PDA

View Full Version : All said and done, was this a good thing for Deus Ex?



numinous
31st Aug 2011, 14:24
I enjoyed DX:HR. Is it as memorable as DX1? No. Was it designed by expert game designers? No. Was it being dumbed down for a selective audience a detriment to the game? Yes.

Now that it's out though, I ask; was DX:HR a good thing for the future of Deus Ex?

Specifically, can we expect more challenging and intelligent content to now flow from Eidos (and indeed other studios that I'm sure will have an easier time getting games like this green-lit through DX:HR's success), or will the commercial and critical success of the game light a profiteers fire in the eyes of it's publishers, enabling them to dumb the series down even further now that they've created a more 'modern' fanbase?

I'm torn. On the one hand I really hope that their experience creating a Deus Ex game will challenge them to create better and better content that engages me as a fan of smart gameplay. On the other... yeah, this could be seen as a money maker.

WildcatPhoenix
31st Aug 2011, 14:29
I can't see DX:HR as anything less than a positive for the franchise. For all of its faults (and I feel there are many), it is a good and intelligent game.

Take the art style: personally, I hate all the black and gold, but the level of effort and passion that went in to the game's visual palette is admirable.

DX:HR has people talking about Deus Ex and the possibilities of multi-path gaming again. Three years ago, Deus Ex was only alive in the memories of its original fanbase and stained by the disaster of Invisible War. Now we are looking forward to more games in the future, more content, more story.

As much as I hate some of the decisions Eidos Montreal made with DX:HR, I'd say the future is bright for Deus Ex as a whole. And that's absolutely awesome. :thumb:

snowman2009
31st Aug 2011, 15:32
I disagree. I played and beat original over 5 times and I think DX: HR is far better on character level (maybe the story is a bit short and there is less conspiracy, but only because we saw Bob Page in the intro and never again (hence false expectation of him being heavily involved in the main story).
I honestly think Adam is far superior then JC as a main character (yes the Batman voice might be a bit of an overkill). Adam is a better choice for the main character because of the things he goes through. JC is just a guy in the middle of conspiracy (until about 60% of the game, when you start find out about your origins). Adam on the other hand has a near death experience (not to say HR has probably the best intro a game can have, visual and sound put together). Now was the game dummed down possibly at the first look (if you look closer it has the same amount of resources and more then original DX.
Should the series continue? Absolutely
In fact I will go as far as say Adam should live and play a big part in the next game (hes just too damn cool to let go)

Dresden
31st Aug 2011, 15:42
Without a doubt. It was good.

The only thing I was disappointed in was that you couldn't make Adam into as witty of a smart ass as JC was. There was the thing about being followed when talking to O'Malley and "Pretty sure I didn't" when talking to Pritchard, but otherwise he seemed pretty by-the-book or perhaps detached.

snowman2009
31st Aug 2011, 15:51
Maybe by the book, but i have to say Adam > JC as JC jsut seems ordinary guy who just got caught up in the middle of events. While I feel more of a connection with Adam due to his Intro sequence and I feel his drive for revenge (kill Barrett, Jaron & Fedorova)
P.S.
Adam got shot in the HEAD and came back, what did JC do, have a hard day at work?

hazard001
31st Aug 2011, 15:51
Without a doubt. It was good.

The only thing I was disappointed in was that you couldn't make Adam into as witty of a smart ass as JC was. There was the thing about being followed when talking to O'Malley and "Pretty sure I didn't" when talking to Pritchard, but otherwise he seemed pretty by-the-book or perhaps detached.

You can definitely make him go detached/hostile.

On the topic, it's made a fan out of me and all this talk about the original being freer makes me ponder going to amazon.com....

JCpies
31st Aug 2011, 15:57
You can definitely make him go detached/hostile.

On the topic, it's made a fan out of me and all this talk about the original being freer makes me ponder going to amazon.com....

It shouldn't take a long time to download on Steam, plus it's really cheap. Not a bad price for one of the best games in existence.

WildcatPhoenix
31st Aug 2011, 15:57
You can definitely make him go detached/hostile.

On the topic, it's made a fan out of me and all this talk about the original being freer makes me ponder going to amazon.com....

You should absolutely check out the first Deus Ex. The game mechanics are pretty laughable these days by modern standards (in terms of enemy AI, gun performance, etc), but it's still a blast.

And the story/characters/dialogue/music is fantastic.

Back on topic: I very much hope we'll see more Deus Ex games in the future. I'd like to see the developers just pretend Invisible War never happened and continue the story after 2052.

Agent Denton
31st Aug 2011, 16:01
Yes it was a move in the right direction for the DX franchise. Would I love to see the original re-made with some elements of HR? Hell Yes!

CarpeNukemXVIII
31st Aug 2011, 16:03
It was definitely a positive thing for the series. The game is excellent, and deeper than the original in some ways, more streamlined in others. It also has one hell of a visual design, and Adam is a far superior protagonist than either DX or IW. It was all I could hope for a modern day Deus Ex game and it mostly delivered. It could of had a bit more about the Illuminati for instance.

Arksun
31st Aug 2011, 16:33
I enjoyed DX:HR. Is it as memorable as DX1? No. Was it designed by expert game designers? No. Was it being dumbed down for a selective audience a detriment to the game? Yes.

Now that it's out though, I ask; was DX:HR a good thing for the future of Deus Ex?


I've really enjoyed DX HR. Is it as memorable as DX1? Not far off, very by todays standards. Was it designed by expert game designers? A resounding yes, to think otherwise is stupid imho. Was it being dumbed down for a less mentally able audience a detriment to the game? No it wasn't dumbed down for mentally less able, some elements like fighting were tougher than the first game.

It was the best possible thing that could happen to Deus Ex. They took the atmosphere and feel of the first game and mixed it up with the kinda stuff todays generation love to play in a balance that I don't think anyone could have done better. Sure, they could have tried to appeal to a very specific die hard target audience but, despite me being one of those die hards, I'm actually glad they didn't. I thought they balanced the new vs old gaming styles very well indeed.

No the story isn't quite as epic as the original, no it doesn't have as many varied locations with massive spaces, but it is way better in terms of atmospheric detail. Hengsha is a mind blowing revelation. I would often just walk around the city, much the same way I used to walk around some areas in the original Deus Ex.

It takes a special game when you want to just walk and soak in the atmosphere instead of head-down going along the main timeline and both DX1 and DX HR have this special quality.

If games are on a relative scale of 1-10, where 1 is the worst and 10 is DX1 (my fave benchmark game),then pretty much every other game I've played lays in a big bundle between 2-6. DXHR is 9. In short, if DX1 had never been made, DX HR would be my favourite game ever easily hands down.

Stuttering issues aside (which didn't bother me too much in the end, once I'd done an initial 360 and it had taken the area in it was smooth sailing), I'm soo glad I pre-ordered DX HR. Eidos Montreal deserve a huge pat on the back for pulling off a game like this in todays market. Very well done.

Positive for the series?!?, duh!. YES

Bawtzki
31st Aug 2011, 16:43
I enjoyed DX:HR. Is it as memorable as DX1? No. Was it designed by expert game designers? No. Was it being dumbed down for a selective audience a detriment to the game? Yes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsogswrH6ck

If you ask me: Yes, yes and what dumbing down?

I've played through first Deus Ex again recently, it's one of my favorite games of all time and I still think DE:HR is just as good and BETTER in some areas. Not designed by expert game designers? Are you ******* kidding me? This game has the best gameplay balance I've seen in the last few years. Especially if you play it on hardest difficulty, you really start to appreciate some of the thought that went into balancing augs, energy recharge system and health regen. As for dumbing down - what dumbing down? List examples, chop chop. And no, having keycode (that you found) displayed on the login screen isn't dumbed down.

Jason Parker
31st Aug 2011, 17:32
To stay fair: I think it is nearly impossible to live up to the legend that the original Deus Ex has grown into. Could DX:HR be more in terms of gameplay and story? It sure could. Still I personally think it's a far more worthy sequel to the series than Invisible War ever was. And as much as I would have loved to see more elements of the original make it into DX:HR (namely a much bigger empghasize on multi-path stoyline, real melee combat and bot domination) I have to give Eidos Montreal Credit for reviving the Series and bringing it to a quality that enables it to be competitive on the commercial side of things.

I also agree with snowman on behalf of the protagonist comparison. While the magic of Deus Ex was more the idea and technique behind the game (which was years ahead of anything else available at that time) and the general storyline, DX:HR managed to create Characters that you realy care for and identify with. So yes a fourth part of the series definetly should again be build up around Adam and should starting somewhere in between DX:HR and Deus Ex finaly overlap with Deus Ex to close the gap.

A 4.5th part of the series should be Deus Ex redone in modern graphics with the sneak gameplay of HR. And the 5th part should be a new alternative to Invisible War.

El Padrino
31st Aug 2011, 17:43
If you ask me: Yes, yes and what dumbing down?

Clearly, the dumbing down he's talking about is the fact that you can't put points into a swimming skill and that an ex-SWAT guy knows how to shoot guns without first crawling through some vents for experience points -- which, of course, breaks immersion for him.

f4rsight
31st Aug 2011, 17:56
Is this game good ? YES. In fact trying to make another DX game was rly hard task and they delivered. I finished DX1 more than 10 times, i finish bout 1 single player game per year [ i play more but got bored too fast to finish them] I started second run in DXHR and i got plans for 3rd with different approaches/builds .. i dont remember a game in last 5 years i wanted to finish 2nd time not to mention 3rd. Is this game missing something ? Defo yes i miss my DX1 meele/samurai build for example ... can i live with it ? YES. Someone said here that game wasnt made by pros ... hes plain stupid no doubts, hes claimed that game is dumbed [prolly bcuz of consoles] ... name me one more challenging single player game in last years [and even if its not SO challenging you can make it challenging yourself by choice of path and build]. Im happy they made it im waiting for DLC, DX4 and MMO in DX world.

Frraksurred
31st Aug 2011, 17:56
Absolutely a good thing for the franchise. Before it was a dead legend with a poor sequel that has scared every other developer off touching it (IP ownership aside).

DX now has a future, and it is well known that this game's success is largely because it honored its roots, not altered them. Future installments would have that contrast to Invisible War to draw on.

The success of this game may inspire other developers that "dumbing down" has exceeded the point of diminishing returns and it is not such as risk to imbue a little more intelligence and learning curve into their games.

--


A 4.5th part of the series should be Deus Ex redone in modern graphics with the sneak gameplay of HR. And the 5th part should be a new alternative to Invisible War.

I am ALL for this. DX remade especially, but also correcting the mess IW was. Much like the Matrix sequels, IW just needs to be over-written like it never happened.

Jenson
31st Aug 2011, 18:03
YES it was...defo yes....if they make another one....they will defo learn from this make it alot better

Jason Parker
31st Aug 2011, 18:10
Clearly, the dumbing down he's talking about is the fact that you can't put points into a swimming skill and that an ex-SWAT guy knows how to shoot guns without first crawling through some vents for experience points -- which, of course, breaks immersion for him.

You are right. I'm a big fan of the first part aswell, but caling leaving out a skill system (that even back in the day was just there to prove it's rather a RPG than a Shooter) "dumbing down" is purist bull****. The different playstyles are perfectly covered and balanced using the augmentation system. The only way to circumvent decisions is to exploit the freedom given in the game and hacking things although you know the codes, run through every vent after doing the job allthough it's not needed anymore and taking every guy down allthough you'd love to just gun them down with a magazine out of your combat rifle, which was perfectly possible in the original aswell.

What was dumbed down in comparison to the original was the multi-path storyline thing, because if I didn't mss anything the story leads straight forward up to the point of deciding for one of 4 endings (all the praised decisions get you is some useful intel on upcoming missions or extra money/sidequests), whereas in the original there where multiple forks in the main storyline that could even get you end up in missions on different sides with different goals. Which is a shame because if they'd taken that element and developed it even further it would have had the potential to replace the original as the gemstone of the franchise.

Edit: Though the other side of the coin is: Multi-Pathing makes the development of sequels somewhat more complicated (as IW has proven by failing at it) on the story side. Maybe that's one of the reasons that despite the critical success of Deus Ex there have not been many games that used a multi-pathing approach in their storyline at least not on the main story.

Mjesko
31st Aug 2011, 20:14
I think DEHR is a great game, because it has the same amazing atmosphere, if you play a stealth character, as Vampire Bloodlines. The level of detail in the city hubs and the missions is great.

I liked Invisible War, too, because it had augmentation limits and you could use the same upgrade on a weapon only once.

Jason Parker
31st Aug 2011, 20:21
I think DEHR is a great game, because it has the same amazing atmosphere, if you play a stealth character, as Vampire Bloodlines. The level of detail in the city hubs and the missions is great.

I liked Invisible War, too, because it had augmentation limits and you could use the same upgrade on a weapon only once.

