, so no matter what you do, you are not the target of the developers when they make a game and that they want money. As simple as that :)

You can choose to not buy the game, but it won't matter to them at all.
You can even choose to not buy DLC (I never bought any DLC), but if only one person (well maybe 10, but I don't even think so to be honest) buy a costume DLC bull****, that's it, he is making it profitable, so it will never disappear.

Jordasm
11th Sep 2011, 12:06
No, you don't. Because old school gamers is now 10% of the market, so no matter what you do, you are not the target of the developers when they make a game and that they want money. As simple as that :)

You can choose to not buy the game, but it won't matter to them at all.

This. A very, very large majority of games now are marketed at casual gamers. Not old school ones. And developers and publishers know that by aiming their game to the casual crowd, they can earn alot more money. That's how it is nowadays, it's not about making games you love, it's about making games that rake in the cash.

unbeatableDX
11th Sep 2011, 12:52
This. A very, very large majority of games now are marketed at casual gamers. Not old school ones. And developers and publishers know that by aiming their game to the casual crowd, they can earn alot more money. That's how it is nowadays, it's not about making games you love, it's about making games that rake in the cash.

so in ten years time we shall be looking at Mass effect 8- virtual reality waifu.
IGN- a deeply immersive experience. now nerds across the world dont need women EVER!

WildcatPhoenix
11th Sep 2011, 16:19
Originally Posted by ColBashar
But for those of you who still insist in some kind of quantifiable means of passing judgement, there is only one to defy argument: sales. As of 2009, Deus Ex had sold only one million copies, Invisible War tacking on another 1.2 million to the franchise. Compare this to Tomb Raider which sold seven million of the first installment and thirty million as a franchise. Or Hitman, which sold eight million copies spread out over four titles. As much as it pains me to say, Deus Ex may be a work of genius, but it's simply not where the money is, it's not what the public is buying.


You also need to consider that video game sales as a whole have drastically increased since Deus Ex was released. In 2000, the full effects of Halo and the popularity of the Xbox/next-gen consoles hadn't been felt yet. Games are a significantly larger industry in 2011 than they were in 2000.

Judging Deus Ex's potential sales in the modern market by comparing it to 2000 is faulty logic, in my opinion. There's no way to know what the original game would sell in today's market. Only one way to find out...

voy
11th Sep 2011, 16:26
to easy, you dont need to commit to one playstyle, you dont have to care about credits, ammo and weapons, hacking is to powerfull and easy to do, the 3rd person head shots are to easy to pull of and it makes whole game a very simple shooter

but still very good but thats probably couse I am a huge fan of first Deus Ex.

Free 7hinker
11th Sep 2011, 17:45
Deus Ex

Presentation - 10
Graphics - 7
Sound - 9
Gameplay - 9
Innovation - 10
Value (Depth/Longevity) - 10
Lasting Appeal - 10
Overall - 9.3/10

Deus Ex: Invisible War

Presentation - 8
Graphics - 8
Sound - 8
Gameplay - 8
Innovation - 8
Value - 8
Lasting Appeal - 8
Overall - 8/10

Deus Ex: Human Revolution

Presentation - 9
Graphics - 9
Sound - 9
Gameplay - 9
Innovation - 8
Value - 10
Lasting Appeal - 10
Overall - 9.1/10

JacobBHE
11th Sep 2011, 17:58
it's not about making games you love, it's about making games that rake in the cash.

I would have agreed with this, if it hadn't been for the advent of the Portal games. Portal was a revelation and is proof that intelligent, engaging games can still sell.

BlumenKohl
11th Sep 2011, 18:19
I don't mind so much that Human Revolution's story is not quite as far-reaching and "epic" as DX. The game's tagline is about how it's not the end of the world, but close enough that you can see glimmers of it. To make this another "oh my god what a huge and epic apocalyptic tale" would cheapen the entire universe. Kudos to Eidos for more or less providing a simple story about a simple man who sits a few meters from the edge of the cliff JC Denton finds himself tumbling off 25 years later.

In terms of traditional narrative structure Human Revolution is stronger than Deus EX. There's not really much evidence you can scrounge up to argue against that. Deus Ex is a train that grinds to a halt by the time you reach Hong Kong.

Strangely, I think that's where the Deus Ex magic happens. It is what we are all feeling and cannot put into words. It's the difference between Deus Ex and Human Revolution. It is at that point, when the traditional narrative grinds to a halt that something wondrous happens. Deus Ex reveals its colors and in doing so catapults itself decades ahead of any other game.

