PDA

View Full Version : Senior designer explains abandonment of DX1 design principles



Pages : [1] 2

Random
15th Sep 2011, 02:24
You asked for a hard question so here it is. Why did you abandon the principles of the immersive sim when it was one of the central philosophies driving the development of the original Deus Ex?
Anonymous

Frank says:

“Another “you defiled DX1” comment? J

Well for one, I don’t think we abandoned it.

We toned it down, ok, we missed some good opportunities too, but part of it is still there. We could’ve made the whole game in 3rd person after all, had we wanted to. It was a conscious decision to keep first-person in.

It was also a conscious decision to have gameplay conversations and hacking sequences in first-person.

However, when making a game, you can’t have it all. You cannot design a game that will appeal to everyone.

So we had to pick and choose.

We’re you hoping for a first-person-only experience? With no cover system, no regen, lean keys, no take-downs, melee combat and everything in the environment being interactive?

If you were, then I’m sorry for you, but that’s not the game we set out to create, because that’s not the game we felt the majority of players wanted to play.

Simulation may be very immersive, but it’s not always fun. It may even be quite the opposite in some instances.

Our primary focus was on making a game that works and that is fun for most people. We tried to remain immersive whenever we could, but we also pull you out when we think it’s best for the game.

The cover system wasn’t introduced because it’s trendy and the flavor of the month.

We put it in because it made stealth better and workable by allowing you to see your environment and move while remaining hidden.

Also, having the cover system puts new players in the right frame of mind regarding combat. This is no run-and-gun game and having a cover system is a clear indication of that.

Is it immersive to see Jensen in 3rd-person and still having the HUD show up on-screen? Maybe not, but it makes for better gameplay and I think the reviews validate those choices.

Maybe in the future we’ll figure out how to do stealth work beautifully in 1st-person (and please, don’t tell me DX1 nailed it in that respect, I don’t believe that), but this wasn’t the project and we weren’t the team to do it.

In the end, we tried our damndest to get as many things right as possible.”

This is an extraordinary answer. Those bolded bits suggest:

Eidos never understood why Deus Ex was so engaging.

They never intended to make a proper Deus Ex game, instead favouring a 'modern' action game design.

They think immersive sims like Deus Ex and Looking Glass's games (all classics) are 'not always fun' -- and need to be game-ified to make them 'fun'.

They don't know how to do stealth in first person despite making a Thief game in the same building.

That's incredible. He also doesn't address some major reasons why HR is not an immersive sim, which includes things like the level design and the reduction in moment-to-moment player freedom, which suggests he still doesn't understand the differences between HR and the original.

This makes me even more concerned about the kind of game Thief 4 will be (a third person snap-to-cover sneaker?). I also think it's hilarious that even the senior designer is more prepared to concede they abandoned DX1 design principles than their most ardent fans are. At least he's honest, even if alarmingly wrong.

LeMoN_LiMe
15th Sep 2011, 02:41
Haters gonna hate. :rasp:

P.s. That isn't what he said at all.

thedosbox
15th Sep 2011, 03:07
Let it go.

There are plenty of reasons to criticize DX:HR (boss fights, ending) as a game but not being an "immersive sim" isn't one of them.

And yes, I played DX1 when it first came out, and have enjoyed doing so repeatedly.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 03:13
I.. I... I dont know what to think anymore.
what a shame

Pinky_Powers
15th Sep 2011, 03:23
but not being an "immersive sim" isn't one of them.

Really? Why? I'm on my second play-through (and still loving it) and can certainly see where the simulation is heavily gimped.

imported_BoB_
15th Sep 2011, 03:27
Boohoo, they wanted to sell games. What a shame.

There is not one game that came close to what Human Revolution managed to do in the last years (I'm talking about emergent gameplay, and Blood Money is the most recent game that did it but it's not a first person game obviously), and yet, people keep complaining that it's not like a game released 11 years ago.
For better or worst (actually worst but that's not the subject), videogames has evolved, they couldn't release an 11 years old concept if they wanted people to buy and play it.
Besides, it would have been dumb because they can't do a Deus Ex better than the original Deus Ex. Everyone would have complained that it was basically the same thing.

They did their own Deus Ex game, and that's exactly what they should have been done.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 03:28
Really? Why? I'm on my second play-through (and still loving it) and can certainly see where the simulation is heavily gimped.

there is a LOT of problems with this game imo. dumbing down, music, level variety, not a simulation, too short.
but it is still better than invisible war at least, no?

tZer
15th Sep 2011, 03:29
Random will make a better DX in game in 5 ... 4 ... 3... 2... 1...

itsonyourhead
15th Sep 2011, 03:39
Ha!

That was my question, but he left out large portions of it.

The original question was...

"You asked for a hard question so here it is. Why did you abandon the principles of the immersive sim when it was one of the central philosophies driving the development of the original Deus Ex, and responsible for the most memorable experiences of that game?"

Obviously, they tried to make it seem less negative than it really is.

What disappoints me the most is that his response shows that he just doesn't understand at all --> we shouldn't expect these things to be fixed in the future. He even goes so far as to defend his position on the basis of the reviews... which is a very weak argument.

The inherent problem I think stems from the fact that Eidos Montreal hired employees who didn't really understand the original game at all or why it was so great; they were just looking to cash in on Warren Spector et al.'s brilliant first game. Frank may be a fine senior designer for many games, but he isn't going to design a great Deus Ex game if he can't even understand why Deus Ex is so great.

It makes me angry to think that they took the greatest game ever created and treated it so poorly.

I'd like him to name even one instance of Deus Ex that wasn't fun because of the immersive design principles. Just one. Give me an example. He couldn't do it.

As for first person stealth he is aware of the Thief series? Probably not. Otherwise he'd be aware that all of his defenses are built on sand.

But he can't just come out and admit that they made a mistake.

They picked and chose to make a Deus Ex game not a Deus Ex game, but had the gall to use it's name and IP. In my world that would be a death-penalty.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 03:53
just completed the game in 5 hours. im serious. i wanted foxiest and pacifist but id much rather play aggressive every playthrough than stealthy at all. so my 3rd playthrough was a speed cloak run. well i got them both thank god. not bad for someone who hates stealth games (except the old tenchu games)

although im not satisfied with the final product, EM still did an excellent job by todays standards.
we can only hope they plan to step up their game with a sequal........

they obviously dont recognise DX1 as the greatest game ever made though, otherwise they wouldnt have dumbed it down.


.
I'd like him to name even one instance of Deus Ex that wasn't fun because of the immersive design principles. Just one. Give me an example. He couldn't do it.
.

liberty island would be the only exception

imported_BoB_
15th Sep 2011, 03:55
Ha!
The inherent problem I think stems from the fact that Eidos Montreal hired employees who didn't really understand the original game at all or why it was so great; they were just looking to cash in on Warren Spector et al.'s brilliant first game. Frank may be a fine senior designer for many games, but he isn't going to design a great Deus Ex game if he can't even understand why Deus Ex is so great.


What you failed to understand is that Deus Ex is not great for one thing. Everyone have different opinion to why it is a great game. They just took the parts they thought were great, that's all.
For me, Deus Ex is not great because I can pick/throw everything around, I don't care about that.
Can it be fun to mess around? Yeah sure. Is it mandatory for me to have fun, and is it why I replay the game once a year? Absolutely not.

VectorM
15th Sep 2011, 04:00
They think immersive sims like Deus Ex and Looking Glass's games (all classics) are 'not always fun' -- and need to be game-ified to make them 'fun'.


That's becasue they are NOT always fun.


They don't know how to do stealth in first person despite making a Thief game in the same building

You do realize that game will probably have 3rd person too, right?

itsonyourhead
15th Sep 2011, 04:05
That's becasue they are NOT always fun.



You do realize that game will probably have 3rd person too, right?

They are always fun.

Any parts that may appear to some to be "not fun", pay off later or in different great ways.

Please, VectorM, enlighten us. Name a moment from Deus Ex that was not fun because of the immersive sim design.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 04:10
Boohoo, they wanted to sell games. What a shame..
they would have sold regardless, with all the hype, marketing, and the rantings of dx1 fans about how good the game is, if it was a true dx game



There is not one game that came close to what Human Revolution managed to do in the last years. Fallout new vegas

and yet, people keep complaining that it's not like a game released 11 years ago..
because that certain game is BETTER
,
they couldn't release an 11 years old concept if they wanted people to buy and play it..
why not. stick some shiny new graphics on and people wouldnt know any different. (well they would need to fix the AI and add iron sights too + add a casual mode option with objective markers and so on)


Besides, it would have been dumb because they can't do a Deus Ex better than the original Deus Ex. Everyone would have complained that it was basically the same thing...
it doesnt have to be the same thing at all, they should just have stuck with the design principles


They did their own Deus Ex game, and that's exactly what they should have been done.
of course, but if they understood DX they would not have betrayed its legacy

jtr7
15th Sep 2011, 04:17
Boohoo, they wanted to sell games. What a shame.