Yay Bloodlines was great. Even with it's unrelated story it was closer to Deus Ex than Invisible War was. And it is a good example of what I mean by taking the multipathing story one step ahead.

Akimbo
31st Aug 2011, 20:48
It's brought life back into the Deus Ex universe. However there are a few points that brought the game down (don't get me wrong, the game is still awesome) which hopefully Eidos will learn from.

All I'm dreading is a glut of poor quality crappy DLC, which due to the game being released on consoles as well, sadly seems quite likely.

jd10013
31st Aug 2011, 21:25
nothing will ever be as good as the original was. it was unique, and the first game of the series. you just can't reproduce that. when you played the original, you would be impressed, maybe even blown away when you found a secrete area, or found out you could save Paul, or kill Anna at a couple different times.
but with future games, you look for it in advance. the novelty is gone. and then there's things like having to turn on UNATCO. you play future installments expecting something like that. it just can't be as good, or as surprising and genuine as when it happened in the original. It's the unexpected stuff like that, stuff that few(if any) other games had done, that makes DX one of the best games ever made. it didn't just follow a formula, it wrote a lot of the formula.

As for HR, I wouldn't call it dumbed down for consoles. After having played it some, I'm actually very curious to see how sales go on it. I'm almost thinking they could suffer because of it's lack of Halo and COD elements. they didn't hardly throw those guys a bone.
I think the best description that comes to my mind of HR is that it's almost a love child of DX and VTMB. the maps, and conversation elements seem to have a very VTMB feels to me. same way with the auto heal, stealth, and (to a lesser degree) third person.

Locutus of BORG
31st Aug 2011, 21:38
I went through a PT of the original DE shortly after starting DEHR. I absolutely cannot see how any reasonable person could love the original yet dump on DEHR. Even Warren Spector, the creator of the original DE praised DEHR. I just do not see any logical reason to hate on DEHR. At worst, it's painstakingly modern homage to a classic game. More likely, DEHR is a painstakingly well-made reboot of a previously derailed franchise.

jd10013
31st Aug 2011, 22:15
because aside from graphics, HR doesn't do anything better, while DX did. they really aren't the same game. their similar, but pretty different. the story in the original is said to be better (I'm no where near finished with HR, so I can't say for myself) the characters (from what I've seen so far) were better, and it was a more intricate, complex game than HR. I'm not dumping on HR, but taking out lock picks, multi tools,, skills, melee weapons, and then reducing the augs to cinematic cut-scenes, adding health regen, intsta kills, and third person cover simplified and detracted from what the original was.

now before you go all ape-excrement on me, I'm enjoying HR and think it's a fine game. and in all fairness, I don't see how anybody can dump on it either. EM made it far more "DX" than I ever though they would. but even though I don't agree with the people dumping on it, I do understand where they're coming from.

remmus
31st Aug 2011, 22:36
personally Deus Ex:HR is to me proof that the old "games made for consoles are dumbed down" bull, heck if some PC gamer purest bring up that debate I just say "Deus Ex:HR" and nothing else, no elaborate posts, no linking to some obscure poll, just post that and consider the debate over.

numinous
31st Aug 2011, 22:47
Guys, the first sentence wasn't up for discussion. They were facts. I'm not going to argue with you that pressing Q to kill 2 guys silently for no cost isn't dumbing down. Nor am I going to argue the blatant balance errors, level design issues (vents, vents everywhere, vents will solve everything) - these things are Deus Ex 101. Carry on.

Nexus_6
31st Aug 2011, 22:47
It doesn't make sense to complain about the drastic gameplay changes present in HR. If they fundamentally made the gameplay mechanics identical to the original's, it would not appeal to the contemporary gaming audience. They had to restructure it to a degree to make it more linear and action-oriented to be enjoyable to a new generation of gamers. I respect the decision to discard lockpicks and multitools in favor of universal passcode system, because it's probably a more accurate depiction of what the world will be like in 2027. I don't believe that the game's flaws were in the gameplay, but in the plot. While the storyline is better than most games, it doesn't come close to the original. It lacks the fluidity, intricacy, and depth that made the original game's plot so brilliant. HR isn't everything it should have been, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. The gameplay was excellent, but the storytelling needs to be more in line with the first game. If they were to address that in a sequel, they could make a game on par with the original Deus Ex.

remmus
31st Aug 2011, 22:54
Guys, the first sentence wasn't up for discussion. They were facts. I'm not going to argue with you that pressing Q to kill 2 guys silently for no cost isn't dumbing down. Nor am I going to argue the blatant balance errors, level design issues (vents, vents everywhere, vents will solve everything) - these things are Deus Ex 101. Carry on.

you posted it on a forum, you don´t have a choice what we have a discussion about, and it something to talk about.

phantomspiker
31st Aug 2011, 23:09
Guys, the first sentence wasn't up for discussion. They were facts.

Uh, no those are your opinions...not facts. Opinions that not everyone on this forum agrees with (including me). I really don't understand why you made this topic TBH, perhaps you're just looking for more attention. You're obviously not interested in any real discussion.

originalDX
1st Sep 2011, 02:22
Uh, no those are your opinions...not facts. Opinions that not everyone on this forum agrees with (including me). I really don't understand why you made this topic TBH, perhaps you're just looking for more attention. You're obviously not interested in any real discussion.

No, he's right the fact is its dumb down in many ways and he has already stated a few.
The original is a classic and DXHR simply is not even the same caliber as the original.

This DXHR is good for new comers of the newer generation consoles who've never really
played the original who've played alot of games like COD, Halo, Gears, and Splintercell conviction and for casual gamers as well as kids who got a copy (stole) of DX1 and
played some of it real quick so they could say that they have played it and it wasn't
as deep or hard to play or even as good as the The new one, DXHR-sorry that's not true.
Even the critics admitted it doesn't stand up to the greatness of the original-gamespy and many others.

Why don't you all go back (for real this time) and play the original on hard, take your time try to find as much as you can observe your highly interactive non linear environment (you don't have to tell everyone you finished it in 6 hours) and without shooting all the time and then maybe you'll understand.

Hah, here's how bit-gamer put it: "The combat isn't the best you'll ever play, the dialogue not the punchiest, the stealth not the sneakiest...But that's missing the point. Human Revolution is a game to take as an entire experience, where you can shift at will from having exciting gunfights to crawling around in vents,"
And the gave it a very forgiving score of 90 despite having said this.

JobeGDG
1st Sep 2011, 02:35
Hah, here's how bit-gamer put it: "The combat isn't the best you'll ever play, the dialogue not the punchiest, the stealth not the sneakiest...But that's missing the point. Human Revolution is a game to take as an entire experience, where you can shift at will from having exciting gunfights to crawling around in vents,"
And the gave it a very forgiving score of 90 despite having said this.

Are you seriously suggesting that Deus Ex did have dialogue that was the punchiest, stealth that was the sneakiest, and combat that was the best you'd ever played? Because that's completely ridiculous (or your experience at the time was limited). Deus Ex only worked as a complete package, which is fortunate, because that's the way that matters. The original remains my favorite game of all time, and Human Revolution can't quite stand up to that titan for quite a few reasons, but everything you saw fit to quote from bit gamer applies as much to the original as it does to Human Revolution.

As to the OP, silly ideas about closing a door on a discussion s/he opened aside, yes. The kind of gameplay the Deus Ex series has always, to varying degrees of success, implemented and tried to hone is back in the public consciousness after far too long a time, and that's unequivocally a good thing.

numinous
1st Sep 2011, 03:35
Uh, no those are your opinions...not facts. Opinions that not everyone on this forum agrees with (including me). I really don't understand why you made this topic TBH, perhaps you're just looking for more attention. You're obviously not interested in any real discussion.

I... am interested in discussion. Just not a discussion that has been discussed to death already. I began the thread with facts, not opinions. Ignorance isn't an opinion. Not being as educated as someone else doesn't validate your opinion.

The point of this particular topic is to discuss if DX:HR was a good thing for the Deus Ex series. Not to complain about your incorrect thought processes or start another console vs PC, DX1 vs DX:HR celebration of ineptitude. Carry on. :wave:

Random
1st Sep 2011, 04:10
I'd say no, because now any game carrying the Deus Ex name will be increasingly a combination of Metal Gear Solid and Mass Effect. For all the new people who have now played a 'Deus Ex game' their reference point will be HR, and the original's brilliance will be lost to all but a few who understand how special it is.

Nexus_6
1st Sep 2011, 04:15
I'd say no, because now any game carrying the Deus Ex name will be increasingly a combination of Metal Gear Solid and Mass Effect. For all the new people who have now played a 'Deus Ex game' their reference point will be HR, and the original's brilliance will be lost to all but a few who understand how special it is.

That idea makes me cringe. I'd hate to see the series further depart from its roots. I enjoyed the new elements and mechanics introduced in HR, but the final product was fundamentally too far from the original. They should move back to the original game's style and atmosphere while retaining some of the new features and ideas that made HR enjoyable.

PrinsJonis
1st Sep 2011, 04:20
The game was WAY too easy, but it's Deus Ex, that's why it's worth playing. The atmosphere is great, but the difficulty? Dissapointment.

Danik0226
1st Sep 2011, 05:10
This thread is ridiculous. I played Deus Ex multiple times back in the day and DX:HR is a worthy successor. The development team should be commended because it seemed like this IP was dead after DX:IW. My only gripe with the game is that there is no free roaming between hubs, it isn't as long as the original, the stealth hack approach is favored heavily in terms of XP, and the consequences of your actions in Deus Ex could stretch out through a much longer portion of the game. Most of the decisions I have seen based on my own play and what people have mentioned in these forums only create a different result within the span of the particular mission at hand. I believe Taggart and Sandoval is an example of this, which I will have to explore on my next play through.

There are many aspects of this game that I think are better. The cover/stealth system is an addition that I feel works well for the game. The takedowns are another interesting aspect of the game. Character development and establishing the plot of the game are far better in my opinion than the original. The trailer as well as the opening sequence of the game are far better done than Deus Ex. The downside is that we were given quite a bit of some characters only to be left confused, such as Megan Reed.

MaxxQ1
1st Sep 2011, 05:13
The game was WAY too easy, but it's Deus Ex, that's why it's worth playing. The atmosphere is great, but the difficulty? Dissapointment.

Not trying to be antagonistic, but why not up the challenge for yourself? Try a no aug playthrough (aside from those you start the game with). Try a no item playthrough. Try a no aug, no item playthrough.

People have done all three of those with the original Deus Ex (not me, though). I don't even know if any of those personal restrictions are possible with HR.

Atlus
1st Sep 2011, 05:15
Is HR perfect?: No

Is it a damn worthy sequel?: Hell yeah.

It's clear that this game was made by passionate developers, who loved deus ex. To me that's what's so great, a developer team, not some team who made the past deus ex game, not Warren Spector, not Harvey, simply a random team from Montreal made such a worthy sequel based from there passion to the 1st.

I see the future titles only getting better from here!

numinous
1st Sep 2011, 05:18
As much as I wished it was made by the original DX team, I definitely agree with you Atlus. Well... once you replace "Hell yeah." with "Hmm... perhaps" ;)

Ashpolt
1st Sep 2011, 10:43
I think only time will tell whether HR was a good thing for the franchise in the long term. In the short term, yes it was absolutely a good thing for the franchise, because it brought it back from the dead with a new entry which was, by and large, a very strong addition to the series.

However, while HR kept many of the core aspects of Deus Ex, but also mixed them in with a number of modern gaming staples which, IMO, run contrary to what Deus Ex is about. Assuming HR sells well (which I believe it will / has) there are two paths Eidos Montreal can take from here, and which one they choose will determine whether HR was a good thing for the series.

They can either look at the strong sales and good critical and consumer reaction and go "OK, we've identified that games with complexity can sell well and be well received," and use that as a stepping stone for the next Deus Ex game to expand on the strengths of this game while removing the modern design "training wheels" (and fixing the other problems that DXHR had which were nothing to do with making it more accessible.)

On the other hand, they could look at the strong sales and great reception of DXHR and say "obviously our concessions to the mass market were the right way to go, so for the next sequel, we'll take that further." Sadly, this is the norm for the industry nowadays. As gamers, I'm sure none of us want to see Deus Ex 4 take the same route as Dragon Age 2, but unfortunately that kind of decision seems to make a lot of sense to the men holding the budgets.