It's at that point you realize that what you are partaking in is not a traditional narrative or traditional game. By all means the climax of the story is past. There is quite literally nothing more you can do or say that will have the gravitas of "Everything you imagined, held dear, and believed in is false." You just can't. So by Hong Kong, the climax of Deus Ex is well past, and you're barely halfway through. And yet you continue to play. You are smart enough to know that there is no way the craftsmen behind what you've just witnessed will be able to top it. And even if they could, it would be so outrageous that your mind would not accept it and the entire experience would be shattered. You as the player would feel cheated.

So then, why keep going? It's a simple question that I think most anyone who has played Deus Ex has in some way shape or form asked themselves after the UNATCO revelation. As an added bonus it's a mental dilemma on the player level that parallels what J.C. would probably going through after realizing the conspiracy. Why would J.C. not go back to the 'Ton and drink himself under the table and wait for the world to end?

The answer isn't simple. In fact, by this point, Deus Ex is no longer a single narrative. It diverges into tiny subplots and moments that form a living and breathing universe. It's a universe where a little boy threatens a newspaper stand owner; a family in Paris worry about their son who has signed up for service. Where you are reminded of the people you asked to stay behind and risk their lives for you. Where you stumble into an apartment, and a ringing phone has a creepy voice on the other end going on about a new age without you. Where you hold philosophical debate with an AI. By this point Deus Ex is a reflection on the world and everything you know, with a whole new perspective. You remember back to Simon's interrogation of the prisoner. It seemed bad before. But now, now with the new perspective it makes your blood boil.

The reflective and philosophical nature of the latter half of Deus Ex is exactly what the character JC Denton, and you the player need after that early climax. The latter half is not so much a game as it is an experience. A "spiritual journey" of sorts. Be it by chance or by design it is the perfect route for the original game.

It is something that would not work on paper. Quite literally, a book structured like this would be considered a poor book. As would a film. Namely because in those mediums you are always and forever a third person observer, no matter the perspective the author has chosen. The author is always in complete control of the story. A living and breathing universe is not explorable by you.

But with a game, that's not the case. This is why Deus Ex shines. It's not just a story. It's not just a game. It's not just cinema. It's not just about simulation. It is an amalgam of them all...a glimpse of what the future of storytelling holds. It is the closest we've come to the Holodeck novels of Star Trek.

And for the most part, I'm inclined to believe the reason we haven't seen anything quite like Deus Ex in the last decade is that most of it was just the right pieces falling into the right place at the right time. In various interviews after the original developers admitted that the story needed tightening up and it lost steam by Hong Kong in a negative light. That's proof that it was more accident than design. But I think it's a mistake to see it as a negative. It's that deep flaw in traditional story telling that makes Deus Ex the innovative and incredible experience that it is. The hallmark of Deus Ex is that it was not traditional. "Accident is the mother of invention."

Ultimately, various variables ended up just right, and no one really gets why. Because everyone no doubt asks "What did we get right?". The original Deus Ex is something that needs its "flaws" as much as it needs its strengths. Somehow or another the game mechanic allowed a story that would traditionally be considered poorly structured and flawed to become magnificent.

And that's where Human Revolution diverges from Deus Ex. It is fundamentally a traditional story, and a traditional game that has clearly focused on taking the best from its predecessor, without really understanding how or why the flaws in it lend to its greatness.

It's a game that I would say as a traditional game is better than Deus Ex. It's superior by absolute measure And that's why it is inferior.

But Human Revolution's heart is in the right place, and to me it is a genuine Deus Ex game. If I had any doubts, the Alice Garden Pods segment put them to rest. It was the closest the game came to the original Deus Ex.

And it was also the part of the game that caused me to lose my Pacifist Achievement.

Booze Zombie
11th Sep 2011, 19:18
Hate how the boss battles go, loving everything else except two thing: Melee attacks eat up my energy? No way, bub, that ain't right. Give me my baton back, we're doing something wrong here. And Adam's body can regen massive wounding up until just before death but he can't recharge some bloody batteries unless he's jamming candy bars down his throat? Urgh.

Other than those three issues (wow, only three) this is a brilliant game.