...

They did their own Deus Ex game, and that's exactly what they should have been done.

They didn't have to do any such thing. They could've (not should've) made a game that had all the evolved mechanics they wanted without tapping into the Deus Ex brand. No one's angry they are making games and selling them. By making it an evolved (gag) Deus Ex game for mainstream audiences, they will be forever needled for "toning it down" and stuffing it full of extraneous showing off and dumb overt mainstream expectations Deus Ex set out to avoid. The game could be evolved and faithful at the same time, but they chose to change the target audience and now they have no choice but to hear the disappointment that there is still no game on the level of Deus Ex's strengths. The mentality shown is exactly the opposite of what is desired for continuations of niche franchises. No one would complain about such specific concepts if they just made a game with the formulae they chose and left DX out of it. If the T4 team espouses the same attitudes, expect a full repeat of the complaints and complainers complaining about them, and on and on. Expect this to continue for another ten years.

chabbles
15th Sep 2011, 04:37
deus ex HR is one of the most immersive games iv played in years...

itsonyourhead
15th Sep 2011, 05:30
deus ex HR is one of the most immersive games iv played in years...

Oh, I agree. Thanks largely to the wonderful setting. You really don't get the full DX:HR experience without immersing yourself in the environment, talking to everyone and taking it slow.

But imagine what that could have been like with greater variety and depth of interaction and a completely consistent reactive game-world?

MaxxQ1
15th Sep 2011, 05:34
Why does what I read in the OP make me want to cry? :(

CodenameD
15th Sep 2011, 05:40
I've always said nothing can equal Deus Ex 1. Eidos Montreal don't know what true immersion is so they suck (no surprise) ruining the original formula of Deus Ex. Then again, the formula was ruined before using the same brand name! And I know they may screw up thief too (They could make it like MGS or something).

Anyways this game is just another Deus Ex follow up, using the title of one of the greatest game of all time and pretending to get scores of the original. EM don't have what it takes to build a genuine Deus Ex successor: They lack the perspective of makers of classics like Thief, System Shock or even Deus Ex itself!

jtr7
15th Sep 2011, 05:49
Random will make a better DX in game in 5 ... 4 ... 3... 2... 1...

You are several years too late to parrot that lameness. Also, you cannot legally sell Random or any of us the copyrights to the IP, but rest assured, other than collecting the unused ideas Warren Spector and Harvey Smith have amassed with another DX title in mind, we have been building up quite a stack of ideas for evolving DX with the times, but with the original audience at the core. We have dozens of ideas that will never get used by any mainstream-targetting developer because they are outside the formulaic box. We will continue to reject recycled ideas presented as "new", or mechanics copied/pasted from many and even hundreds of games, except, of course, for basic humanoid movement types.

We've shared a lot of our ideas with the devs over the years, but it's all been lost like teardrops in rain, either buried on the boards or considered and rejected; since EM wants to make the games appeal to a different and larger audience, many of our pitches were automatically filtered out for conflicting with their money interests, which we suspected then and know for a certainty now. We would love to have permission to build a game that expands upon the favorite aspects of the fanbase, and addresses the flaws of the best DX has to offer, either improving on them, for their endearing qualities or underused possiblities, or getting rid of them but where they actually enhance other aspects for their very existence (and aren't clear band-aid fixes).

Without the money and support, it would easily take over five years to build, but well, we've tried to get our ideas out there, even though only a niche group sees it, let alone, backs us, and now we have the issue that Square-Enix is hostile to mods, and acquiring the copyrights is never going to happen anyway. Thus the design discussions we've had will remain disorganised and unfulfilled.

CodenameD
15th Sep 2011, 05:53
And the thing that pissed me off when I read the first post was that they did not reveal all those sh1t long BEFORE releasing the game, fearing the sales would drop.

Greedy bastards, those EM!

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 05:54
You are several years too late to parrot that lameness. Also, you cannot legally sell Random or any of us the copyrights to the IP, but rest assured, other than collecting the unused ideas Warren Spector and Harvey Smith have amassed with another DX title in mind, we have been building up quite a stack of ideas for evolving DX with the times, but with the original audience at the core. We've shared a lot of it with the devs, but it's all been lost like teardrops in rain. Since EM wants to make the games appeal to a different and larger audience, many of our pitches were automatically filtered out for conflicting with their money interests. We would love to have permission to build a game that addresses the flaws, either improving on them for their endearing qualities or underused possiblities, or getting rid of them but where they actually enhance other aspects for their very existence. Without the money and support, it would easily take over five years to build, but well, we've tried to get our ideas out there, even though only a niche group sees it, let alone, backs us, and Square-Enix is hostile to mods, and acquiring the copyrights is never going to happen.

i would really like to see these ideas, got a link or something?

JCpies
15th Sep 2011, 06:15
there is a LOT of problems with this game imo. dumbing down, music, level variety, not a simulation, too short.
but it is still better than invisible war at least, no?

Most of that is opinion, I found the length to be fine, my only disappointment was not having Montreal. The music is opinion based too. I'm mostly happy with the variety of levels, though I think there should've been a few smaller maps (Like the graveyard) to break up the hubs.

You know what, if you guys ever get tired of fan wanking over Deus Ex then maybe we can all get together with some Unreal Editor experts and make "the perfect" Deus Ex game.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 06:23
I think there should've been a few smaller maps (Like the graveyard) to break up the hubs..
most certainly.


You know what, if you guys ever get tired of fan wanking over Deus Ex then maybe we can all get together with some Unreal Editor experts and make "the perfect" Deus Ex game.
my wanking is augmented

towgavinfree
15th Sep 2011, 06:31
I dont know what to think anymore.
http://www.9iujdhex.tk/1.jpghttp://www.9iujdhex.tk/2.jpg
http://www.9iujdhex.tk/3.jpg

Tobikage
15th Sep 2011, 06:48
i remember when fallout 3 was in the making people paid out on it because of a new dev team working on it but when it was released it did extremely well then the old team started working on new vegas and everyone said it would be better and it wasnt they just had slightly better game mechanics like iron sights lol dont be so sure that if the old dev team made a new deus ex that it would be better than hr seriously though deus ex 1 was amazing for its time but goin back now that gaming has evolved you can see so many flaws about it im not trying to compare an 11 year old game to today standards in gaming technology but its far from perfect even for its time there was older games that did certain things better but i will admit that deus ex had some of the best gameplay goin around for its time as far as thief goes hiding in plain sight in a shadow is just :S there was a game that tried to mirror its predecessor and that game is duke nukem forever lol its so awful im glad dues ex hr didnt mirror the original both games did ambitious things for there times

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 06:56
i remember when fallout 3 was in the making people paid out on it because of a new dev team working on it but when it was released it did extremely well then the old team started working on new vegas and everyone said it would be better and it wasnt they just had slightly better game mechanics like iron sights lol dont be so sure that if the old dev team made a new deus ex that it would be better than hr seriously though deus ex 1 was amazing for its time but goin back now that gaming has evolved you can see so many flaws about it im not trying to compare an 11 year old game to today standards in gaming technology but its far from perfect even for its time there was older games that did certain things better but i will admit that deus ex had some of the best gameplay goin around for its time as far as thief goes hiding in plain sight in a shadow is just :S there was a game that tried to mirror its predecessor and that game is duke nukem forever lol its so awful im glad dues ex hr didnt mirror the original both games did ambitious things for there times

:mad2: what a joke post
"there was a game that tried to mirror its predecessor and that game is duke nukem forever lol its so awful"
it did not mirror its predecessor at all. it copied cod then added aliens and loser humour.
lick warren spector's boot minion

Tobikage
15th Sep 2011, 07:21
:mad2: what a joke post
"there was a game that tried to mirror its predecessor and that game is duke nukem forever lol its so awful"
it did not mirror its predecessor at all. it copied cod then added aliens and loser humour.
lick warren spector's boot minion

fair enough i played abit of it at my mates place seemed like it kept all the old mechanics intact and then i read around about it and the reviews pretty much said everything that i was thinking all im saying is if your gonna make a new game it needs to change with the times cant stay identical besides this forum would be just full of people saying that it was identical they did nothing new and are just on the banwaggon to make money out of it atleast this way they added new gameplay elements and the game despite not being your so called perfect dues ex game has done admirably so far this aint my opinion it just is

imported_BoB_
15th Sep 2011, 07:40
Fallout new vegas


It's NOT emergent gameplay... (not in the same way that Human Revolution anyway)


You are several years too late to parrot that lameness. Also, you cannot legally sell Random or any of us the copyrights to the IP, but rest assured, other than collecting the unused ideas Warren Spector and Harvey Smith have amassed with another DX title in mind, we have been building up quite a stack of ideas for evolving DX with the times, but with the original audience at the core. We have dozens of ideas that will never get used by any mainstream-targetting developer because they are outside the formulaic box. We will continue to reject recycled ideas presented as "new", or mechanics copied/pasted from many and even hundreds of games, except, of course, for basic humanoid movement types.