You can't view things like this purely by themselves - by itself, Invisible War was a bad thing for the franchise because it made a lot of bad decisions. However, it did give a lot of important lessons about how not to approach a Deus Ex game, which EM obviously took to heart with DXHR. I'm sure without Invisible War, DXHR would've made a lot more mistakes than it did. So while DXHR may be a very strong game itself, and in a number of ways (though not all) a strong entry to the Deus Ex franchise, its true legacy will be in the lessons it teaches to whoever approaches future entries to the franchise - and for that, only time will tell.

originalDX
1st Sep 2011, 10:53
This thread is ridiculous. I played Deus Ex multiple times back in the day and DX:HR is a worthy successor. The development team should be commended because it seemed like this IP was dead after DX:IW. My only gripe with the game is that there is no free roaming between hubs, it isn't as long as the original, the stealth hack approach is favored heavily in terms of XP, and the consequences of your actions in Deus Ex could stretch out through a much longer portion of the game. Most of the decisions I have seen based on my own play and what people have mentioned in these forums only create a different result within the span of the particular mission at hand. I believe Taggart and Sandoval is an example of this, which I will have to explore on my next play through.

There are many aspects of this game that I think are better. The cover/stealth system is an addition that I feel works well for the game. The takedowns are another interesting aspect of the game. Character development and establishing the plot of the game are far better in my opinion than the original. The trailer as well as the opening sequence of the game are far better done than Deus Ex. The downside is that we were given quite a bit of some characters only to be left confused, such as Megan Reed.


The cover system has improved? No, its just another dumb down gears of war console hit the button, bounce around and stick to everything in third person.

ranmafan
1st Sep 2011, 11:15
It was a game 4 years in the making - the designers would've had their work cut out for them designing a game that could withstand the competition on the date of release. It is, in fact, a game ahead of its time you might say. :D

All joking aside, the fact that they've pulled it off at all is a testament to the passion and ability. You cannot call the designers 'amateurs' (since the OP said it wasn't designed by 'experts') - they've had to keep up with advances in competing games, evaluate their gameplay, etc. over the course of four years. It can't have been easy.

Yes - there are flaws. Things that could've been done better, things the designers might have lost perspective over during the dev cycle. No, the game is still an amazing game.

And guess what? With the experience in developing this game - the design experience, the aesthetic experience, technical experience, etc., I'm confident they can bring us the next game in the franchise in half that time or less with even more improvements for the contemporary DX game.

So yes - It's a good thing. And I think it's set to get better.

Kaylord
1st Sep 2011, 13:09
Yes, there are flaws, which are making this game a good one, but as in good average. Story and dialogue, is covered way better by Mass Effect, as are story choices in general. Gameplay is covered better in shooters or sneaking games. Innovations are few, and in Details. I can name a few on the story department, as the overall mood, the blend-in with realism through all those augmentation promotion video material we had pre-launch. I can name a few on the gameplay department, as the hacking-minigame, or the refinement of the mix between sneaking and shooting which is unique to this game.

Is it good for the franchise? Yes. Is it an outstanding game? No. Maybe if they had made it a bit more challenging, included some choice-based branching into the story, and a more satisfying conclusion. The raw material is there, and there is certainly potential for more. What is the raw material: The ethic questions and the very intelligent projections on how the assumed technology leaps could influence our society.

Make no mistake; the strengths of this franchise is neither shooting nor sneaking. The strength is its power of a true, interactive cyber-science-fiction-thriller. If they expanded more on this, I am sure fans would even forgive unified ammonition (they sure do with Mass Effect...).

Well, good luck next time!

MonkeyLungs
1st Sep 2011, 14:49
I'm 35. I played original Deus Ex when it was brand new. Deus Ex, SS2, and Thief games were my favorites and probably still are. Games just won't ever be like that again.

That said, I have greatly enjoyed Human Revolution. Does it suffer from dumbing down and hand holding? Yes. However, these kinds of elements are here to stay because new gamers CANNOT play games without these hand holding elements. I have just come to the realization that if I want to play games I have to get used to hand holding and streamlining because it is inevitable.

snowman2009
1st Sep 2011, 15:40
I love DX, DXHR (more HR because of deeper connection to main character), but to say that nothing will be close to original DX because of never before seen alternatives (saving Paul and dealing with Anna), that is like saying that nothing will come close to the original invention of the wheel and praising caveman for inventing it =O
I think that HR is incredibly epic (the advertising, the back story (neuroposine use and control through ur augs), while original DX became so popular due to word of mouth (people telling other people to check this game out).
On top of that very few games and movies actually deliver on their epic promotion (green lantern trailer looked great, but final product was kind of bad).
All in all I can't wait for DXHR 2 and i hope that Adam is center figure in it aswell (would be such a shame to let an awsoem character go to waste).

JCpies
1st Sep 2011, 15:53
Guys, the first sentence wasn't up for discussion. They were facts.

Yeah, because there's no way that people from all areas of the gaming industry joined a newly created studio to work on a high profile game published by Square Enix because they were all amateurs.

DarkKnightDanny
1st Sep 2011, 16:59
Is this good for the franchise?

Did it sell well? Yes

Top the Charts in the UK? Yes

Has it scored good reviews? Yes

Id say a big YES to you friend.

WildcatPhoenix
1st Sep 2011, 17:58
Is this good for the franchise?

Did it sell well? Yes

Top the Charts in the UK? Yes

Has it scored good reviews? Yes

Id say a big YES to you friend.

A note:

Good for Eidos' bank account =/= "good for the franchise."

Not necessarily, at least. I know sales are important (obviously we'll never get more/better games if nobody buys them), but they aren't the absolute bottom line.

DarkKnightDanny
1st Sep 2011, 18:54
A note:

Good for Eidos' bank account =/= "good for the franchise."

Not necessarily, at least. I know sales are important (obviously we'll never get more/better games if nobody buys them), but they aren't the absolute bottom line.

I totally understand, but if a games reviews go hand in hand with great sales thats a great thing. Great game plus great sales is fantastic.
Which makes me wonder why the new Duke Nukem sold so well.

Atlus
1st Sep 2011, 19:07
Yes, there are flaws, which are making this game a good one, but as in good average. Story and dialogue, is covered way better by Mass Effect, as are story choices in general. Gameplay is covered better in shooters or sneaking games. Innovations are few, and in Details. I can name a few on the story department, as the overall mood, the blend-in with realism through all those augmentation promotion video material we had pre-launch. I can name a few on the gameplay department, as the hacking-minigame, or the refinement of the mix between sneaking and shooting which is unique to this game.

Is it good for the franchise? Yes. Is it an outstanding game? No. Maybe if they had made it a bit more challenging, included some choice-based branching into the story, and a more satisfying conclusion. The raw material is there, and there is certainly potential for more. What is the raw material: The ethic questions and the very intelligent projections on how the assumed technology leaps could influence our society.

Make no mistake; the strengths of this franchise is neither shooting nor sneaking. The strength is its power of a true, interactive cyber-science-fiction-thriller. If they expanded more on this, I am sure fans would even forgive unified ammonition (they sure do with Mass Effect...).

Well, good luck next time!

http://www.myfacewhen.net/uploads/677-are-you-serious.jpg

I'm sorry if HR didn't please you, but you are the minority. Saying Mass Effect covered dialogue, and cover is bs. The story is handled WAY better in HR as well imo.

I'm sorry, but it sounds like you had HR on this God tier pedestal, and was expecting the same with this.

This is 2011. Games like COD are what are considered "games" today. The fact that a game like HR was even produced in this day and age is alone incredible. This is 2000, where games like these were the norm. I love Deus Ex as much as the next guy, but to say this was simply an okay sequel is crazy talk. To me it even EXCEEDS some areas than the original deus ex, so I'm very glad Square decided to publish this title, and that Edios did a proper Deus Ex sequel for once.

BlackFox
1st Sep 2011, 21:27
This wasnt just a good thing for Deus Ex it was a good thing for games period.

I was beginning to lose faith in this generation, like nobody had the balls to make this sort of thing anymore, thank god they did for all our sakes, hopefully the sales figures will prove to developers you can make something against the "norm" of todays cookie cutter games and still turn up a profit.

We have a new benchmark on consoles at least.

Long live AJ:cool:

CarpeNukemXVIII
1st Sep 2011, 22:39
Oh spare me. Please point to these facts cause all you have said is opinion, just you being so damn pretentious you think it's some sort of "common sense". It's not. I do not see how HR is simpler than DX. At all. None of the changes made the game feel easier or simpler to me, because any feature that was streamlined, there was one that was made better than the original(say what you will, but cover is better than leaning, by the truck load). But hey, this type of topic is routine for EVERY game forum ever in existance.

Ashpolt
1st Sep 2011, 23:16
Oh spare me. Please point to these facts cause all you have said is opinion, just you being so damn pretentious you think it's some sort of "common sense". It's not. I do not see how HR is simpler than DX. At all. None of the changes made the game feel easier or simpler to me, because any feature that was streamlined, there was one that was made better than the original(say what you will, but cover is better than leaning, by the truck load). But hey, this type of topic is routine for EVERY game forum ever in existance.

So you criticise him for stating his opinion as fact - and then go on to state your own opinion as fact?

Good job.

Silentbutdeadly
1st Sep 2011, 23:19
Oh spare me. Please point to these facts cause all you have said is opinion, just you being so damn pretentious you think it's some sort of "common sense". It's not. I do not see how HR is simpler than DX. At all. None of the changes made the game feel easier or simpler to me, because any feature that was streamlined, there was one that was made better than the original(say what you will, but cover is better than leaning, by the truck load). But hey, this type of topic is routine for EVERY game forum ever in existance.

I prefer leaning

Random
2nd Sep 2011, 00:47
(say what you will, but cover is better than leaning, by the truck load)

Wrong.

exmachinad
2nd Sep 2011, 01:47
I'm sorry if HR didn't please you, but you are the minority.

Why some people love to throw away this sentence? Like "I'm right because I am with the majority, and the majority is always right"... :rolleyes:


DX:HR managed to create Characters that you realy care for and identify with

Like ... Who? Personally, I couldn't care less about any character. If there is one thing that never gets old, even in gaming, is writing / plot, and, for me, the writing in this game is (most of the time) just bland, and there was never a single character I could care for or identify. Not a single line stands out, opposed to the original, that has plenty of thought provoking conversation.

The gameplay overall, IMO, while good, is quite more rigid than DX, but I won't go in detail as there are plenty of topics around covering it.

It is a very nice game, but it didn't reignite my faith in games developers.

numinous
2nd Sep 2011, 02:11
Yeah, because there's no way that people from all areas of the gaming industry joined a newly created studio to work on a high profile game published by Square Enix because they were all amateurs.

I didn't say they were. See how you're putting words in other people's mouths? See how defensive you get for absolutely no reason?

No - I said they aren't expert game designers. This is a fact. They aren't. Anyone can point to 50 design problems with DX:HR and I mean anyone. Can you do the same with Zone of the Enders? Metal Gear Solid? DX1? Thief? Half-life? No. Not without being a total prat with absolutely no ground to stand on.

The word "expert" can be taken to mean "best of the best". This isn't a best of the best game. It's good. Not the best. I expect the best from a Deus Ex game.


Oh spare me. Please point to these facts cause all you have said is opinion, just you being so damn pretentious you think it's some sort of "common sense". It's not. I do not see how HR is simpler than DX. At all. None of the changes made the game feel easier or simpler to me, because any feature that was streamlined, there was one that was made better than the original(say what you will, but cover is better than leaning, by the truck load). But hey, this type of topic is routine for EVERY game forum ever in existance.

-Pressing Q to takedown anyone in the game, even those that NPCs specifically tell you are too dangerous for you.
-Object Highlighting ruining any sense of exploration. Hell, there are times you're meant to "investigate" something, you know, with your eyes. All you do is sweep your mouse around for a second and you've seen everything.
-Third person Cover better than leaning? At least I now know the caliber of game expertise I'm dealing with here.
-Passive augs
-No skills
-No actual choices in dialogue
-Health regeneration

That's just off the top of my head. How could you possibly even begin to form the idea in your head that DXHR is not simplified? How? How does that even biologically happen?

Let's restate - I'm not saying it's a bad game or making you feel bad about paying full price for it and succumbing to the advertising. I'm just stating some facts to base the thread on. Let's continue concerning ourselves with the future of Deus Ex.

repiV
2nd Sep 2011, 02:55
-Pressing Q to takedown anyone in the game, even those that NPCs specifically tell you are too dangerous for you.


Some people like it, some don't. It's not a big deal either way.



-Object Highlighting ruining any sense of exploration. Hell, there are times you're meant to "investigate" something, you know, with your eyes. All you do is sweep your mouse around for a second and you've seen everything.


Turn it off, then.



-Third person Cover better than leaning? At least I now know the caliber of game expertise I'm dealing with here.


The cover system, surprisingly, lends itself to the game extremely well. "Calibre of game expertise"? I can't recall the last time I read a comment that sounded so ridiculously pretentious. Who made you the guardian of interactive entertainment greatness?



-Passive augs


Point being...?



-No skills


The skills didn't add to the game. I'm glad they're done away with. Half of them were pointless, and otherwise were just annoying as the combat was crap without the weapons skills and far too easy with them fully upgraded.