Tverdyj
11th Sep 2011, 19:47
I was gonna write my detailed opinion of the game so far (just got back to detroit, heading over to the Convention centre), But having read the thread, I think I'll wait till I finsh the game.

anunnaki
11th Sep 2011, 20:14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoFe8hRy42o

ColBashar
12th Sep 2011, 06:50
The games industry is not the film industry, even though they share similarities. The fact is that computer/console gaming as a form of entertainment is comparatively in its infancy. I remember the days when "development studios" were a couple of guys typing away at at Commodore 64's in somebody's mom's garage. That's how franchises like Myst and Doom originated. I also remember when money was tossed around in sums that would sicken a developer with envy to create titles such as Daikatana and the 11th Hour. We've come a long way in the last thirty years, have felt a lot of growing pains to reach the level of sophistication now achieved, but I don't believe that 2011 represents the final mould of the game industry's form. The status quo is under continual barrage of technological, sociological, and economic changes, today more than ever.

I hear people talk a lot about how games are being "dumbed down". What I want to remind people is that what has also "dumbed down" over the years are gamers. I'm not trying to offend anybody by that statement, I'm not trying to suggest that gamers of any variety are at all stupid. What I mean is that in the 1990s, when System Shock was published and Deus Ex was in production, PCs were an entirely different beast. It was expected that a PC user would know things like the difference between extended and expanded memory, how to convert them, or how to configure the IRQ of your sound card. People like Warren Spector came from an age when PCs were bought as a kit at Radio Shack and then assembled at home. It required a level of technical expertise that most people simply weren't interested in acquiring or have the the patience to utilise. The attraction of console games was the fact that all you needed to do was put that cartridge in for the game to work (usually). No delving into the esoteric mysteries of the Microsoft operating systems required.

In 1990 developers made games for themselves because they knew that their target demographic was people like themselves, people who would have similar interests in problem solving and the patience to think through problems and experiment before admitting defeat or declaring the game "flawed". Some games were priced as high as $70 USD back then, that's about $130 in today's currency, and you made darned sure you got your money's worth no matter how bug ridden or how bad the interface was.

Since that time PCs have become much, much more accessible. Consequently, the level of expertise displayed by the average user has diminished. Everything is a few clicks away and when there's a problem, a solution can usually be found with a google search. The whole process of using a computer has become simplified, streamlined and it stands to reason that its users would expect to have entertainment that is likewise streamlined and simplified.

It's not that PC games have become consolised, it's that PC users have become consolised. Yes, the game industry as a whole has expanded greatly in the last ten years, particularly as we are just seeing the first generation of humanity born of the Information Age begin to reach maturity. But the proportion of PC users that was once the dominant demographic ten or twenty years ago has not followed suit. It has grown, yes, but not in proportion to the population as a whole, and not in proportion to the cost of developing a "AAA" title. We're not in mom's garage anymore.

Eidos: Montreal did their job. They made a good game. They made a popular game. It might not have been -quite- the game they wanted to make, but the days when a developer was guaranteed that luxury, particularly when working on their first title, are past. As Harvey Smith has stated, "It's not selling out to cater to an audience." EM had a responsibility to make a AAA title that would sell like an AAA title. In modern terms, that means sell like a console game. The shocking thing is not how different Human Revolution is from Deus Ex but how similar they are in spite of those (significant) differences.

For a player coming in whose gaming experience consists of games like Halo, a clone, even a modernised clone of Deus Ex would have been offensive. It's not just a matter of what this player is accustomed to, it's also a matter of what they want to play. They don't want to deal with lockpicks, they don't want to be barred from choosing this augmentation or that, what they're interested in is jumping into an exciting new world and kicking some arse. There's nothing wrong with that.

The kind of "thinking man's shooter" that the Looking Glass crew revolutionised with System Shock, Thief and Deus Ex was a product of a transitional time in computer history. A few years earlier and a game like Deus Ex would have lacked the technology to be developed, a few years later and it would have lacked the confidence to be published. Many of you mourn for this period, but bear in mind that Deus Ex was not the only casualty.

Ask anybody in the 1990s what Looking Glass studios was known for and the most common answer would have been "Flight Unlimited". In the 1980s, you weren't considered a true PC gamer unless you had a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator on your hard drive. What was the first Star Wars themed PC game? X-Wing. There was a time when flight simulators dominated the PC game market yet where are they now? The closest thing you'll find on the market today are X3 and commercially produced mods for eight year old software.