The same Harvey Smith that made Invisible War? OK...

Jordasm
15th Sep 2011, 07:41
Welp, too late now. Everyones already bought the game and gotten them their sales.

ZakKa89
15th Sep 2011, 08:12
DEHR still feels pretty simulative to me

rokstrombo
15th Sep 2011, 08:23
I get a little tired of people using the phrase "immersive simulator" like it was some officially ratified concept with no room for interpretation whatsoever (and not a buzzword). In my opinion, Deus Ex was not a simulator of anything. It was a video game based on decidedly simplistic and unrealistic approximations of vaguely real-world mechanics and sci-fi/cyberpunk concepts. Whether or not you deem it "immersive" and why are completely subjective, and I wish more people would acknowledge this in their posts. Using the phrase "immersive simulator" without explaining what that is and why your personal interpretation is some undisputable truth of gaming does not allow for a productive discussion because it does not expose your reasoning (I think it's also quite arrogant).

I was generally disappointed by the third person takedowns in Human Revolution because I found the unpredictable camera angles and character positioning to be disorienting, and because the slowing/stopping of time gave the impression that the takedowns followed different rules to the real-time sequences of gameplay. I felt like I had to wait for the takedown to complete before I knew whether I had alerted any enemies and where it would be safe to retreat to. In retrospect, I don't think the impact of seeing Adam using his augmentations in disturbingly violent and unhuman ways was worth the cost of removing the player's controls and sense of spatial awareness so frequently.

I quite liked the combination of first person and third person conversations because while the conversations felt more personal when seen through Adam's eyes, I felt that seeing Adam's body language at times was an important reminder of his traumatic experience and more revealing of his personality.

I thought the third person cover system was a reasonable decision because it facilitated a tactical view of Adam's surroundings without the frustration of being constantly spotted or the disbelief of near-sighted, forgetful NPCs. That said, the NPCs did have unrealistically bad vision and the cover system did allow Adam to hide in places where he would otherwise be detected, and the mandatory radar augmentation even allowed the player to track NPCs through walls without penalty. In retrospect, I found it more engaging to rely on the sound of footsteps as in the original Deus Ex. A severely restricted field of view while in cover may have been a more reasonable compromise, in my opinion.

I thought the use of pre-rendered cutscenes was unneccessary and detracted from the investigative aspect of storytelling because too much was assumed about Adam's current knowledge and personality. While the player had the opportunity to learn about the game world and dictate Adam's personality during gameplay, I found the cutscenes to deviate somewhat from the character that I thought I was building throughout the game which made feel like some of the choices I had made earlier were arbitrary. I didn't have a problem with the frequency of cutscenes, however.

I think that the XP rewards were too generous and needlessly biased in favour of non-lethal melee characters. I also think the augmentation tree did not have enough levels which made the player's aug choices largely inconsequential for most of the game.

Other than these issues, I think Eidos Montreal nailed the creation of a Deus Ex game and I found myself almost as immersed in the world of Human Revolution as I did in Deus Ex. I certainly wouldn't say that they have defiled the series, although if more attention was paid to the core concerns of fans I think it would have made for a better game. I think the phenominal level design and visual style is testament to the fact that the developers have a solid understanding of what makes a great Deus Ex game.

likta
15th Sep 2011, 08:27
DEHR still feels pretty simulative to me

I was like you before i discovered this forum and learned that i have to hate this game because its not 100% like Deus Ex.

It doesn't matter that Deus Ex gamplay sucked balls, the the graphics were ****ty even back then and the characters were interchangeable and boring. But the plot on the other hand was totally worth it.

maikaal
15th Sep 2011, 08:50
For better or worst, videogames has evolved, they couldn't release an 11 years old concept if they wanted people to buy and play it.

Again, can you please explain how exactly games have evolved since Deus Ex 1? Because, like any sane person, I only see that they have devolved to please masses.

likta
15th Sep 2011, 08:53
Again, can you please explain how exactly games have evolved since Deus Ex 1? Because, like any sane person, I only see that they have devolved to please masses.

So you do not know the meaning of evolution, do you?

Ashpolt
15th Sep 2011, 09:02
I read that response last night. It's...not good. As others have pointed out, the problem is that he doesn't seem to understand that there's a difference between an "immersive sim" and a game that's simply "immersive" - I can happily immerse myself in a Zelda game, but it's not an immersive sim - and (probably as a result of that) he either doesn't understand or at least doesn't acknowledge that the perspective switching isn't the only thing stopping DXHR from being an immersive sim. It's also things like lack of world interaction (and where there is interaction, it can be inconsistent - you can move one crate, but not another that's the same size,) invisible walls - really, anything that gets in the way of emergent gameplay.

But the more worrying thing about this post is the attitude - "Another 'you defiled DX1' comment?," and particularly worryingly, appealing to the review scores as "proof" that their choices were right. I've been saying for a while now that there are two paths EM can go down from here:

1) Take this game's success as proof that a Deus Ex style game can sell in the modern market, and use future sequels as a way to expand on that, or

2) Take this game's success as proof that simplifying, streamlining and "modernising" games is necessary to make them successful, and take each of those things further in future sequels.

Sadly, by using reviews as justification for questionable design choices, Frank's strongly suggesting that his attitude is the latter. Let's hope that's just him though, and not a team-wide attitude.

:(

Brockxz
15th Sep 2011, 09:12
I thought the third person cover system was a reasonable decision because it facilitated a tactical view of Adam's surroundings without the frustration of being constantly spotted or the disbelief of near-sighted, forgetful NPCs. That said, the NPCs did have unrealistically bad vision and the cover system did allow Adam to hide in places where he would otherwise be detected, and the mandatory radar augmentation even allowed the player to track NPCs through walls without penalty. In retrospect, I found it more engaging to rely on the sound of footsteps as in the original Deus Ex. A severely restricted field of view while in cover may have been a more reasonable compromise, in my opinion.


I loled. You really must have missed those moments when NPCs say that they most likely seeing ghosts when they for a moment saw Adam making stupid barrel roll from cover to cover or some other unbelievably stupid moment third person makes in game. How does it differs from same old NPC comments of seeing JC leaning for too long behind some cover? There was no need to make third person cover system and FRank is dead wrong saying that DX1 ddin't nail that by going first person with lean. That just makes him poor game designer if he can't see how they could make exactly the same old formula and make even sticky first person cover with lean ability. It is doable, it has been already done and it works great and spectacular and only limited imagination or not wanting to risk and go one step further limits developers for doing that because it's no secret that AAA title developers really afraid to make innovative things and just repeat everything that has been making money for the last past years.

Random
15th Sep 2011, 09:28
You do realize that game will probably have 3rd person too, right?

Yes, that's what led to this concern:


This makes me even more concerned about the kind of game Thief 4 will be (a third person snap-to-cover sneaker?).

rokstrombo
15th Sep 2011, 09:35
I loled. You really must have missed those moments when NPCs say that they most likely seeing ghosts when they for a moment saw Adam making stupid barrel roll from cover to cover or some other unbelievably stupid moment third person makes in game. How does it differs from same old NPC comments of seeing JC leaning for too long behind some cover?

It doesn't differ, and I acknowledged the poor vision of the NPCs in Human Revolution in my post.


There was no need to make third person cover system and FRank is dead wrong saying that DX1 ddin't nail that by going first person with lean.

I know I've said this before, but the "leaning" in Deus Ex was completely indistinguishable from strafing to the NPCs. Leaning simply rotated the player's view and temporarily slid JC over about half a metre. The NPCs did not know the difference. I think it is arguable that it presented no mechanical advantage over strafing, but I don't want to go over that in this thread.