-No actual choices in dialogue


Dialogue choices would have been a nice addition. The persuasion system is an excellent innovation however.



-Health regeneration


Health regeneration is one of the better developments in games in recent years. How annoying and disruptive to the flow of the game to go round searching for medpacks. Anyway, Deus Ex had a health regeneration aug which made every battle ever incredibly easy so what's your point?



That's just off the top of my head. How could you possibly even begin to form the idea in your head that DXHR is not simplified? How? How does that even biologically happen?


Cutting out unneccessary or superfluous game mechanics is not the same as simplification. Complexity for the sake of complexity is not a virtue. That's why Quake 3 is pretty much a perfect game, and Unreal Tournament is not.

Seriously, some of you have some major blinders on here. Deus Ex was an amazing game, but the gameplay itself sucked. It was an extremely flawed game, even compared to its peers - and it was widely criticised for them at the time for that matter.

The action wasn't good. As a shooter, it was mediocre at best. The stealth wasn't brilliant either, and was done far better by games like Thief and System Shock 2. BOTH these elements are far, far superior and more enjoyable in HR. Who gives a **** about whether there is a largely pointless skills system which detracted from the gameplay anyway?

If you want to criticise HR, then criticise it on something worthwhile - like the fact that the second half of the game has clearly been cut to pieces and put back together with lots of crucial parts missing. It was the story, atmosphere and environment that made Deus Ex great. The gameplay was forgettable. HR falls short of hitting the mark with the story, mainly because it's clearly unfinished - and a couple of other, relatively minor, issues. As a game though, it's infinitely less flawed than Deus Ex ever was.

Kaylord
2nd Sep 2011, 11:29
I'm sorry if HR didn't please you, but you are the minority. Saying Mass Effect covered dialogue, and cover is bs. The story is handled WAY better in HR as well imo.

I'm sorry, but it sounds like you had HR on this God tier pedestal, and was expecting the same with this.

This is 2011. Games like COD are what are considered "games" today. The fact that a game like HR was even produced in this day and age is alone incredible. This is 2000, where games like these were the norm. I love Deus Ex as much as the next guy, but to say this was simply an okay sequel is crazy talk. To me it even EXCEEDS some areas than the original deus ex, so I'm very glad Square decided to publish this title, and that Eidos did a proper Deus Ex sequel for once.

Atlus, I never played DX 1. I played DXIW several times, and I still get goosepimples when I finally get to hear "Helios hath spoken" and ask myself, is this what I really wanted, and what does make us man. So you see, I like stories, even those which are shunned by majorities.

I didn´t notice any emotions with the press-a-button-ending of DX:HR, and I had no connection whatsoever to those wailing women in Hyperions entrails which I had to kill, I don´t even know why. I am still wondering on how stupid Jensen could be, who sneakattacked every professional belltower guard, and then lets Lao escape into a panic room after she does a primitive seductive damsel in distress act, let alone let her connect to that Hyperion machine in the end. For a moment, it even looked like Jensen would connect himself, which, given his genetic heritage surely would have had great chances of success. But it would have also been the third iteration of the same thing from the previous games.
For me, there are many examples on behalf of the story which don´t leave much room to say "it is an outstanding story".

Maybe it is unfair to quote Mass Effect in comparison, but when you want intricate story and character depth, there is no way around that franchise, imo.

Concerning gameplay, I dare you to replay that game five or six times. No problem with Mass Effect 2, you have very different experiences. Here, you can basically decide between getting a lot of augs or few, that´s it for replayablity. Aside from maybe having the choice of entering a police building by the sewers, by persuasion or by shooting. Or deciding to disable or to kill some drug dealers. It simply doesn´t matter at all. A little too less for replaying it, don´t you think?

Don´t misunderstand, I still like this game a lot and did not regret buying it. I just hope they can improve. :)

Ashpolt
2nd Sep 2011, 11:34
Atlus, I never played DX 1. I played DXIW several times,

Oh. Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear. Rectify this immediately, man!

Kaylord
2nd Sep 2011, 11:42
Oh. Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear. Rectify this immediately, man!

I don´t dare. I prefer having it to be the mythic ideal Deus Ex game on the pedestal. ;)

Random
2nd Sep 2011, 11:45
Seriously, some of you have some major blinders on here. Deus Ex was an amazing game, but the gameplay itself sucked. It was an extremely flawed game, even compared to its peers - and it was widely criticised for them at the time for that matter.

This is just extraordinarily wrong in numerous ways.

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 11:51
I wonder how many more people will make a pretentious thread about the quality of game, stating that their personal opinion is somehow a "fact" now.

The fact is: there's no leaning in HR, there is a cover system instead.
The subjective opinions on that fact are: it's bad; it's a design flaw; it was made by an amateur designer; etc.

I hope many of you will be able to spot the little difference.

repiV
2nd Sep 2011, 13:00
This is just extraordinarily wrong in numerous ways.

Ok, how?

JCpies
2nd Sep 2011, 14:24
Ok, how?

An amazing game with terrible gameplay? Sounds like you're describing Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty.

repiV
2nd Sep 2011, 15:19
An amazing game with terrible gameplay? Sounds like you're describing Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty.

I've never played Assassins Creed, and I don't see how Call of Duty would fit that bill. It has pretty tight game mechanics for what it is - a short, straightforward and cinematic action game experience. And it would need to have, because the game doesn't really have anything to offer beyond that. It's certainly a lot more fun to shoot stuff in Call of Duty than it is in Deus Ex. But, you wouldn't want it to be any longer than the paltry six or so hours it is, because it would soon get extremely dull and repetitive. Which is why games like Deus Ex are great, because there's a lot more to them than doing the same thing over and over and over again.

All the things that made Deus Ex great and memorable are all the things that had absolutely nothing to do with the game mechanics. Hong Kong, waking up in some secret facility with an AI talking to you, finding out that MJ12 is UNDER Unatco, talking to Morpheus, etc.

Now, on the contrary, what were the tedious parts of the game that dragged? Scuttling the superfreighter, Vandenberg, Area 51...all the gameplay-oriented stuff. If Deus Ex had been a simple stealth/action game without any of the RPG elements, world/character interaction or story which made it great, it would have been a terrible game because the stealth and action elements are average at best. Then of course there are the hacking/bypassing elements of the game which simply involve clicking a button and waiting for an animation to play. Not very interesting in and of itself either.

MaxxQ1
2nd Sep 2011, 15:41
I don´t dare. I prefer having it to be the mythic ideal Deus Ex game on the pedestal. ;)

**** the pedestal. As great as DX is, it doesn't need one. Just play the damn game, and enjoy it, and maybe, just maybe, you'll understand.

alanschu
2nd Sep 2011, 17:03
What was dumbed down in comparison to the original was the multi-path storyline thing, because if I didn't mss anything the story leads straight forward up to the point of deciding for one of 4 endings (all the praised decisions get you is some useful intel on upcoming missions or extra money/sidequests), whereas in the original there where multiple forks in the main storyline that could even get you end up in missions on different sides with different goals. Which is a shame because if they'd taken that element and developed it even further it would have had the potential to replace the original as the gemstone of the franchise.

I don't mean to sound antagonistic when I say this, but I'm having troubles relating this point back to the main game.

There were many places in the original that I believed I had a choice in my main playthrough, but later found out wasn't the case (such as joining UNATCO instead of Paul and stuff like that). But in the end the only one I can remember in detail is at the end of Deus Ex being the place where you're able to actually make choices of significant consequence.

I vaguely remember something about the Dragon Tooth sword, and how you can work with Maggie Chow to accomplish your goals. What other ones are there?

WildcatPhoenix
2nd Sep 2011, 17:55
I don't mean to sound antagonistic when I say this, but I'm having troubles relating this point back to the main game.

There were many places in the original that I believed I had a choice in my main playthrough, but later found out wasn't the case (such as joining UNATCO instead of Paul and stuff like that). But in the end the only one I can remember in detail is at the end of Deus Ex being the place where you're able to actually make choices of significant consequence.

I vaguely remember something about the Dragon Tooth sword, and how you can work with Maggie Chow to accomplish your goals. What other ones are there?

As much as I agree with Jason's point, there is a bit of inaccuracy here. At no point in the original Deus Ex do you "end up with a different faction with different goals" dependent on player choice. You can't ever officially join the NSF, or stay with UNATCO, or decide to help Page/Simons. You don't get to decide not to meet with Morgan Everett. It's the illusion that you are making decisions that impact the world, the narrative sleight-of-hand that the first game manages so well.

Really, the strength of the first game comes from the overall narrative arc. JC starts the game in the shadow of lies and misinformation. He trusts UNATCO, Manderley, Navarre, etc. Then the rug gets pulled out from under him. Suddenly he doesn't know who to trust at all. Various factions plead their case (Nicolette, Everett/Dowd, Chad, Daedalus, Tong, Savage, etc). Finally, at Area 51, JC has all the pieces. At last he has all the information, and he gets competing objectives from the various interested parties. Others (like Jacobson or Paul, if he lives) chime in and say "Okay, JC, do what you think is best." And you make your decision.

But in future sequels, I'd like to see the player miss out on significant parts of the story/game if he/she chooses Option A versus Option B (versus C, D, etc). The Ion Storm developers mentioned how they originally wanted JC to have the choice to stick with UNATCO, but it would've required too much more development time and had to be cut. In future DX games I'd love to see something like this make it to the finished product.

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 18:41
But in future sequels, I'd like to see the player miss out on significant parts of the story/game if he/she chooses Option A versus Option B (versus C, D, etc).
That's one the reasons why Witcher 2 sucks.

It's just an artificial stop sign saying "HEYA BOY! You have to replay the game to get the whole story, otherwise you'll be missing tons of things Just Because We Made It Like That."

I'm all for the "you'll be seeing the consequences of your actions" way of playing the story. People will be moving around, behaving and reacting differently, you'll have to get through missions in several different ways (based not on what air duct you chosen, but on your earlier actions), etc. etc. But branching the whole story so that you'll have to replay it X times to see everything -- hell no.

PS: Besides, it's a very impractical way to spend your development budget.

WildcatPhoenix
2nd Sep 2011, 18:57
That's one the reasons why Witcher 2 sucks.

It's just an artificial stop sign saying "HEYA BOY! You have to replay the game to get the whole story, otherwise you'll be missing tons of things Just Because We Made It Like That."

I'm all for the "you'll be seeing the consequences of your actions" way of playing the story. People will be moving around, behaving and reacting differently, you'll have to get through missions in several different ways (based not on what air duct you chosen, but on your earlier actions), etc. etc. But branching the whole story so that you'll have to replay it X times to see everything -- hell no.


The alternative is "HEYA BOY! You've got this huge decision to make....but don't worry, it doesn't really matter at all because you'll still end up in the same place either way."

MaxxQ1
2nd Sep 2011, 19:02
The alternative is "HEYA BOY! You've got this huge decision to make....but don't worry, it doesn't really matter at all because you'll still end up in the same place either way."

Kinda like the original DX, eh? ;):D

Itkovian
2nd Sep 2011, 19:11
I've never played Assassins Creed, and I don't see how Call of Duty would fit that bill. It has pretty tight game mechanics for what it is - a short, straightforward and cinematic action game experience. And it would need to have, because the game doesn't really have anything to offer beyond that. It's certainly a lot more fun to shoot stuff in Call of Duty than it is in Deus Ex. But, you wouldn't want it to be any longer than the paltry six or so hours it is, because it would soon get extremely dull and repetitive. Which is why games like Deus Ex are great, because there's a lot more to them than doing the same thing over and over and over again.

All the things that made Deus Ex great and memorable are all the things that had absolutely nothing to do with the game mechanics. Hong Kong, waking up in some secret facility with an AI talking to you, finding out that MJ12 is UNDER Unatco, talking to Morpheus, etc.

Now, on the contrary, what were the tedious parts of the game that dragged? Scuttling the superfreighter, Vandenberg, Area 51...all the gameplay-oriented stuff. If Deus Ex had been a simple stealth/action game without any of the RPG elements, world/character interaction or story which made it great, it would have been a terrible game because the stealth and action elements are average at best. Then of course there are the hacking/bypassing elements of the game which simply involve clicking a button and waiting for an animation to play. Not very interesting in and of itself either.

I rather think he hits it spot on.

DX:HR does many gameplay elements significantly better than DX, mainly because DX wasn't great because of it's stunning shooting or stealth gameplay. It was the plot, the RPG elements, the believable world-building.

In any case, I think you will be hard pressed to find ANY gaming forum out there that does not proclaim that new games are being dumbed down for idiot gamers. When people level the same accusations at games like DX:HR, which go out of their way to build a believable and rich world that encourages thinking, it does rather become less credible.

DX:HR is a very good thing for the franchise, and a very good thing for gaming. I hope more studios pay attention and there is a revitalization of the genre.