Times change. People change. Their opinions, values, and perspectives change. The good news is that change is a continuous and multifaceted phenomenon. The cost of producing a top quality game may have become prohibitively expensive but at the same time the opportunity to develop small, indie titles has never been more accessible. For the first time ever, software like XNA allows programmers to develop for both PC and console simultaneously, without the need for a port from one language to another. Wrappers, APIs, and software classes are more easily integrated than ever. We've seen what Deus Ex fans can do with the publication of The Nameless Mod, imagine that same dedication behind the production of an independent title.

For the time being I think it's unrealistic to expect a game in the true style of Deus Ex to be developed with the budget of Human Revolution, just as I think it unrealistic for Hollywood to produce a romantic comedy with the budget of an adventure film. But I have faith that as the digital generation reaches maturity, the art of game development will have reached a level of accessibility to open the doors for smaller developers to create a new, proprietary IP in the spirit of Deus Ex. It might not be as fancy as its big budget contemporaries, but it doesn't have to be. As long as it adheres to the design elements of Deus Ex and has superior graphics and more refined gameplay, I think fans of the original will be happy. 2011 wasn't the year for such a game, but I'm confident that it's not very far around the corner.

- - -


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoFe8hRy42o

This.

Is.

Hilarious!

Thank you. I loved that. And it's another reminder of what Deus Ex fans have to offer when they assert themselves toward achieving something productive.

- - -

To BlumenKohl:

While I agree with you on the point of the two game's respective narratives, I do not share your opinion on how it augmented Deus Ex's gameplay experience. Nevertheless, it does exemplify what I think is one of the reasons the original title is such a great game: the fact that so many different people can walk away from it with such a different perspective on so many different levels. It was a game that proved so many things to so many people.

For me, narrative is important. The fact that it started to drop off after Hong Kong was a gradually growing disappointment. I agree that there were still poignant moments yet to be had, that mother pleading with me not to kill her son even though she knew that all the MJ12 troopers looked the same always stuck with me, as did Icarus' suggesting I re-examine my motives after breaking into the hostel room. I think other people here have made a good point in suggesting that another reason Deus Ex seems to drop off after Hong Kong is because by that time, if you've played well, all the augmentations will have been discovered and the opportunity for character development in the RPG sense of "levelling up" diminishes. But your recounting has been interesting, thought-provoking, and heartening. I do think you're right in that Deus Ex's qualities as a "simulation" were in large part what contributed to the enjoyment of many players, the fact that the world behaved consistently with its own, internally defined logic.

I would be very interested in hearing you speak about the Alice Garden pods segment of Human Revolution. What was it about this part of the game that pulled you in? Why did it affect you so profoundly?

Nightcrowe
12th Sep 2011, 16:35
I am really enjoying my first s-l-o-w playthrough of this much-anticipated game....BUT....... I miss the following things from the first game:

No switching light switches on or off .
More cupboards to rifle through esp in kitchens and bathrooms.
Secret panels with hidden loot...some of it completely pointless, but it was fun looking.
More varied items to lift up, stack or throw. Couldn't we shift some furniture before?

The things that are slightly irritating so far are the loading zones (again), the baffling (to me) hacking system, the lack of interesting loot and no directional compass! to help navigate around some of the areas that look exactly the same wherever you are (you know who you are, Hengsha!). EDIT: Oh and being forced to fight bosses :(

That said, I am 30+ hours in and only about half-way through Hengsha. I like to take my time and savour as much as possible in these Deus Ex and Thief games especially on a first run through. You never forget your first time! ;) I also reload a lot to try out something new.

jd10013
12th Sep 2011, 17:04
I am really enjoying my first s-l-o-w playthrough of this much-anticipated game....BUT....... I miss the following things from the first game:

No switching light switches on or off .
More cupboards to rifle through esp in kitchens and bathrooms.
Secret panels with hidden loot...some of it completely pointless, but it was fun looking.
More varied items to lift up, stack or throw. Couldn't we shift some furniture before?

The things that are slightly irritating so far are the loading zones (again), the baffling (to me) hacking system, the lack of interesting loot and no directional compass! to help navigate around some of the areas that look exactly the same wherever you are (you know who you are, Hengsha!). EDIT: Oh and being forced to fight bosses :(

That said, I am 30+ hours in and only about half-way through Hengsha. I like to take my time and savour as much as possible in these Deus Ex and Thief games especially on a first run through. You never forget your first time! ;) I also reload a lot to try out something new.


damn, your even slower than me. :rasp: I'm 33 hours in and just beat the 2nd boss. which, I don't know why everybody says they're so hard.