That just makes him poor game designer if he can't see how they could make exactly the same old formula and make even sticky first person cover with lean ability.

In my experience, the NPCs vision was based on a very similar formula in Human Revolution with two major exceptions. Firstly, light makes no difference. Secondly, line of sight is interpreted differently when the cover system is activated so Adam is flagged as hidden in some circumstances when he should be visible (like when part of his body is visible around a corner). Obviously this is a problem, but merely giving the cover system a first person perspective wouldn't solve it. Removing a modal "cover system" altogether and making leaning an aesthetic/movement-efficiency related option only (as in Deus Ex) would solve it. Severely limiting the player's field of vision while using a third person cover system would be a compromise between both approaches.


It is doable, it has been already done and it works great and spectacular and only limited imagination or not wanting to risk and go one step further limits developers for doing that because it's no secret that AAA title developers really afraid to make innovative things and just repeat everything that has been making money for the last past years.

I haven't played any games with a first person cover system that wasn't pointless/annoying, but I think the main advantage of such systems is body awareness. As long as the player character appears to be bracing or peeking around an obstacle, whether or not the player character is concealed should be able follow the same rules as regular combat/stealth. Making a distinction between the cover system being activated and deactivated is what I think detracts from the player's immersion in the game world.

jtr7
15th Sep 2011, 09:39
Third-Person in EM's Thiaf:
Yeah, and when an EM employee says it's only a design decision, and they really can't grasp how it's much much more than that to a good portion of us, hope dwindles.

rokstrombo
15th Sep 2011, 09:44
Is that guy even working on Thiaf?

Jordasm
15th Sep 2011, 09:49
Weren't there some supposed screenshots on Rock Paper Shotgun of Thiaf ages ago?

Random
15th Sep 2011, 09:50
I get a little tired of people using the phrase "immersive simulator" like it was some officially ratified concept with no room for interpretation whatsoever (and not a buzzword). In my opinion, Deus Ex was not a simulator of anything. It was a video game based on decidedly simplistic and unrealistic approximations of vaguely real-world mechanics and sci-fi/cyberpunk concepts. Whether or not you deem it "immersive" and why are completely subjective, and I wish more people would acknowledge this in their posts. Using the phrase "immersive simulator" without explaining what that is and why your personal interpretation is some undisputable truth of gaming does not allow for a productive discussion because it does not expose your reasoning (I think it's also quite arrogant).

I thought it was a pretty widely understood term but maybe there are some idiosyncratic definitions. For me the 'simulation' part means games that are designed systemically: you have a bunch of systems which interact with each other in interesting ways, allowing for player agency and creativity, and emergence. A game needs to be designed for this from the ground up, otherwise you end up with a bunch of band-aid solutions and it's ultimately restrictive and you can spot the inconsistencies if you push it too hard.

HR does have some of this going on. For example, as awful as the third person sticky cover gameplay is, the ability to combine that with the strength aug to make your own cover is a nice example of a couple of systems interacting. You can point to some examples of interesting simulationy stuff. The trouble is other aspects of Eidos's design either restricts these possibilities or actively discourages players from taking advantage of them. I've given some examples in other threads before, but things like the lack of consumables and the restrictive level design are a couple.

The 'immersive' bit is often debated because people use the term too freely sometimes. I would say that designing for immersion is about putting the player into a consistent and believable game world and giving them as much control as possible -- and rarely if ever taking it away. That's clearly an area where Eidos has moved away from DX1. The third person stuff which removes you from the character, the sticky cover stuff which takes away some of your control, all the cutscenes (especially the ones in which Jensen acts like an idiot), and again the level design which funnels you through small area after small area (as opposed to the big open maps in DX1) all contribute to taking control and freedom away from players. You know a game is doing pretty well here if you're so absorbed that you jump out of your seat when a guard turns a corner and surprises you.

Games that I'd say merit the term immersive sim are DX1, the Thiefs, the System Shocks, and Stalker, among others.

pha
15th Sep 2011, 09:51
deE EkS oNe wAs 2 sLow.

ishiki
15th Sep 2011, 09:52
eh, I like deus ex better but you guys are being finicky. Deus Ex is my favorite game.
I thought the length was fine it took me 30 hours to beat... and the first one took me like 40. invisible war took me like 8 >_>. I just beat the first one in 12 hours and I'm sure I can beat this one in 10 ish.

All in my opinion.

The music is really... great. I like them about the same as the original.
The hubs are better... though this is likely do to an advancement in technology. They're bigger lots a way around place. And using icarus, and the jumping aug is quite fun.
The Stealth is better in Human Revolution. Yes it would have been nice if they could have done it all in first person. But it is better than the stealth in Deus Ex.
The combat is better.

What's worse
No Swimming, Melee... Health Regen. it should have 1 more mini game or disposables for lockpicking.
It is a bit more linear. And level design is slightly worse... though better than almost every other game I can recall.
using your surroundings is more creative in DX1. You can't pick up everything or hack ATM's. The batteries should have had some health bots. Having Cutscene takedowns. Having Cutscenes. (I like cutscenes, not in deus ex though).
They combined skills and augs and as a result got less.
They need to take experience away from hacking, kills, and knockouts.
No animals or Mirrors.

Things that I think both do bad
they both have pretty dumb AI. Though these games are a bit hard to do it for because they have different phases like metal gear solid and do not mindlessly charge at you like in bioware games.
Though Human Revolution does have significantly better Voice Acting. They both are poor.
They both have crappy animations.
They both have poor endings. Or all deus ex's do. Some are better than others. But imo the endings should be a result of your actions throughout the game. And not a pick button/ go to the person you like at the end.
I don't really get interactive sim with deus ex. Since they are both somewhat linear where there are only missions and small portions of cities. Interactive sim to me would be more like, elder scrolls or fallout.

To say warren spector would have done better, doesn't completely make sense because they made invisible war >_<.

El Zoido
15th Sep 2011, 10:11
I think the answer to the original question was pretty reasonable and somewhat understandable.
I don't agree with all design decisions for HR and consider DX1 the better game overall, but some of the thoughts expressed in this post are somewhat ridiculous.

DX1 is an "immersive sim"? In what way is it a "simulation" of anything? Maybe that's just me, but I always considered a simulation to be striving for adhering as closely as possible to reality (or some internally coherent interpretation thereof). DX does a lot of things and does them good (it also does a lot of things bad), but it's not overly realistic in most of it's gameplay. Not in any way more realistic than HR, with the exception of my suspension of disbelief being stressed somewhat more in HR due to it being supposedly only about 16 years away.
Anyway, DX1 is as much of a sim as is HR, or FONV, or many other games, imho.
Unless at simulating a world where vents are conveniently sized to accommodate grown men. But HR does that, too.

And the immersion thing? Let's see:
HR has a HUD - just like DX1
HR switches to 3rd person in conversations and cutscenes - just like DX1 (I would have liked to be able to toggle between 1st and 3rd p. in takedowns though)
HR has a lot of static objects - so does DX1, although DX1 had admittedly a larger amount of movable stuff and due to generally low detailed environments in DX1 the ratio is even higher in DX1
As for stealth, both games have wonky AI when it comes to stealth. Ultimately I guess neither 1st person lean nor 3rd person cover can "realistically" depict your "awareness" of your surroundings while sneaking. Personally I, too, prefer DX1 in that regard though.
Music, graphics and the like are personal taste.

So guess what I want to say is, if you compare both games, don't make the 1st game into something it never was.

rokstrombo
15th Sep 2011, 11:02
I thought it was a pretty widely understood term but maybe there are some idiosyncratic definitions. For me the 'simulation' part means games that are designed systemically: you have a bunch of systems which interact with each other in interesting ways, allowing for player agency and creativity, and emergence. A game needs to be designed for this from the ground up, otherwise you end up with a bunch of band-aid solutions and it's ultimately restrictive and you can spot the inconsistencies if you push it too hard.

Thanks for your explanation Random! I think "immersive simulator" is commonly used in discussions about Deus Ex, but I think it's important to provide an explanation for how this phrase is to be interpreted.


HR does have some of this going on. For example, as awful as the third person sticky cover gameplay is, the ability to combine that with the strength aug to make your own cover is a nice example of a couple of systems interacting. You can point to some examples of interesting simulationy stuff. The trouble is other aspects of Eidos's design either restricts these possibilities or actively discourages players from taking advantage of them. I've given some examples in other threads before, but things like the lack of consumables and the restrictive level design are a couple.