Itkovian

WildcatPhoenix
2nd Sep 2011, 19:21
Kinda like the original DX, eh? ;):D

Read what I said:



But in future sequels, I'd like to see the player miss out on significant parts of the story/game if he/she chooses Option A versus Option B (versus C, D, etc). The Ion Storm developers mentioned how they originally wanted JC to have the choice to stick with UNATCO, but it would've required too much more development time and had to be cut. In future DX games I'd love to see something like this make it to the finished product.

I never said the first game did this successfully. I said I want to see future sequels do this.

MaxxQ1
2nd Sep 2011, 19:28
Read what I said:

Lighten up. I know what you said - I was simply agreeing with you and trying to be somewhat humorous about it. Besides, my comment was only directed at what you said that I quoted, which was all there was in the post I quoted. Had I really been trying to go against what you said in the earlier post, I would have quoted *that* one instead.

On a more serious note, it refutes the assertion that us old DX fans are looking at the game through rose-tinted glasses (gawd, I'm starting to hate that phrase).

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 19:37
The alternative is "HEYA BOY! You've got this huge decision to make....but don't worry, it doesn't really matter at all because you'll still end up in the same place either way."
...and it's absolutely fine, as long as there's a noticeable difference in finer details that reflect the choice you just made.

In another words, kinda like the original, IW (even though I don't like IW, that moment was kinda good in it), and, to a bit lesser extent, HR ;)

Ashpolt
2nd Sep 2011, 20:55
DX:HR does many gameplay elements significantly better than DX,

Yes it does, but it also does many things significantly worse than the original. I know you're going to say "oh, nostalgia is blinding you to its flaws," but it's not: I'm more than aware of Deus Ex's many flaws. I'd say, in fact, that Deus Ex's age and technical flaws are blinding you* to how brilliant its underlying design was.

*General term to mean "those who believe DXHR is an improvement on the original" rather than just you specifically.

This is something I was thinking when I finished the game and wrote my review the other day, but which I hadn't quite figured out how to explain at the time: Human Revolution replicates a lot of the Deus Ex experience, but only on a superficial level. Eidos Montreal clearly spent a lot of time looking at the original game and figuring out the things that made it great - even if they hadn't told us as much, it's plainly obvious by playing DXHR. That's where they stopped though (intentionally or otherwise) - they didn't figure out why those things made the game great, or the design philosophy behind them. They noted that multiple paths to your objective were one of the things that made DXHR special, and so the game has levels filled with vents and hackable doors, but which are (mostly) ultimately linear, and where the side routes are clearly choreographed rather than being natural extensions of the level design - there's little to no emergent gameplay. They identified that stacking crates to reach otherwise unreachable areas was a fun aspect of the original, and so we get plenty of crates that we can interact with - but not all crates can be moved, so there's little world consistency, and very few other items can be physically manipulated, so the world feels static and in many ways fake. They recognised that reams of supplemental reading material added to the depth and intrigue of the world, but didn't understand that what made it interesting was the depth and breadth of it, and the fact that it was thought provoking, and so the game's filled with supplemental reading material, but it's all on one single subject (i.e. augmentation) and it's nearly all technical / scientific in nature, there's very, very little philosophy - the material makes you go "oh, that's interesting," but doesn't actually make you think. They recognised that allowing you to choose your own playstyle was crucial to the Deus Ex experience, but somehow didn't figure out that assigning different amounts of XP to different playstyles greatly negates the player freedom. And these are just a few examples; there are many, many more.

Don't get me wrong: Human Revolution is a great game. A great, great game. I've already put about 35 hours into it, maybe more, and I'm going to play more tonight. But Demon's Souls is a great game too, I've put in 60+ hours in that and I love it - it takes more than simply being a great game to be a great follow up to Deus Ex. Ultimately, what it boils down to is this: Human Revolution is an FPS / RPG hybrid. The original Deus Ex, while it drew heavily from those two genres, is neither, nor is it simply a combination of the both: it's a term used very liberally around here, but it really is an immersive sim - something that Human Revolution can't claim.

Or, to put it another way: Human Revolution is a tribute band that produces almost note-perfect recreations of Deus Ex's songs, but the guitar solos are produced by computer rather than the skilled fingers of a master guitarist, and the lyrics are sung from memory rather than being a reflection of the singer's personal experiences and emotions. They sound pretty damn similar, and if that's all you're looking for, you'll be perfectly happy - but the deeper meaning that made the original special is missing.

Cerebelum
2nd Sep 2011, 21:36
I find it rather annoying that people will, based on playing a computer game, accuse others of being of inferior intelligence based on the fact the accusor thinks the game is simple whereas the accused happens to like the game. Baulders gate or Planescape Torment....Quake or Half Life....DX or DX:HR. Different horses for different courses but ostensibly running under the same banner. Yes, some games are more cerebral than others...Monkey Island or Leisure Suit Larry?..go play both and tell me the larry game takes any less thinking? (go try LL: love for Sail and tell me some of the puzzles don't require the odd IQ point or two). Back when DX was released the console market was a consultants wet dream and a PC worth its salt (ie could play DX) was far more than pocket money could buy, so yes DX catered for the slightly more mature gamer. Now we have people with fewer birthday candles on a cake than you have fingers flooding the market, so yes, if you compare 'like' for 'like' its probably going to seem easier or less complex or however you want to put it. But times change, learn to enjoy GAMES for what they are (yes, a leisure time relaxation for most, not another day job), learn to take pleasure in circumventing the desired style of play (love the throwing the firdge vid on another post) and walk a mile in a current dev's shoes before you break out the 20mm AA canons to shoot them down in flames...or go make you own more cerebral game Stephen Hawking would have a time figuring out.

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 21:37
They noted that multiple paths to your objective were one of the things that made DXHR special, and so the game has levels filled with vents and hackable doors, but which are (mostly) ultimately linear, and where the side routes are clearly choreographed rather than being natural extensions of the level design - there's little to no emergent gameplay.
No difference with the original. Same "I know there's another way out of here however improbable it looks, because levels are built in such a way" approach.


They identified that stacking crates to reach otherwise unreachable areas was a fun aspect of the original, and so we get plenty of crates that we can interact with - but not all crates can be moved, so there's little world consistency, and very few other items can be physically manipulated, so the world feels static and in many ways fake.
Don't get me on how static and improbable many things in the original were.


They recognised that reams of supplemental reading material added to the depth and intrigue of the world, but didn't understand that what made it interesting was the depth and breadth of it, and the fact that it was thought provoking, and so the game's filled with supplemental reading material, but it's all on one single subject (i.e. augmentation) and it's nearly all technical / scientific in nature, there's very, very little philosophy - the material makes you go "oh, that's interesting," but doesn't actually make you think.
There's one answer to it: you grew older, old enough not to get important life-bending philosophy out of a computer game anymore. This comes from a person who replayed original this June and hasn't been given jack **** to all of its reading materials. Yeah, it's interesting. It's TES-level interesting. But in no way special. Much like HR.


They recognised that allowing you to choose your own playstyle was crucial to the Deus Ex experience, but somehow didn't figure out that assigning different amounts of XP to different playstyles greatly negates the player freedom.
Nope, it's not. Again, this comes from a person who did one and a 3/4 playthroughs in two very different styles and didn't feel that my freedom is somehow being "negated".

So... I still don't see anything but nostalgia in this. Oh, and no, it's not about the game -- it's about your past first-time experiences, which of course left much more impact on you than the second try.

Ashpolt
2nd Sep 2011, 21:47
So... I still don't see anything but nostalgia in this.

And there comes the obvious, lazy response. I could debate the rest of your post point for point, but given how easily you write off my entire post on the presumption of nostalgia, and ignore the overall point of my post in favour of nitpicking examples, I sense rational debate would be a waste of time.

[EDIT]
I find it rather annoying that people will, based on playing a computer game, accuse others of being of inferior intelligence based on the fact the accusor thinks the game is simple whereas the accused happens to like the game. Baulders gate or Planescape Torment....Quake or Half Life....DX or DX:HR. Different horses for different courses but ostensibly running under the same banner. Yes, some games are more cerebral than others...Monkey Island or Leisure Suit Larry?..go play both and tell me the larry game takes any less thinking? (go try LL: love for Sail and tell me some of the puzzles don't require the odd IQ point or two). Back when DX was released the console market was a consultants wet dream and a PC worth its salt (ie could play DX) was far more than pocket money could buy, so yes DX catered for the slightly more mature gamer. Now we have people with fewer birthday candles on a cake than you have fingers flooding the market, so yes, if you compare 'like' for 'like' its probably going to seem easier or less complex or however you want to put it. But times change, learn to enjoy GAMES for what they are (yes, a leisure time relaxation for most, not another day job), learn to take pleasure in circumventing the desired style of play (love the throwing the firdge vid on another post) and walk a mile in a current dev's shoes before you break out the 20mm AA canons to shoot them down in flames...or go make you own more cerebral game Stephen Hawking would have a time figuring out.

Assuming this is a response to my post (as I'm the only person on this page who's posted anything that could be construed as negative, really) - where did I break out the 20mm AA cannons and shoot them down in flames? Did you not read the bit where I said:


Don't get me wrong: Human Revolution is a great game. A great, great game. I've already put about 35 hours into it, maybe more, and I'm going to play more tonight.

I notice you also don't actually say anything that counters with what I'm saying, you just make excuses for why the game ended up that way - which in itself implies that you actually agree with what I'm saying, because if you didn't agree that the game was lacking in those areas, you wouldn't feel the need to try and justify it / make excuses for it. So, putting all the "whys" aside for a second - do you agree with that what I'm saying is true?

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 21:53
And there comes the obvious, lazy response. I could debate the rest of your post point for point, but given how easily you write off my entire post on the presumption of nostalgia, and ignore the overall point of my post in favour of nitpicking examples, I sense rational debate would be a waste of time.
Nitpicking examples? You made four examples, I provided counter-arguments to all of them, how's it "nitpicking"? These examples are the core of your "overall point", without them it's just a "HR's good but original's gooder" point, and I won't argue with that as it's a simple matter of different subjective tastes. However, you're trying to get more weight to your "overall point" by providing more rational arguments, and I will argue on those.

jd10013
2nd Sep 2011, 21:55
Now we have people with fewer birthday candles on a cake than you have fingers flooding the market, so yes, if you compare 'like' for 'like' its probably going to seem easier or less complex or however you want to put it.

it's not just that, but (and even more so I'd argue) the introduction, primarily through consoles, of the casual gamer. in fact, age has nothing to do with it, as the average age of people playing video games has steadily been rising over the last 15-20 years. what the console has done was opened up the market to people, often young and even mature adults, that only have a few hours a week to play a game. and most of those people will naturally gravitate towards less complex games like sports games and COD/Halo shooters. games where they can get online with their friends for an hour or so a day, a day two a week and have fun. It's why Nintendo's Wii system was such a huge success. it catered almost entirely to the casual, and fist time/novice gamer. it drew in people of all ages and even that most difficult to attract demographic of women 18 and up.

Ashpolt
2nd Sep 2011, 22:03
Nitpicking examples? You made four examples, I provided counter-arguments to all of them, how's it "nitpicking"? These examples are the core of your "overall point", without them it's just a "HR's good but original's gooder" point,

Which shows you didn't understand what I was saying at all. I wasn't making a statement about overall game quality in any way - except, ironically, the part where I said "Human Revolution is a great game. A great, great game." I was talking about game design philosophy, saying that Human Revolution doesn't stick true to the original's design philosophy, it only replicates the experience on a superficial level - as I said, Deus Ex is an immersive sim, where DXHR is an FPSRPG. I'm not claiming one is better than the other - if people want just an FPSRPG, then DXHR will, for them, be a better game. And that's fine, I'm not arguing against that opinion in the slightest. But Deus Ex was more than simply an FPSRPG, and it was the elements beyond that which, for me, made the game special, and made it different from other games - made it Deus Ex. Again, there's no value judgement there except my own personal opinion, which I'm not claiming as fact. For many people, the experience Deus Ex provided may not be an enjoyable one, and again, that's a perfectly valid opinion. But DXHR provides a different experience, one that's taken some steps away from the design philosophy of Deus Ex and towards a more generic one - that's not an opinion. Whether you see that as a good or bad thing is an opinion, sure, but whether it's happened or not isn't.

ZakKa89
2nd Sep 2011, 22:09
is the nostalgia argument in copypasta yet? :)

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 22:10
You're still masterfully dodging initial counter-arguments. Also, I still don't see why your paragraph of text can't be packed into "HR's good but original's gooder" statement -- especially now you practically repeated it with different text, but with the same meaning. Oh, replace "gooder" (it's not a word, anyway) with "special" -- same ****.


But DXHR provides a different experience
Yup, that's a fact. Every single game provides different experience than every single other game. Even if they are look-alikes. Much more so if there's an abyss of technical progress between them.


one that's taken some steps away from the design philosophy of Deus Ex and towards a more generic one - that's not an opinion.
...and I'm sorry, but this part IS an opinion.