MaxxQ1
12th Sep 2011, 17:12
damn, your even slower than me. :rasp: I'm 33 hours in and just beat the 2nd boss. which, I don't know why everybody says they're so hard.

You both are faster than I am. My first playthrough clocked in at 91 hours.

I did *a lot* of backtracking (picking up weapons individually and selling them) and exploring, playing around with things, reading everything, and so on.

Tverdyj
17th Sep 2011, 08:22
finished.
clocked in about 49h according to Steam (I reload a lot)

overall, I find myself not having too many problems with this game.

As mentioned often, my main concern with this prior to release was with the 3rd person stealth.
After mapping cover to the ~ button (as far as I could put it, since I use arrow keys to move), and playing the whole game first person, I'm happy to say, third person cover-based stealth is entirely optional. which makes me happy.

biggest unexpected flaw with the game--two things share this. first is the music. Aside from a few areas, I barely even noticed it. certainly near as good as the original.
Equally frustrating--NPCs in hubs. it's great that there are so many. But the fact that they have 2 lines of dialogue each, and these are often recycled throughout the area... I can't help but wish there were LESS NPCs. but with more engaging dialogue. Biggest offender in this--Detroit Metro. on each entrance there's a girl, who's complaining about her boyfriend not picking her up. that was a big mood killer for me, seeing how blatantly recycled the line was.

the best part--hub level design. Especially Hengsha. Especially the rooftop district (aka Youzhao). seriously, I can't remember the last time I was engaged in a game world as much as the hours i've spent exploring that place. I especially liked how the design here doesn't really conform to the black and white "multi-path" gameplay that other parts of the game suffer from.

that being said, I didn't get that particular vibe from the game. yes, there were a lot of fairly linear levels. but in most of them, the "obvious stealth routes", such as vents and ladders weren't all that clear cut (mind you, I played w/o highlighting). in that sense, I didn't find it to be all that obvious and clear cut, and I'd mix it up a lot (although i've played strictly non-lethal)
with regard to that, a small gripe about consolitis--why couldn't diff types of takedowns be on diff buttons? instead of this "tap v hold" crap.

the much-maligned boss battles--you know, aside from Barett, I really didn't mind them all that much. I mean, yes, they were out of character, and didn't add much to the game, but they didn't distrupt the flow THAT much. (well, since right before the fight with Fedorova I picked up the heavy rifle in the room right before the arena, and kept lugging that around for other bosses.) Also, the Namir fight was kinda cool, since my HUD was fritzing.

that last level...to be honest, I felt they pulled off the exposition (i.e, choices setup) really well. In this, they clearly took a page out of IW. in fact, the very point of broadcasting a message to explain the outbreak was a parallel to the last level of IW, where Alex was to decide who would get access to Ophelia. it's just that they didn't have Adam go gun down the two other sides after.
I also gotta say, I didn't mind that last fight. the entirety of last level tehy tried to go for a horror-vibe (someone said "tribute to SystemShock", I can see that), esp if you pay attention to the music. it was easy to fit the last boss in that setting.

with regard to the "removal of resource management" gripe--it's certainly changed. but introduction of the handy tools for hacking (the viruses) helped to compensate that (at least untill you become uber l33t), and the fact that some of your weapons (the ones with the least available ammo) could be used to distrupt secrity systems was a great touch. not to mention recharging energy and consumables for bonus health. I didn't mind the changes they took in this direction.

new systems: Hacking was well done, I didn't get bored to death with it. Conversations were also decently done, although I didn't get any of the symbols behind the CASIE aug when it was actually being used.

in short, this game doesn't surpass the original DX. it has a number of flaws, most notable of which being the experience system--this could definitely use an overhaul. I ended the game with I think 7 praxis points to spare. there should definitely be more of a deficit throughout the game, not just in the beginning. I can also mention the kinda wonky physics system, but i've done that elsewhere already.
nonetheless, this game is definitely a DX derivative, in the vein of Bloodlines,or IW. it's made some decisions I don't entirely agree with, but it's a fine game in its own right.

needed more hubs, though. that, and more NPCs who could sell you info/stuff. the MCBer in Highland Park was great. we needed more NPCs like that.