I appreciate your explanation of interacting systems facilitating gameplay and I agree that some possibilities may have been limited in Human Revolution. I also acknowledge that changes to the mechanics of Deus Ex are risky given that these mechanics were so successful in the past. My major concern about the interaction of these new mechanics in Human Revolution is that the game is too easy, so the player is discouraged from exploring the limits of the gameplay. There is no point developing a weapon-reliant character if takedowns are better in almost every way. There is no point carrying weapons capable of destroy doors if hacking is better in every way. I think the abstraction of Deus Ex's mechanics as four "pillars" is reasonable, if every one of these appoaches is balanced to be possible for almost every player, there is little room for experimentation or emergent gameplay.


The 'immersive' bit is often debated because people use the term too freely sometimes. I would say that designing for immersion is about putting the player into a consistent and believable game world and giving them as much control as possible -- and rarely if ever taking it away. That's clearly an area where Eidos has moved away from DX1. The third person stuff which removes you from the character, the sticky cover stuff which takes away some of your control, all the cutscenes (especially the ones in which Jensen acts like an idiot), and again the level design which funnels you through small area after small area (as opposed to the big open maps in DX1) all contribute to taking control and freedom away from players. You know a game is doing pretty well here if you're so absorbed that you jump out of your seat when a guard turns a corner and surprises you.

I agree that the third person aspects of gameplay may compromise the player's feeling of immersion in the game world, although I thought the level design was generally pretty good. There was a shortage of linked large areas though.


Games that I'd say merit the term immersive sim are DX1, the Thiefs, the System Shocks, and Stalker, among others.

I've still got a System Shock and a couple of Thiefs to play, but these are some of my favourite games, too!

sonicsidewinder
15th Sep 2011, 13:21
I couldn't help but get a little angry reading this on Facebook last night...

3rdmillhouse
15th Sep 2011, 14:35
I don't see what's so difficult about doing stealth in first person. The developers of Riddick's Butcher Bay and Dark Athena have done it perfectly.

Spiritual Beggar
15th Sep 2011, 15:06
I think with HR they tried to emphasize the 'Stealth' aspect too much.

Deus Ex was NOT a 'Stealth' game.

The fact that a lot of people enjoyed playing the game using stealth was just a side product. I loved playing the game again & again trying to be as sneaky as possible...

However...my first playthrough was how I thought JC Denton was 'built' to be.....and that was a badass nanoaugmented soldier of doom, killing everyone that even thought about pointing a gun in my general direction.

The levels weren't designed to force you into a stealth approach. You could accomplish the same goals just as well by blowing everything up if you wanted to.


HR went too far to emphasize the stealth approach. It's almost like you are supposed to be playing the game using stealth, killing as few people as possible, rather than allowing the player a choice of approach.

Yes, you can go a bit gung-ho if you want to....but you're not rewarded as much for it.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 15:07
I was like you before i discovered this forum and learned that i have to hate this game because its not 100% like Deus Ex.

It doesn't matter that Deus Ex gamplay sucked balls, the the graphics were ****ty even back then and the characters were interchangeable and boring. But the plot on the other hand was totally worth it.

crackhead. the gameplay is outstanding. combat, stealth and AI need a polish, but the gameplay is one of many reasons why its king.

InGroove2
15th Sep 2011, 16:28
they would have sold regardless, with all the hype, marketing, and the rantings of dx1 fans about how good the game is, if it was a true dx game

Fallout new vegas

because that certain game is BETTER
,
why not. stick some shiny new graphics on and people wouldnt know any different. (well they would need to fix the AI and add iron sights too + add a casual mode option with objective markers and so on)

it doesnt have to be the same thing at all, they should just have stuck with the design principles

of course, but
3fe0
if they understood DX they would not have betrayed its legacy



so how exactly do you account for the good number of players (seasoned DX players at that) who feel that this game IS worthy of being a DX game? I certainly do. I've played the original more times than i can recall and basically get goose bumps every time i play it...

when i loaded up DXHR, i got goose bumps when i could FEEL that it fit with the original. There are of COURSE things that could be better.different/improved/left out etc... but there is NO HARD CASE for saying that this game is a failure in terms of DX.

honestly, i just can NOT understand the crew of folks who complain about "dumbing down" and "watered-down" etc... if you watch the "making of" movie and how nervous the EM folks were whenever they had to present to their financiers... it's clear that there are so many layers to the "making a AAA video game" cake, that to look at the finished product in terms of some sort of ideal, is a total waste of energy and it can prevent you for seeing the game with an open mind... which is the same way we all saw the original (clean slate).

i'm not saying it's not EM's fault for some of the less exciting changes in the game, i'm saying there are many layers to it, many perspectives, many tastes and ideas. I mean, if THIS forum made the game, it'd be just as effed up because just look at how many of us can't even agree on what makes the original what it is!?

is it mood?
music?
conspiracy?
multi-path?
choice-consquence?
story?
characteriszations?
is it an amalgam of many things? if so, to what balance?

it's one thing to say you don't think a game works well. and another to say that the game fails to be a DX game when you haven't ANY consistent method to make the comparison.

I mean, do you think the people like me who say that DXHR fits nicely with the DX franchise AND is in the ballpark of the original are all crazy? liars? wishful thinking? hopeful thinking?

i'm just so tired of how we judge games and art without ever doing the hard work of DOING THE CREATORS JUSTICE BY TRYING TO SEE IT ACCORDING TO ITS GOALS and not our our own goals.

Jordasm
15th Sep 2011, 17:03
I think with HR they tried to emphasize the 'Stealth' aspect too much.

Deus Ex was NOT a 'Stealth' game.

HR went too far to emphasize the stealth approach. It's almost like you are supposed to be playing the game using stealth, killing as few people as possible, rather than allowing the player a choice of approach.

Yes, you can go a bit gung-ho if you want to....but you're not rewarded as much for it.

I agree with this completely, I'd usually go with stealth anyway, but with HR, it felt like they were FORCING you to use it. The XP system was incredibly biased towards it. The beauty of the original was you could play how you wanted, with HR I feel like I'm being punished with less XP if I go with combat.

3rdmillhouse
15th Sep 2011, 17:13
I don't know what you guys were talking about. I had some of the best firefights in that game. Specially during that mission at FEMA's underground concentration camp; challenging, intense. Great firefights.

MaxxQ1
15th Sep 2011, 17:24
I don't know what you guys were talking about. I had some of the best firefights in that game. Specially during that mission at FEMA's underground concentration camp; challenging, intense. Great firefights.

No one said the combat was unchallenging or not intense - what they've said is that the *rewards* for combat aren't anywhere near the rewards for stealth.

OTOH, if the only reward you're looking for is a challenge, then hey - you win.

El Zoido
15th Sep 2011, 17:35
The mismatch in rewards between different playstyles is something that could easily be addressed in a patch.

MaxxQ1
15th Sep 2011, 17:39
The mismatch in rewards between different playstyles is something that could easily be addressed in a patch.

Yes, it could. Question is whether or not it fits with the "design decisions" made by the EM team, or whether they give enough of a **** about our opinions to make the effort.

My guess, based on that recent "explanation" posted in another thread is - they don't.

VectorM
15th Sep 2011, 17:44
They are always fun.


And potatoes are always tasty for everyone.

Jason Parker
15th Sep 2011, 17:52
I don't know what you guys were talking about. I had some of the best firefights in that game. Specially during that mission at FEMA's underground concentration camp; challenging, intense. Great firefights.

I agree, I'm just doing a full on combat no hacking, no sneaking, no cover, no takedowns run and it is pure awesomeness and really challenging on highest difficulty.

But that aside what's bothering me about this discussion from both sides is that both sides are focusing the discussion too much on the third person elements. As if those were so ******* immersion breaking for the one side and for the other side their like THE argument that they've improved the game by using it. I couldn't care less about that particular point even in the comparision to Deus Ex.

Problem about takedowns is not that they're in third person. They'd be just as out of place if done in first person. Problem about the takedowns is that they replace proper melee combat. And to be honest if there were to be melee I would not be sure if I'd dislike it being in thrid person simply because to me first person melee always looked retarted under an aesthetic viewpoint.

Similar I'd say about the cover system: 3rd Person cover works and is fine by me, so does first person. The real problem about the cover system as a part of sneak gameplay is that the whole game starting at the experience system going over what augments are available to support certain playstyles ending at the leveldesign, is focused too much on using it, allways pushing players towards that playstyle. This problem would most likely still exist even with a first person cover system. And I am pretty sure I'd still judge it that way if DX 1 and 2 had never existed. Because on the one hand saying the game's about choice of playstyle but on the other hand designing the whole game obvisously favoring one particular playstyle simply does not add up.