Is the nostalgia argument in copypasta yet?
Yup. But I wonder if copypasta holds something applicable for a person who first claims that he's not affected by nostalgia, then proceeds to disprove that with... rather "vocal" walls of text.

Cerebelum
2nd Sep 2011, 22:25
Ashpolt, I had gotten through maybe two pages of this thread before I hit 'reply' so I wasn't directing my comment at anyone per se, just the general (as I see it) whinge at easier games. I have been playing PC games since the late 80's, early 90's and 'computer games' well before that....ZX80 and speccy onwards. I agree HR is a great game. I have put in 25 hrs on my 1st play through and give it a week or two and I will be back with a different play style. But the 'im an old gamer ergo i can whinge about new games' attitude I read in a lot of forums, from a lot of games (bar AD&D Daggerdal as that really is pants hehe) just sort of gets my goat. Games are an expression of the time they were created in, in general. The original DX was, for its time, fantastic...becuse it was so different. As were the William Gibson books (Neuromancer, Burning Chrome etc). When something is new and unexpected it leaves a huge impression behind. Then everything else gets compared to it and seems to fail the test. HR is a very good game, one of the best I have played in a while (and I play most games bar the SIM series...including a street sweeper sim I saw in my local GAME shop...go figure). I don;t know if you would call me a 'hardcore' gamer as I play games a lot but just for fun (a verteran MMO gamer from single world UO to beta testing WoW, but I hate the raids) and so view them from a fun point of view....and DX:HR is fun now....just as DX was fun then....

Frag Maniac
2nd Sep 2011, 22:33
It's good for them (Eidos) lucratively, good for those wanting a game like this whom haven't played the original, and maybe even good for the sake of keeping multi platform gaming viable and competitive, since that seems to be the only thing saving PC gaming from dying.

Sadly however it is yet another title that makes it obvious we have to settle for slightly better than mediocre on most AAA titles, even highly anticipated ones. It's obviously dumbed down in graphics and AI from the original (respective of their time), and the overall complexity of the story and gameplay are a bit dumbed down as well.

This is one of many games that feels like they focused far too much on art design, settings and mood to lure people in, despite getting away with some rather garish texture resolution and polygon count on many objects, not to mention horrible explosion effects.

In this day and age of pushing look and style over gameplay quality and duration, you'd think we'd at LEAST get texture res settings, one being above this single console grade one, enough polygon count to avoid boxy looking cars and octagonal paint cans, and Havoc physics.

When it comes right down to it, this game is a mixed bag. It combines fairly good gameplay content and duration, art design, settings and world detail, with mediocre graphics, effects and AI. I don't feel that's nearly enough to warrant the 9.1/10 rating it's getting worldwide, more like 8/10 maybe.

I keep coming back to Dead Space 2 being the game that really caught me by surprise this year. It's got epic maps, gameplay, graphics, sound and story. It is CLEARLY not weaker than the original like this one. In fact the PC version even improved quite a bit in it's control scheme over the first.

Cerebelum
2nd Sep 2011, 22:33
jd10013 I see where you are comming from but where do you draw the line between casual and non-casual gamers. I know its a tough one...i was there when Ultima Online went from one land to Tram and Fel (care bear as it was called and hard core pvp....those terms always made me laugh), I was there when WoW buggerd up (imo) pv with nuclear guards at the cross roads and battle grounds. I and my friends have always just been gamers, if we didn't like lv 60 WoW raids we quit (ditto for LotRO, Conan and many others), if we didn't like a single player we just uninstalled it (Daggerdale). If its fun then play it....if its not your fun just consider it may be fun for someone else. BTW I don't like Daggerdale, but if you do....great. ;-P


BTW i love swords and sorcery....read every Conan book going, loved the Arnie films....went and saw the Conan 3D film last night....I considered it pants (rubbish)...its all horses for courses and your (my) opinion...

Ashpolt
2nd Sep 2011, 22:42
You're still masterfully dodging initial counter-arguments. Also, I still don't see why your paragraph of text can't be packed into "HR's good but original's gooder" statement -- especially now you practically repeated it with different text, but with the same meaning. Oh, replace "gooder" (it's not a word, anyway) with "special" -- same ****.

You know that thing I said about how you didn't seem to understand the point I was making? This paragraph supports that. You're putting words in my mouth, then arguing against the point that you're making rather than the one I am.


...and I'm sorry, but this part IS an opinion.

How is that an opinion? Explain to me how Human Revolution, despite all evidence to the contrary, did not step away from Deus Ex's design philosophy, when your previous sentence:


Yup, that's a fact. Every single game provides different experience than every single other game. Even if they are look-alikes. Much more so if there's an abyss of technical progress between them.[quote]

...pretty much flat out agrees that it's a fact, and supports that view? And please, when writing your response, do so without resorting to subjective phrases like "...but those things weren't important" or "it didn't do X, but Y is better anyway."

[QUOTE=just_dont_do_it;1673413]Yup. But I wonder if copypasta holds something applicable for a person who first claims that he's not affected by it, then proceeds to disprove that with... rather "vocal" walls of text.

Again you make a statement without backing it up in the slightest. How have I "proved" that my opinions are only down to nostalgia when I'm not making subjective statements about quality?

And to avoid being criticised for "masterfully dodging initial counter arguments"...


No difference with the original. Same "I know there's another way out of here however improbable it looks, because levels are built in such a way" approach.

That "I know there's another way out of here" is a simple necessity for the game to work, not a sign of clearly choreographed paths. Take the Statue of Liberty in Deus Ex: what's the stealth path? What's the guns blazing path? There isn't one for either: it's a wide open level, and any route can be taken with any playstyle. Most of the levels in DXHR (the only exception I can think of being the Hengsha Port) have a clearly defined guns blazing route and an even more clearly defined stealth route - notice how enemy patrols almost always end at the exact point before they'd be able to see behind a particular bit of conveniently placed cover? Notice how in many areas you've got a line of crates etc placed from one end of the room to the other?


Don't get me on how static and improbable many things in the original were.

Go up to any shelf in Deus Ex, and you'll be able to pick up any object on it - plants, picture frames, bowls, whatever usable items are on there, etc. Yes, there are generally only a few items on each shelf, but that's a technical limitation, not a philosophy one. The important point is, you can interact with the world consistently, even if there's no actual in-game reason to do so. In DXHR, on the other hand, you can only interact with items that are important. The rest of the game world is entirely static.


There's one answer to it: you grew older, old enough not to get important life-bending philosophy out of a computer game anymore. This comes from a person who replayed original this June and hasn't been given jack to all of its reading materials. Yeah, it's interesting. It's TES-level interesting. But in no way special. Much like HR.

When I originally played Deus Ex, I was at university studying for a philosophy degree. Now, I barely read around the subject anymore - not because I'm not interested, but because I rarely find the time. If anything, I was less likely to be impressed by "game philosophy" back then than I am now because I had far more to contrast it with.

But again, this isn't a subjective thing anyway: regardless of whether I like it or not, it's a straight out fact to say that HR doesn't have much in the way of philosophy - it doesn't try to. I'm not saying it tries but doesn't do it well, I'm just pointing out that it doesn't try. Similarly, it's not at all related to my judgement, and not subjective, to say that the supplemental material in HR is very one-note (augs augs augs) whereas the original covered a far broader spectrum.


Nope, it's not. Again, this comes from a person who did one and a 3/4 playthroughs in two very different styles and didn't feel that my freedom is somehow being "negated".

Ok, I grant you that that "negated" was a bad choice of word, as it's too severe, so change it instead to "diminishes." The XP system doesn't force you to play one way, sure, but it certainly encourages it - and by encouraging one play style you are by definition discouraging the others, and therefore diminishing player freedom. They're free to play the way they want, as long as they don't mind the game rewarding them more for playing in one particular manner.

Right, going to stop replying for a while now. Off to play DXHR.

just_dont_do_it
2nd Sep 2011, 23:28
You know that thing I said about how you didn't seem to understand the point I was making? This paragraph supports that. You're putting words in my mouth, then arguing against the point that you're making rather than the one I am.
Because I don't like walls of text, it's simple as that. Any person almost always can make a point AND maintain brevity. The underlying logic in this case was -- that by making comparisons between original and HR and then dwelling upon such comparisons, you're making a statement on comparison, even if you don't use words "bad"/"good" and do "great"/"special" instead.


How is that an opinion? Explain to me how Human Revolution, despite all evidence to the contrary, did not step away from Deus Ex's design philosophy, when your previous sentence
1) You haven't provided any credible evidence.
2) My previous sentence vocalizes that indisputable fact that every game is different, ergo it provides unique experience. Stating that there's "difference in design philosophy" requires additional arguments.


Take the Statue of Liberty in Deus Ex: what's the stealth path? What's the guns blazing path?
Oh, it's rather simple and very evident: a stealth path is to keep away from the guards, an assault path is the direct opposite. Absolutely the same approach on a port level in HR, right. If anything, it's an argument that further disproves your initial argument -- there's even more similarities between two games if we try to elaborate the initial statement.


Go up to any shelf in Deus Ex, and you'll be able to pick up any object on it - plants, picture frames, bowls, whatever usable items are on there, etc.
What about "welded" lamps? Keyboards? Computer displays?
And yes, I consider the argument completely moot, because the paradigm is still the same -- you have some objects to move/throw, enough to solve some built-in puzzles. Oh, and other objects are completely non-movable, whatever the cause. The difference is that you pick potted plants in original and cardboard boxes in HR, but I can't say that this could be related to "different design philosophy".


In DXHR, on the other hand, you can only interact with items that are important. The rest of the game world is entirely static.
Nope, there's much more boxes than really needed, so you can't say that there are JUST some things left movable strictly because they're needed. Not really.


If anything, I was less likely to be impressed by "game philosophy" back then than I am now because I had far more to contrast it with.
The point is -- you were impressed. Cool. Nice. Do you really expect to be impressed second time by the same subset of philosophical views?


But again, this isn't a subjective thing anyway: regardless of whether I like it or not, it's a straight out fact to say that HR doesn't have much in the way of philosophy - it doesn't try to.
Again, not a fact. Unless you have a way to "count" the amount of philosophy. Also no, in-game texts are not just about augs (ones that give you experience/achievement are, the others aren't).


The XP system doesn't force you to play one way, sure, but it certainly encourages it
...and again, that's not a fact. Any person who can do some very basic math will quickly see that "diminished rewards" are practically irrelevant. If anything, the e-e-evil Steam Achievements strongly discourage you to play aggressively by providing that "Pacifist" achievement. So why don't you complain to Valve, because it's their system that shifted "design philosophy" of HR even further away (by your opinion) from original? ;)

Frag Maniac
2nd Sep 2011, 23:30
Looks to me like BOTH of you guys are ruining this thread with "walls of text". Can you not see activity in it has dropped since you both went at it? You COULD do the right thing and carry this on via PM, since it only involves you two anyway.

LkMax
2nd Sep 2011, 23:59
DX:HR is a great thing to happen to the franchise. HR is not perfect but it don't change the fact that the team did a great job in every aspect (soundtrack, artistic and level design, gameplay, etc...). The only problem I had with HR is: I felt the story still could be a bit longer or more complete.

Glyph
3rd Sep 2011, 00:53
In the end without Human Revolution there would not be a Deus Ex franchise worth mentioning. Sure the original was incredible but the sequel was not and the franchise has been long dead since then. I still wish that the game was built upon a better engine though as this one looks rather dated but for a combeack to the franchise I'm willing to forgive it; although no sequels should be made using this technology.

As for the missions themselves, my personal favorite was Talion A.D. due to having to actually *gasp* think about where to go instead of having a marker direct you. I find it hilarious that threads constantly pop up asking how to complete this quest as this generation of gamers has become a bunch of mindless thralls. I just wish there were more quests in Human Revolution that actually forced you figure out how to complete them instead of holding your hand the entire time.

Random
3rd Sep 2011, 01:14
This is something I was thinking when I finished the game and wrote my review the other day, but which I hadn't quite figured out how to explain at the time: Human Revolution replicates a lot of the Deus Ex experience, but only on a superficial level. Eidos Montreal clearly spent a lot of time looking at the original game and figuring out the things that made it great - even if they hadn't told us as much, it's plainly obvious by playing DXHR. That's where they stopped though (intentionally or otherwise) - they didn't figure out why those things made the game great, or the design philosophy behind them. They noted that multiple paths to your objective were one of the things that made DXHR special, and so the game has levels filled with vents and hackable doors, but which are (mostly) ultimately linear, and where the side routes are clearly choreographed rather than being natural extensions of the level design - there's little to no emergent gameplay. They identified that stacking crates to reach otherwise unreachable areas was a fun aspect of the original, and so we get plenty of crates that we can interact with - but not all crates can be moved, so there's little world consistency, and very few other items can be physically manipulated, so the world feels static and in many ways fake. They recognised that reams of supplemental reading material added to the depth and intrigue of the world, but didn't understand that what made it interesting was the depth and breadth of it, and the fact that it was thought provoking, and so the game's filled with supplemental reading material, but it's all on one single subject (i.e. augmentation) and it's nearly all technical / scientific in nature, there's very, very little philosophy - the material makes you go "oh, that's interesting," but doesn't actually make you think. They recognised that allowing you to choose your own playstyle was crucial to the Deus Ex experience, but somehow didn't figure out that assigning different amounts of XP to different playstyles greatly negates the player freedom. And these are just a few examples; there are many, many more.