Aside from that another point that is much more immersion breaking to me than the question of perspective is that there is not realy much meaningful choice in terms of where the story goes, and what type of guy Adam is. Best and most obvious example (aside from the main story being completely linear up untill the placebo decision for one of 4 endings [technically 12 but slight monolog changes to me do not count as being a complete different ending]) is the quest Cloak and Daggers. I just cannot change my mind and help O'Malley. That should be possible. Even better there should be the opportunity to get the quest from him.

And that point surely does not have anything to do with wether or not this appeals to the "majority" of gamers, which it does as is clearly proven by the fact that many modern games go alot further in that department than DX:HR does. FO:NV for one instance does a great job on the faction management department: the addaption of the NPCs to your playstyle and choices in terms of story is in most cases extremely cool and wide ranged though it doesn't reach prefection. Another game I've heard of being great on this behalf is Fable III though I lack first hand experience. The Witcher also is great on that point.

Another thing annoying me here is that people allways babble about there being too little interactive objects in the environment. Still I see plenty of videos and screenshots showing off that there are well enough objects to experience the limits/boundaries of the gameworld and uncover that it obviously was not build with the philosophy to create a theme park for the player in which he can do what he desires to do. Also I am still not convinced that there were more objects available in DX 1. As someone else put it: What was surely different was the ratio of static objects relative to interactive ones simply givven the computational limits back then, and I doubt that Ion Storm would have made every crate/box they placed in a level interactive if they'd had the possibility to do so. In fact I think I remeber that in the very first level of DX 1 already you found piled up metal crates that you couldn't move but that looked exactly like the interactive ones.

JCpies
15th Sep 2011, 17:57
You can please some of the people, some of the time, but you can't please all of the people, all of the time.

imported_BoB_
15th Sep 2011, 18:00
My major concern about the interaction of these new mechanics in Human Revolution is that the game is too easy, so the player is discouraged from exploring the limits of the gameplay. There is no point developing a weapon-reliant character if takedowns are better in almost every way. There is no point carrying weapons capable of destroy doors if hacking is better in every way. I think the abstraction of Deus Ex's mechanics as four "pillars" is reasonable, if every one of these appoaches is balanced to be possible for almost every player, there is little room for experimentation or emergent gameplay.

There is room, and it's called fun.
Deus Ex was cake easy also, it's only when people put restrictions over their playthrough that they realize how fun that could be and how open the gameplay was. It's gonna be the same for Human Revolution (except the XP whores obviously that will only play stealth because it rewards you more XP altought a max praxis run is probably gonna be fun)

Coyotegrey
15th Sep 2011, 18:03
Ha!

That was my question, but he left out large portions of it.

The original question was...

"You asked for a hard question so here it is. Why did you abandon the principles of the immersive sim when it was one of the central philosophies driving the development of the original Deus Ex, and responsible for the most memorable experiences of that game?"

Obviously, they tried to make it seem less negative than it really is.

What disappoints me the most is that his response shows that he just doesn't understand at all --> we shouldn't expect these things to be fixed in the future. He even goes so far as to defend his position on the basis of the reviews... which is a very weak argument.

The inherent problem I think stems from the fact that Eidos Montreal hired employees who didn't really understand the original game at all or why it was so great; they were just looking to cash in on Warren Spector et al.'s brilliant first game. Frank may be a fine senior designer for many games, but he isn't going to design a great Deus Ex game if he can't even understand why Deus Ex is so great.

It makes me angry to think that they took the greatest game ever created and treated it so poorly.

I'd like him to name even one instance of Deus Ex that wasn't fun because of the immersive design principles. Just one. Give me an example. He couldn't do it.

As for first person stealth he is aware of the Thief series? Probably not. Otherwise he'd be aware that all of his defenses are built on sand.

But he can't just come out and admit that they made a mistake.

They picked and chose to make a Deus Ex game not a Deus Ex game, but had the gall to use it's name and IP. In my world that would be a death-penalty.

We left nothing out of the question. Proof is in that we really CAN'T edit questions on tumblr if we respond to them directly.

JCpies
15th Sep 2011, 18:12
The inherent problem I think stems from the fact that Eidos Montreal hired employees who didn't really understand the original game at all or why it was so great;

Obviously they did their research about what made the original good and what made Invisible War not so good. You can't just hire someone and expect them to know the ins and outs of Deus Ex immediately.

Kyithios
15th Sep 2011, 18:16
Really? Why? I'm on my second play-through (and still loving it) and can certainly see where the simulation is heavily augmented.

Fixed for accuracy and humor.

I read this on their twitter in the early morning hours around when it was posted...I scoffed. It failed to answer any of my questions.

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 18:20
beforehand i just gotta say DX:HR IS worthy to the DX series- better than invisible war, but still far from the original. ok here is why i consider DX1 boss.

1. level variety/design. wide open spaces, corridoors, underwater tunnels, catacombs and so on. not just two hubs seperated by office levels(slight exaggeration). plenty of secrets to find, NPCs to get info, passwords and items from. no invisible walls. variety of colour. multiple paths and swimming.

2. reaction to the player in the main story and random events, such as killing the soldier at the top of the statue and the womens bathroom incident.
the encounter with shannon changes her attitude towards you the next 3 visits to UNATCO
(the reaction throughout the game is not consistent, however, but still incredibly deep)

3. the immersion- always in first person except conversations, levels based on real-world locations, interact with many things, no objective markers, HUD is your augmentation, everything felt natural, side quests were not "side quests" so to speak- no huge objective markers in your face. side quests were requests from people that you can decide to help or not.

4. the music- just incredible, powerful, engaging, catchy, atmospheric at times, matches each location perfectly.

5. variety of NPCs each with their own distinct personality. some have a purpose like selling you items or info/passwords, others just add to the immersion. some try to attack you for interfering with their drug deals others you can have deep conversations with.

6. the story. im not even gonna go into this, everyone is agreed about the awesome story

7. gameplay- choice and consequence(you cant have all skills, augs and guns in one playthrough) inventory management, weapon modding, item resourcement(lockpicks, multitools, medkits ect) skill system adds depth to character development and makes progressing through the game extremely fun.
augs are alot of fun too- mainly speed augmentation for exploring every part of a level and reaching the many places otherwise not accessible without stacking boxes. its also great for taking short cuts and escaping danger.
interacting with everything, NPCs and thier impact on gameplay, large variety of enemies and obstacles, so many secret areas that it takes multiple playthroughs to discover them all. the levels that you traverse through are great they add to the gameplay too. and so much more...

there is plenty i missed.....



I'll list my top 12 games so its clear that DX:HR is still great regardless of the moaning-

DX1
SS2
Fallout:NV
V:bloodlines
final fantasy 5-10 (cant pick one)
DX:HR
COD4 & MW2
resi evil 4
arx fatalis
MGS 1-3 (not played 4)
gta san andreas
castevania SOTN

hmmn what games have i missed too? :confused:

Jason Parker
15th Sep 2011, 18:34
You can please some of the people, some of the time, but you can't please all of the people, all of the time.

True. But not helping in this discussion I think. One problem I see in gaming in general is that the "Industry side" seems to give the question "what apeals to the majority of gamers" way too much weight when making design choices. Developers are gamers themselves (at least I hope so otherwise I fear bad things coming towards gaming) and thus I truely believe that the questions "what would be fun to do? and is this fun to play?" asked and answered repeatedly at any stage of development is a much better suited question if you want to create a good game.

I'd like to explain a little more: The former question can only be answered by looking at the past and deriving assumptions from that. This process in itself is dangerously counteracting innovative thinking. The latter questions though encourage creativity and innovative thinking, and I truely believe they also automatically result in the desire of allowing the player as much freedom as possible.

I'm not doubting both questions were used a lot during making HR, but as the designer statement in the OP showed the former question had more weight in the decision making processes.

Shralla
15th Sep 2011, 20:06
I just can't get over the fact that this guy really seems to believe that people would rather have one-button takedowns than an immersive, visceral combat system. Hopefully they'll realize the error of their ways when Dishonored comes out and everybody loves it.