Well said. In HR there's a clear shift away from the rich simulation of DX1 towards a more 'gamey', directed design in the vein of Metal Gear Solid (which isn't surprising since the devs have often said what big fans they are of MGS).


That "I know there's another way out of here" is a simple necessity for the game to work, not a sign of clearly choreographed paths. Take the Statue of Liberty in Deus Ex: what's the stealth path? What's the guns blazing path? There isn't one for either: it's a wide open level, and any route can be taken with any playstyle. Most of the levels in DXHR (the only exception I can think of being the Hengsha Port) have a clearly defined guns blazing route and an even more clearly defined stealth route - notice how enemy patrols almost always end at the exact point before they'd be able to see behind a particular bit of conveniently placed cover? Notice how in many areas you've got a line of crates etc placed from one end of the room to the other?

Also well said. The Heng Sha port really felt like a Deus Ex map to me, in that you could pretty much choose your own path and there were a lot of options wherever you went (not just stealther go here, combat guy here, hacker here), but it was the only one in the whole game that did so. All the other maps were pretty cramped, with lots of boxes placed conveniently so you could stick yourself to them, and a vent or two (or three or four) placed nearby. DX1's maps were more open and more accommodating of playstyles wherever you chose to go.

Honestly, anyone arguing with Ashpolt here needs to take a closer look at the design of both games. There are clear differences.

cartridge
3rd Sep 2011, 01:21
It was a very good thing for Deus Ex.

sea
3rd Sep 2011, 01:33
I enjoyed DX:HR. Is it as memorable as DX1? No. Was it designed by expert game designers? No. Was it being dumbed down for a less mentally able audience a detriment to the game? Yes.

Now that it's out though, I ask; was DX:HR a good thing for the future of Deus Ex?

Specifically, can we expect more challenging and intelligent content to now flow from Eidos (and indeed other studios that I'm sure will have an easier time getting games like this green-lit through DX:HR's success), or will the commercial and critical success of the game light a profiteers fire in the eyes of it's publishers, enabling them to dumb the series down even further now that they've created a more 'modern' fanbase?

I'm torn. On the one hand I really hope that their experience creating a Deus Ex game will challenge them to create better and better content that engages me as a fan of smart gameplay. On the other... yeah, this could be seen as a money maker.
I fall pretty much in the latter camp. I liked Human Revolution, but it was an expensive gamble - one that paid off, mind you, but now that there's chances at DLC and sequels, I'm not holding my breath that the resulting game will be any more ambitious or bring back any of the old features people liked. While I disagree that Human Revolution wasn't made by "expert game designers", I'm not sure Eidos Montreal want to appease the hardcore fanbase as much anymore. They don't have to prove anything to them at this point - they delivered a quality Deus Ex game, even if it doesn't trump the original in many respects. My guess is that, combined with the established assets, engine technology, etc., we're not going to see another four-year labour of love... Human Revolution isn't just a game, it's a Franchise with a capital F, and investors and the publisher will want to see it exploited to its full potential.

jtr7
3rd Sep 2011, 01:46
Yep. Thus, the complaints.
...even if it doesn't trump the original in many respects. 'Nuff said. The case rests.

numinous
3rd Sep 2011, 02:24
Because I don't like walls of text, it's simple as that. Any person almost always can make a point AND maintain brevity. The underlying logic in this case was -- that by making comparisons between original and HR and then dwelling upon such comparisons, you're making a statement on comparison, even if you don't use words "bad"/"good" and do "great"/"special" instead.


Everything you have said in this post (and all of your posts here) is wrong. What a shame.

LkMax
3rd Sep 2011, 03:58
For me, the only real problem is the end (and the absence of some dlc items), felt kind of unfinished, wich is a shame because the storytelling was excellent till close to the end.

Everything else is still excellent. This is still my GOTY for 2011.

Bawtzki
3rd Sep 2011, 07:33
They recognised that reams of supplemental reading material added to the depth and intrigue of the world, but didn't understand that what made it interesting was the depth and breadth of it, and the fact that it was thought provoking, and so the game's filled with supplemental reading material, but it's all on one single subject (i.e. augmentation) and it's nearly all technical / scientific in nature, there's very, very little philosophy - the material makes you go "oh, that's interesting," but doesn't actually make you think.

Uh, what? Have you even read any of the emails in TYM building and Picus station? Emails in this game are basically the backbone of the story and pretty much explain (or rather, hint at) the same overarching concepts that were already present in first Deus Ex.

jtr7
3rd Sep 2011, 08:11
He's saying the thought-provoking aspect is lacking in comparison.

ricardosamuel1961
3rd Sep 2011, 11:02
The game is decent but there is nothing memorable about it. The best parts of the game are the ones that closely follow the game structure of the first Deus Ex.

Environments feel cramped. Interactions with NPCs is mostly a dull and repetitive affair.

The game has few memorable characters, and the boss fights are in terms of the narrative ridiculous and pointless.

My main gripe with the game is that the game developers took no risks whatsoever. They played it safe and basically tried (and partially succeeded) to emulate the first one.

Storywise, the game has little replay value for me.

One more comment about narrative: relying on "emails" (or "audiotapes") to propel the narrative forward shows laziness in terms of game design.

subtlesnake
3rd Sep 2011, 11:22
My main gripe with the game is that the game developers took no risks whatsoever. They played it safe and basically tried (and partially succeeded) to emulate the first one.
Well, they'd never tried to design a game like Deus Ex before, and the original and VTMB are maybe the only two successful entries in that 'genre'. I think even 'copying' the multi-path, multi-solution style of the original was a big risk for them.

Now they've got it down, hopefully they'll be able to be more ambitious with the sequel.


One more comment about narrative: relying on "emails" (or "audiotapes") to propel the narrative forward shows laziness in terms of game design.
Aren't the e-mails mainly used to provide optional information?

Bawtzki
3rd Sep 2011, 12:43
He's saying the thought-provoking aspect is lacking in comparison.

It's there, just less obvious since it's not in the form of dialogues.


One more comment about narrative: relying on "emails" (or "audiotapes") to propel the narrative forward shows laziness in terms of game design.

No.

Random
3rd Sep 2011, 12:50
The problem is there are far too many trivial emails in this game. While I haven't counted it feels like there are far more emails in HR than in DX1, but hardly any of them are worth reading.

In DX1 you knew you'd be getting something interesting when you hacked a computer. In HR there are often a dozen or so computers in a building, but they all have the same quirky email about employee antics or whatever. And that Nigerian scam mail appears again and again. Jeez, use it once as a joke, fine, but it wears a bit thin after the 8th or 9th time. Hacking computers ends up becoming a chore, a boring grind to find something worth reading.

ricardosamuel1961
3rd Sep 2011, 13:01
It's there, just less obvious since it's not in the form of dialogues.



No.

"No" what?

Bawtzki
3rd Sep 2011, 13:09
It's not a sign of lazy game design, it's just a different approach for unveiling the story, one that requires more participation from the player (in form of exploration, reading, drawing conclusions).

JCpies
3rd Sep 2011, 13:24
The problem is there are far too many trivial emails in this game. While I haven't counted it feels like there are far more emails in HR than in DX1, but hardly any of them are worth reading.

In DX1 you knew you'd be getting something interesting when you hacked a computer. In HR there are often a dozen or so computers in a building, but they all have the same quirky email about employee antics or whatever. And that Nigerian scam mail appears again and again. Jeez, use it once as a joke, fine, but it wears a bit thin after the 8th or 9th time. Hacking computers ends up becoming a chore, a boring grind to find something worth reading.

There are some funny emails too. Like the farm animal porn wallpaper fiasco.

Blidly
3rd Sep 2011, 13:44
Yes this was an awesome thing for DE , i never played any of the originals (im bout 1/2 in to HR) but im now interested in the series and the previous games(would you guys reccomend it or has it aged pretty badly?)
Compared to if they didnt release HR DE fans would windle down , this has given the series new blood and therefore new investment to make more games ( hopefully of quality)

Ashpolt
3rd Sep 2011, 16:23
It's there, just less obvious since it's not in the form of dialogues.

It wasn't in dialogue in the first game either, for the most part (the conversation with Morpheus being an obvious exception to that.) I read every single email, ebook and pocket secretary I could find in DXHR - and made special effort to explore absolutely everywhere, no doubt I missed a few places but I'd say I almost certainly got most of it. And yet almost all of the supplemental reading I found was on one topic - augs - and of that, 90% is at a purely technical level ("Hugh darrow explains how this aug works") with maybe 10% touching on the ethics debate surrounding it, but even then at a fairly shallow level.

I'm not saying there's nothing to read or that the emails don't advance the plot further (which seems to be what you think I'm saying, judging from your original response.) I'm saying that they're too narrowly focused on one subject, and too involved in science (the "what" and the "how") rather than philosophy (the "why") to be thought provoking.

jd10013
3rd Sep 2011, 17:44
I think one of the best things about the reading in DX was the little bits of the plot you could acquire form different peoples computers, and sometimes some background info on some of the character. you had to invest some XP into hacking early, but you could lean some interesting stuff from hacking Jamie, Alex, and even smugglers computer, just to name a couple.

subtlesnake
3rd Sep 2011, 18:04
I thought I'd respond to this now:


This is something I was thinking when I finished the game and wrote my review the other day, but which I hadn't quite figured out how to explain at the time: Human Revolution replicates a lot of the Deus Ex experience, but only on a superficial level. Eidos Montreal clearly spent a lot of time looking at the original game and figuring out the things that made it great - even if they hadn't told us as much, it's plainly obvious by playing DXHR. That's where they stopped though (intentionally or otherwise) - they didn't figure out why those things made the game great, or the design philosophy behind them. They noted that multiple paths to your objective were one of the things that made DXHR special, and so the game has levels filled with vents and hackable doors, but which are (mostly) ultimately linear, and where the side routes are clearly choreographed rather than being natural extensions of the level design - there's little to no emergent gameplay. They identified that stacking crates to reach otherwise unreachable areas was a fun aspect of the original, and so we get plenty of crates that we can interact with - but not all crates can be moved, so there's little world consistency, and very few other items can be physically manipulated, so the world feels static and in many ways fake. They recognised that reams of supplemental reading material added to the depth and intrigue of the world, but didn't understand that what made it interesting was the depth and breadth of it, and the fact that it was thought provoking, and so the game's filled with supplemental reading material, but it's all on one single subject (i.e. augmentation) and it's nearly all technical / scientific in nature, there's very, very little philosophy - the material makes you go "oh, that's interesting," but doesn't actually make you think. They recognised that allowing you to choose your own playstyle was crucial to the Deus Ex experience, but somehow didn't figure out that assigning different amounts of XP to different playstyles greatly negates the player freedom. And these are just a few examples; there are many, many more.

Don't get me wrong: Human Revolution is a great game. A great, great game. I've already put about 35 hours into it, maybe more, and I'm going to play more tonight. But Demon's Souls is a great game too, I've put in 60+ hours in that and I love it - it takes more than simply being a great game to be a great follow up to Deus Ex. Ultimately, what it boils down to is this: Human Revolution is an FPS / RPG hybrid. The original Deus Ex, while it drew heavily from those two genres, is neither, nor is it simply a combination of the both: it's a term used very liberally around here, but it really is an immersive sim - something that Human Revolution can't claim.

Or, to put it another way: Human Revolution is a tribute band that produces almost note-perfect recreations of Deus Ex's songs, but the guitar solos are produced by computer rather than the skilled fingers of a master guitarist, and the lyrics are sung from memory rather than being a reflection of the singer's personal experiences and emotions. They sound pretty damn similar, and if that's all you're looking for, you'll be perfectly happy - but the deeper meaning that made the original special is missing.
People throw the term 'immersive sim' about, but really all games are simulations to greater or lesser degrees, and all games have player outcomes that are not the result of simulation. Ultimately, levels have to be designed with specific navigational paths in mind, and any kind of 'higher level' reaction to what the player is doing (eg. an NPC deciding how much help to give the player based on his past choices) must be explicitly scripted.