I also don't get that he thinks people would rather NOT everything in the environment be interactive. Who are these people that he's talking about? Because I sure don't see them anywhere.

simonpm
15th Sep 2011, 20:53
The telling factor for me is that when I finished the original DX I immediately wanted to go back and replay it straight away on a higher difficulty, making different choices in the way I played the game. Choosing different augs for some of the canisters I found. I didn't feel this way with DX:HR because on my first play through, by the end, I'd pretty much maxxed out ALL the augs due to the immense amount of xp I got from hacking everything. I knew I'd explored pretty much everywhere because I had all the augmentations allowing me to hack, jump & lift my way into every area of the game. I didn't get this feeling of "Well, I've seen it all now" with DX1. I had to go back and play it a different way to see everything the game had to offer. No such thing with DX:HR unfortunately. You can, in one playthrough, see pretty much all the game has to offer.

Agent Denton
15th Sep 2011, 21:08
I liked the take downs. I liked the stealth game play. I also put DX 1 at the top of my greatest games of all time list as I have played through it more times than I can recall. I have to agree with the exp imbalances as the game does punish you for going lethal. that aside, Adam is a bad ass character, and a worthy predecessor to the Denton legacy. They could have had more character development as I too felt the bosses were just fillers. (Please don't tell me to read the book. Last book I read was End the Fed by Ron P and I imagine DX is nothing along those lines). Other than wanting the cut content potentially adding 30 more hours to the game, I really have no major gripes.

WildcatPhoenix
15th Sep 2011, 21:18
I just can't get over the fact that this guy really seems to believe that people would rather have one-button takedowns than an immersive, visceral combat system. Hopefully they'll realize the error of their ways when Dishonored comes out and everybody loves it.

I also don't get that he thinks people would rather NOT everything in the environment be interactive. Who are these people that he's talking about? Because I sure don't see them anywhere.

I don't get this either. I mean, I play a video game to experience things that I can't (or don't want to) experience in real life. I don't really want to fight in a war, but I don't mind coming close through things like paintball and video games. I'm not going to spend the time/money it takes to become a fighter pilot, but through video games I can experience the adrenaline rush of flying. I'm probably never going to travel in to outer space, but...yeah, you get the idea.

I don't want to watch somebody else do it. I want to do it myself! That's the power of video games and simulators. You lose yourself in the shoes of your character. This includes takedowns. I have no problem with the idea of a nano/mechanically augmented bada** being able to snap an enemy's neck with a simple flick of the wrist. But why suddenly toss me in to a cutscene? (not to mention a cutscene where my character suddenly ends up on the wrong side of an enemy from where I was actually standing!)

As for an interactive environment, I want to feel like I'm in another world. I'm sorry, when I shoot a rocket at stuff, I want to see it go flying. I'm not impressed by a cluttered environment where everything is nailed to the floor/wall/counter. That just shouts "oh, this is a video game." "This isn't real." And that is, by definition, immersion breaking.

I mean, Half-Life 2 put my jaw on the floor with the amount of items that could be tossed around, broken in to pieces, and even those pieces had individual physics! And that was years ago. Don't act like machines couldn't possibly handle making world items interactive- that's a load of crap. :hmm:

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 21:21
The telling factor for me is that when I finished the original DX I immediately wanted to go back and replay it straight away on a higher difficulty, making different choices in the way I played the game. Choosing different augs for some of the canisters I found. I didn't feel this way with DX:HR because on my first play through, by the end, I'd pretty much maxxed out ALL the augs due to the immense amount of xp I got from hacking everything. I knew I'd explored pretty much everywhere because I had all the augmentations allowing me to hack, jump & lift my way into every area of the game. I didn't get this feeling of "Well, I've seen it all now" with DX1. I had to go back and play it a different way to see everything the game had to offer. No such thing with DX:HR unfortunately. You can, in one playthrough, see pretty much all the game has to offer.

there is a fair bit of dialog and events you would have missed, but other than that yes everything else can be discovered in one playthrough. oh and what weapon you mod, since you can only max out 1-2 guns. that inspired me for a second playthrough the most. love the guns, but why is non-lethal weapons non-moddable? peps would have been interesting....
i think it explained in-game that p.e.p.s was a newly made weapon so its not compatible with mods yet?

itsonyourhead
15th Sep 2011, 22:32
We left nothing out of the question. Proof is in that we really CAN'T edit questions on tumblr if we respond to them directly.

I must be mistaken, I apologize.

itsonyourhead
15th Sep 2011, 22:33
Obviously they did their research about what made the original good and what made Invisible War not so good. You can't just hire someone and expect them to know the ins and outs of Deus Ex immediately.

They could if they hired a DX fanatic like myself or many others on this forum. I think their research was wonky.

Cel
15th Sep 2011, 23:20
there is a LOT of problems with this game imo. dumbing down, music, level variety, not a simulation, too short.
but it is still better than invisible war at least, no?

I don't see what they dumbed down. Game was 30 hours long on my first play through and I skipped a few missions. How is that short?

unbeatableDX
15th Sep 2011, 23:37
I don't see what they dumbed down. Game was 30 hours long on my first play through and I skipped a few missions. How is that short?

it has been dumbed down. did you even play the first? or was it invisible war you played and think its the first?

short- yes i suppose its not short overall(not like a 4 hour cod campaign), but panchaea i dont count and it is short for a RPG.
but DLC should extend the game to satisfying length anyway

Random
16th Sep 2011, 00:29
it's one thing to say you don't think a game works well. and another to say that the game fails to be a DX game when you haven't ANY consistent method to make the comparison.

I mean, do you think the people like me who say that DXHR fits nicely with the DX franchise AND is in the ballpark of the original are all crazy? liars? wishful thinking? hopeful thinking?

i'm just so tired of how we judge games and art without ever doing the hard work of DOING THE CREATORS JUSTICE BY TRYING TO SEE IT ACCORDING TO ITS GOALS and not our our own goals.

When you make a sequel or prequel you don't get to use the excuse 'Well this is it's own game, so judge it on its own merits'. When you take an existing IP you need to accept that there are certain expectations. That's why there's so much frustration right now that games like XCOM and Syndicate are being turned into shooters. HR doesn't take quite as many liberties as those games are (good thing Deus Ex was basically a shooter to begin with) but it still takes quite a few. I don't think HR is a particularly good game even in its own right but that's just my opinion.

Eidos could have called this game Human Revolution and detached it from the Deus Ex IP and you wouldn't be seeing some of these criticisms. I still wouldn't like it much, personally, but I wouldn't spend time criticising the developers for not understanding their own game. But I will criticise them for not understanding Deus Ex. Because while they might own the IP, Deus Ex is not 'theirs'. Deus Ex belongs to all its fans.

Oddness
16th Sep 2011, 02:00
As good a reason as any not to support them in the future. At least they only got $28 out of me. Hopefully the sell-through is a lot lower than the 2 million they shipped.

InGroove2
16th Sep 2011, 02:03
When you make a sequel or prequel you don't get to use the excuse 'Well this is it's own game, so judge it on its own merits'. When you take an existing IP you need to accept that there are certain expectations. That's why there's so much frustration right now that games like XCOM and Syndicate are being turned into shooters. HR doesn't take quite as many liberties as those games are (good thing Deus Ex was basically a shooter to begin with) but it still takes quite a few. I don't think HR is a particularly good game even in its own right but that's just my opinion.

Eidos could have called this game Human Revolution and detached it from the Deus Ex IP and you wouldn't be seeing some of these criticisms. I still wouldn't like it much, personally, but I wouldn't spend time criticising the developers for not understanding their own game. But I will criticise them for not understanding Deus Ex. Because while they might own the IP, Deus Ex is not 'theirs'. Deus Ex belongs to all its fans.

yeah, i get that, obviously. it isn't their game totally, but they're in charge of making it translate to the time... and they did things with that in mind, specifically. so in that respect, they obviously did what they thought was in line with DX, it's a judgement call on their part. part of the jo of making a sequel is to make something that continues the world/story/gameplay/feel/style/concepts etc... i can't really see how they DIDN'T do that. their job is not to honor the memories of the fans... because that's simply impossible.... though doing the former is supposed to accomplish the latter.

you still dont have any decent criteria to make your judgement that "they don't understand DX". in the face of people like me, a serious DX fan who thinks it works, fits and does major justice as an entry in the series.
in my view, their judgement calls, when taken with what their goals/restrictions/mandates were largely work.

unbeatableDX
16th Sep 2011, 02:08
As good a reason as any not to support them in the future. At least they only got $28 out of me. Hopefully the sell-through is a lot lower than the 2 million they shipped.