HR has many simulated systems that interact to give emergent possibilities. To give two examples: hacking a turret, and then picking it up to use as a weapon, and building a wall out of boxes to hide behind when hacking. HR doesn't allow you to pick up everything, so in that sense the simulation isn't consistent. However, this was done for performance reasons, and doesn't necessarily correspond to a philosophical difference in game design. Lots of games do have full physics simulations, though, like Half-Life 2, and we wouldn't refer to them as immersive sims.

So, what other simulated systems, that 'immersive sim' would have, did EM intentionally decide not to include?

Ashpolt
3rd Sep 2011, 20:23
So, what other simulated systems, that 'immersive sim' would have, did EM intentionally decide not to include?

OK, firstly: you say the lack of item interaction is down to performance issues, but Deus Ex managed it ten years ago. Yes, DXHR has a lot more items in the world - a lot more "clutter" - so it would require a lot more power to make them all physics objects. But EM were the ones who chose to fill the world with clutter to such a degree: they had a choice between a world that looks particularly good, or one which is fully interactive, and they chose the former: that in itself is a sign of moving the design philosophy away from that of an "immersive sim." (And anyway, Oblivion managed to have shelves absolutely full of stuff which were still all physics objects, and that was 5 years ago.)

So other than that, what else stops DXHR from being an immersive sim?

-Third person gameplay elements. Obvious one.
-Invisible walls. I've encountered these a few times.
-Areas where you can't use (or even unholster) your weapons. At least Invisible War, when you entered clubs etc, addressed it in plot by saying they had a field which disabled your guns - but to be honest, even that's a bandage rather than a cure.
-Even despite the above, there are certain areas where you can use weapons, but characters won't react. When you talk to Tong in his basement office, try shooting him in the face - he doesn't react at all. Not in the slightest. Not even a "stop that!" Invisible War was criticised for having plot-critical characters behind glass at all times, but this is worse. The original Deus Ex got around this by having plot-critical characters completely (and unavoidably) kick your arse if you attacked them. Short of having a perfectly branching plotline (which is technically pretty much impossible, so fair enough) that's the best solution.
-Small thing, but why can't I jump in elevators?

...And that's just a handful of examples off the top of my head, I'll probably come up with more as I play more, but you get the point.

(Please can we avoid a point-by-point debate on this by the way, for 3 reasons: 1) it's boring, 2) whether you think these are good or bad things isn't relevant to the point I'm making, and 3) pre-empting an obvious response, I'm not saying the original Deus Ex was perfect, but it's a lot better as an immersive sim than DXHR.)

unbeatableDX
3rd Sep 2011, 20:35
OK, firstly: you say the lack of item interaction is down to performance issues, but Deus Ex managed it ten years ago. Yes, DXHR has a lot more items in the world - a lot more "clutter" - so it would require a lot more power to make them all physics objects. But EM were the ones who chose to fill the world with clutter to such a degree: they had a choice between a world that looks particularly good, or one which is fully interactive, and they chose the former: that in itself is a sign of moving the design philosophy away from that of an "immersive sim." (And anyway, Oblivion managed to have shelves absolutely full of stuff which were still all physics objects, and that was 5 years ago.)

So other than that, what else stops DXHR from being an immersive sim?

-Third person gameplay elements. Obvious one.
-Invisible walls. I've encountered these a few times.
-Areas where you can't use (or even unholster) your weapons. At least Invisible War, when you entered clubs etc, addressed it in plot by saying they had a field which disabled your guns - but to be honest, even that's a bandage rather than a cure.
-Even despite the above, there are certain areas where you can use weapons, but characters won't react. When you talk to Tong in his basement office, try shooting him in the face - he doesn't react at all. Not in the slightest. Not even a "stop that!" Invisible War was criticised for having plot-critical characters behind glass at all times, but this is worse. The original Deus Ex got around this by having plot-critical characters completely (and unavoidably) kick your arse if you attacked them. Short of having a perfectly branching plotline (which is technically pretty much impossible, so fair enough) that's the best solution.
-Small thing, but why can't I jump in elevators?

...And that's just a handful of examples off the top of my head, I'll probably come up with more as I play more, but you get the point.

(Please can we avoid a point-by-point debate on this by the way, for 3 reasons: 1) it's boring, 2) whether you think these are good or bad things isn't relevant to the point I'm making, and 3) pre-empting an obvious response, I'm not saying the original Deus Ex was perfect, but it's a lot better as an immersive sim than DXHR.)

the game was still immersive, but it needed more depth in gameplay and immersion. but are the devs willing to do this in a sequal? not sure.... if they did it could likely surpass the almighty dx1.

Kain Carver
3rd Sep 2011, 23:24
an amazing game, definitely, without question a huge boost to an otherwise dead franchise. And Adam Jensen will be back, they've created an iconic protagonist and a sellable appealing hero, too good to let go.

Benderova
4th Sep 2011, 03:18
I played DX & DX: IW, and I really liked DX:HR. I have a few reservations, though:

- Ugly HUD
- Some jerky character animations
- Terrible lip synch
- Not a great variation of areas compared to the original (I heard there were 40 hours worth of stuff cut out, but I'm not sure if that's true. If so, someone ought to be shot)
- Felt like they "crowbar-ed" in as many of the original character's names as possible. I would have been happy to have seen just Bob Page and Tracer Tong, but I saw Joseph Manderley, Morgan Everett and Nicolette(!!!) DuClare's names on emails, and heard Elizabeth Duclare's on the news. It's fan service, yeah, but it seems a bit too convenient in terms of the world, IMHO.
- The conspiracy radio station was on everywhere... It was nice to hear some of the original music, but that station was playing on every radio. It's not really an easter egg.

It's a good game, though. The takedowns are a pretty cool addition (even if they look abit weird on occassion and remind me a bit of Arkham Asylum somehow). and the cover system is well implemented. They've also managed to capture the atmosphere and style very well (and improve on it in my opinion). And the soundtrack is incredible.

I'm hoping for a sequel myself. I think Adam owes Megan a bullet to the head.

unbeatableDX
4th Sep 2011, 03:28
I played DX & DX: IW, and I really liked DX:HR. I have a few reservations, though:

- Ugly HUD
- Some jerky character animations
- Terrible lip synch
- Not a great variation of areas compared to the original (I heard there were 40 hours worth of stuff cut out, but I'm not sure if that's true. If so, someone ought to be shot)
- Felt like they "crowbar-ed" in as many of the original character's names as possible. I would have been happy to have seen just Bob Page and Tracer Tong, but I saw Joseph Manderley, Morgan Everett and Nicolette(!!!) DuClare's names on emails, and heard Elizabeth Duclare's on the news. It's fan service, yeah, but it seems a bit too convenient in terms of the world, IMHO.
- The conspiracy radio station was on everywhere... It was nice to hear some of the original music, but that station was playing on every radio. It's not really an easter egg.

It's a good game, though. The takedowns are a pretty cool addition (even if they look abit weird on occassion and remind me a bit of Arkham Asylum somehow). and the cover system is well implemented. They've also managed to capture the atmosphere and style very well (and improve on it in my opinion). And the soundtrack is incredible.

I'm hoping for a sequel myself. I think Adam owes Megan a bullet to the head.

i disagree with most you just said except for your complaint about level variety. the others are trivial.
i liked the hud and easter eggs too

subtlesnake
4th Sep 2011, 16:23
(Please can we avoid a point-by-point debate on this by the way, for 3 reasons: 1) it's boring, 2) whether you think these are good or bad things isn't relevant to the point I'm making, and 3) pre-empting an obvious response, I'm not saying the original Deus Ex was perfect, but it's a lot better as an immersive sim than DXHR.)
Well, whether I quote your points individually or not, I still have to respond to all or most of them, in order not to ignore parts of your argument.


OK, firstly: you say the lack of item interaction is down to performance issues, but Deus Ex managed it ten years ago. Yes, DXHR has a lot more items in the world - a lot more "clutter" - so it would require a lot more power to make them all physics objects. But EM were the ones who chose to fill the world with clutter to such a degree: they had a choice between a world that looks particularly good, or one which is fully interactive, and they chose the former: that in itself is a sign of moving the design philosophy away from that of an "immersive sim." (And anyway, Oblivion managed to have shelves absolutely full of stuff which were still all physics objects, and that was 5 years ago.)
I think the choice is between a world that looks real, but doesn't offer a fully consistent simulation, and a world that looks more artificial, but gives more opportunities for interaction. That's a pretty tough call to make. Arguably HR's world feels as deep and immersive as it does, because of the effort EM put into the environmental details. You take those away and you remove a huge pillar of the experience.

I don't think Ion Storm faced this issue because they simply couldn't render their world at such a high fidelity in the first place. Oblivion was running on a different engine, and I think its environments weren't anywhere near as cluttered. I remember shops just being sparsely scattered with bottles and fruit, and such.


-Third person gameplay elements. Obvious one.
-Invisible walls. I've encountered these a few times.
-Areas where you can't use (or even unholster) your weapons. At least Invisible War, when you entered clubs etc, addressed it in plot by saying they had a field which disabled your guns - but to be honest, even that's a bandage rather than a cure.
-Even despite the above, there are certain areas where you can use weapons, but characters won't react. When you talk to Tong in his basement office, try shooting him in the face - he doesn't react at all. Not in the slightest. Not even a "stop that!" Invisible War was criticised for having plot-critical characters behind glass at all times, but this is worse. The original Deus Ex got around this by having plot-critical characters completely (and unavoidably) kick your arse if you attacked them. Short of having a perfectly branching plotline (which is technically pretty much impossible, so fair enough) that's the best solution.
-Small thing, but why can't I jump in elevators?
OK, I guess if you're going to define an immersive sim narrowly as an exclusively first person experience, then HR doesn't fit the bill. The danger, though is in defining away elements simply because you don't like them, or because they differ from other common examples of that 'genre'. I feel that third person is a valid perspective for deep, immersive and richly simulated experiences. If the particular term 'immersive sim', doesn't fit, then perhaps we can use another one instead.

The other two examples you give, relating to killing NPCs, just seem to me to be different ways of treating the same limitation: you can't kill plot critical characters. It's not as if DX allows you to do this, and HR doesn't. The choice is between letting the player fire his weapon and it having no effect (however this is treated), and not 'allowing' use of the weapon at all.

The first results in a loss of 'consistency' - because some characters can be killed and some can't - while the second results in a loss of freedom (because the player can't always choose when to use his weapons). Neither solution seems unambiguously superior to the other to me. Both require that the developer 'break the rules' in some way. The other other case you give involves the issue of whether to show damage that has no affect (DX), or not to show damage at all (HR); again more of stylistic issue.

As for invisible walls, well you have to keep the player inside the level somehow, and the developers have said they did everything possible to avoid using them. Again, sometimes you just run into problems that have to be patched up in an inelegant way. The lift thing seems pretty weird to me, and I wonder if it's just a bug or some kind of technical limitation.

Anyway, even if you don't want to respond point-by-point again, my main point is that the simulation of HR isn't necessarily less complex (other than the physics, perhaps); it's more where the simulation in both games breaks down that you see the difference. And obviously you have a personal preference one way.

Ashpolt
4th Sep 2011, 17:38
<<words>>

I think you're using "immersion" interchangeably with "immersive sim." An immersive sim is more than simply a game that's immersive - i.e. a game can be immersive without being an immersive sim. The hallmark of an immersive sim is that design decisions are made around putting player freedom and interaction above all else - so as I said above, choosing a world that looks great (while that in itself may be immersive in its own way) over one that's interactive is a sure sign that you're not aiming for an immersive sim. It's about making a consistent world, regardless of how useful set actions may be in game terms - see the articles about Dishonored where they talk about allowing players to possess fish, even though it's utterly useless in terms of gameplay, simply because it wouldn't be consistent if you couldn't, or how when they discovered that players could cover huge distances really quickly and reach areas thought to be unreachable through combining certain powers, the devs decided to allow for this rather than disabling that power combination or putting invisible walls around areas they didn't want players to reach. Contrast that with DXHR: can you honestly say you can interact with anything in the game that doesn't have some specific purpose? Can you say you've never found areas that your super jump should let you reach, but you can't? (And that's not always simply about keeping the player in the level either - there are a few areas in the courtyard of Highland Park where you can't reach upper walkways or scaffolding, even though doing so wouldn't let you get outside the level.)

I really don't know why you're trying to argue this, it seems pretty self-evident that DXHR isn't, and isn't trying to be, an immersive sim. Put it this way: either they tried to make an immersive sim and failed, or they tried to make a great, immersive FPSRPG and succeeded brilliantly. I prefer to think the latter, don't you?

MaxxQ1
5th Sep 2011, 05:50
is the nostalgia argument in copypasta yet? :)

Yup!

Edit: Oh, my! Something told me to actually check, and it *wasn't* there. That has now been rectified, in the "Poster comments to other posters, as well as general comments" category, right underneath You just want DX with updated graphics.