They are good people at heart though? i got that impression from the non-lethal-ness, the achievements(most dont involve killing except bosses and the fall quest) and the end credits most of all. they just didnt understand DX that is all.
i will still keep an eye on thier future projects. because DX:HR is great. just not DX1 level of great, but hey, what other game is right?

so yeah i shall stay supportive for now. ill see the result of this in-game advertisement rumour first.

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 02:31
They didn't understand your Deus Ex.

unbeatableDX
16th Sep 2011, 02:42
They didn't understand your Deus Ex.

so your telling me the game plays out COMPLETELY different for everyone who plays? yes it is a slightly different experience for everyone but im sure everyone experienced most of the following-


.

1. level variety/design. wide open spaces, corridoors, underwater tunnels, catacombs and so on. not just two hubs seperated by office levels(slight exaggeration). plenty of secrets to find, NPCs to get info, passwords and items from. no invisible walls. variety of colour. multiple paths and swimming.

2. reaction to the player in the main story and random events, such as killing the soldier at the top of the statue and the womens bathroom incident.
the encounter with shannon changes her attitude towards you the next 3 visits to UNATCO
(the reaction throughout the game is not consistent, however, but still incredibly deep)

3. the immersion- always in first person except conversations, levels based on real-world locations, interact with many things, no objective markers, HUD is your augmentation, everything felt natural, side quests were not "side quests" so to speak- no huge objective markers in your face. side quests were requests from people that you can decide to help or not.

4. the music- just incredible, powerful, engaging, catchy, atmospheric at times, matches each location perfectly.

5. variety of NPCs each with their own distinct personality. some have a purpose like selling you items or info/passwords, others just add to the immersion. some try to attack you for interfering with their drug deals others you can have deep conversations with.

6. the story. im not even gonna go into this, everyone is agreed about the awesome story

7. gameplay- choice and consequence(you cant have all skills, augs and guns in one playthrough) inventory management, weapon modding, item resourcement(lockpicks, multitools, medkits ect) skill system adds depth to character development and makes progressing through the game extremely fun.
augs are alot of fun too- mainly speed augmentation for exploring every part of a level and reaching the many places otherwise not accessible without stacking boxes. its also great for taking short cuts and escaping danger.
interacting with everything, NPCs and thier impact on gameplay, large variety of enemies and obstacles, so many secret areas that it takes multiple playthroughs to discover them all. the levels that you traverse through are great they add to the gameplay too. and so much more...
:

Oddness
16th Sep 2011, 02:43
They are good people at heart though? i got that impression from the non-lethal-ness, the achievements(most dont involve killing except bosses and the fall quest) and the credits most of all. they just didnt understand DX that is all.
i will still keep an eye on thier future projects. because DX:HR is great. just not DX1 level of great, but hey, what other game is right?

so yeah i shall stay supportive for now. ill see the result of this in-game advertisement rumour first.

It's all irrelevant. Ultimately, as they said, they're just making a game they feel will appeal to the majority of players, original game and fans be damned. Coming from that perspective they are flat out incapable of making a worthy sequel to Deus Ex, and that perspective isn't one that should be rewarded with success as far as I'm concerned.

unbeatableDX
16th Sep 2011, 06:45
this is bad, real bad. the ads are in.

you know i believe the devs were more influenced by blade runner and metal gear solid than deus ex1 when creating this game.

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqcvcqaNxm1qer56zo1_500.jpg

it should be JC denton who jensen high fives, after all they are making cash from his name

Jordasm
16th Sep 2011, 08:36
Hopefully they'll realize the error of their ways when Dishonored comes out and everybody loves it.


And I cannot wait for that day :D
Dishonored will be amazing.



you know i believe the devs were more influenced by blade runner and metal gear solid than deus ex1 when creating this game.

This I agree with completely, Blade runners fine, but I actually played through MGS4 yesterday...there's quite a few similarities...

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 09:31
but I actually played through MGS4 yesterday...there's quite a few similarities...

The only difference is, you're actually playing something most of the time.

(obvious troll is obvious I know :D)

JacobBHE
16th Sep 2011, 13:55
''We’re you hoping for a first-person-only experience? With no cover system, no regen, lean keys, no take-downs, melee combat and everything in the environment being interactive?''

OK so you did understand what people wanted then, you just chose to ignore it. That's hilarious.

''If you were, then I’m sorry for you, but that’s not the game we set out to create, because that’s not the game we felt the majority of players wanted to play.''

Just at what point did you imagine that Deus Ex fans wouldn't want a Deus Ex game? No wonder you were so so quiet over the last 3 years.

''Simulation may be very immersive, but it’s not always fun. It may even be quite the opposite in some instances.''

You have completely missed the point haven't you. This is what happens when the wrong people get hold of the right IP.

The only conclusion to come to after this little confession is the question: Why would anyone trust Eidos Montreal after this?

Sure HR has it's good moment's but don't think for one minute you made anywhere near the mark of a great game like the original did.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 14:00
''If you were, then I’m sorry for you, but that’s not the game we set out to create, because that’s not the game we felt the majority of players wanted to play.''

Just at what point did you imagine that Deus Ex fans wouldn't want a Deus Ex game? No wonder you were so so quiet over the last 3 years.



That's the point, they weren't talking about what Deus Ex fans want to play. They are targeting the (much larger) mass of people who never played, or never completed, or have never even heard of Deus Ex.

I'm not saying that ALL Deus Ex fans didn't like DX:HR (clearly some of you did). But fans of the original were never the target audience. Yeah, it hurts, especially since they're making money off the name and goodwill of the original. But that's how it is, apparently. :hmm:

JCpies
16th Sep 2011, 15:21
That's the point, they weren't talking about what Deus Ex fans want to play. They are targeting the (much larger) mass of people who never played, or never completed, or have never even heard of Deus Ex.

To get funding and make a profit for a game like this, you can't just target the 10,000 hardcore fans.


I'm not saying that ALL Deus Ex fans didn't like DX:HR (clearly some of you did). But fans of the original were never the target audience. Yeah, it hurts, especially since they're making money off the name and goodwill of the original. But that's how it is, apparently. :hmm:

I think they've done a lot for us. The references, the easter eggs, the community Questions and Answers, they gave us the toggle of highlighting and objective markers etc. People are being too critical of the developers.



it should be JC denton who jensen high fives, after all they are making cash from his name

There's no JC Denton figure anyway.

guillaume.oudin
16th Sep 2011, 16:06
Were you hoping for a first-person-only experience?

Yes. As it has been mentionned countless times in this thread and many others on this forum and all around the internet, DX is (among other things) about an immersive world and the 3rd person view, despite offering good gameplay options, IS an immersion breaker. That being said, it's all about compromise and the issue people have about DXHR not being as immersive as the first DX is not due to the 3rd person, because it is somewhat transparent during the game. It's much more about the restricted options, like :
- I can move this box but not this one despite the fact they look exactly the same
-Invisible walls
-Bigger maps that would allow for even more options and gameplay combinations
-No real acknowldegement of the player choices during the story
-RPG-side under-developed (except augmentations) : Sidequests with no feedback whatsoever, no real consequences, no choices that matter, no character development

Metal Gear Solid is an amazing game that has been regularly cited as one of the inspirations by the team.

The thing is I like playing Metal Gear Solid, but not for the same reasons I like playing DX. I enjoy Metal Gear Solid the way I enjoy a good movie. I enjoy Deus Ex the same way I enjoy a good book. Harder to get into it, but deeper and more rewarding in the end.


With no cover system, no regen, lean keys, no take-downs, melee combat and everything in the environment being interactive?

No. I am sorry but what is the logical link between "First person experience" and "No cover, no regen, no take-downs, no melee combat, nothing interactive [...] (In one word : nothing worthy gameplay-wise)"

I grant you the 3rd person cover system was a good idea and a nice improvement of the gameplay during stealth phases, it is just maybe not 100% fitting with the DX philosophy, the way I see it.

Regarding melee combat : yes it is hard to implement in 1st person but far from impossible and I would have liked to have it available as an option. Take-downs weren't a bad idea, it's just the fact that melee combat was reduced to take-downs only that was an issue. IMO it should have been harder to get the augmentation allowing takedowns because it was way too easy having it from the beginning.

Regarding environment being interactive : the game certainly missed on this point. Someone from the team said that simply transposing DX gameplay elements into a more modern setting wouldn't work, yet that's exactly what has been done regarding environment interaction. It wasn't that bad, but it could have been a lot better, especially giving proper physics to office furniture for instance.

Ashpolt
16th Sep 2011, 16:30
To get funding and make a profit for a game like this, you can't just target the 10,000 hardcore fans.

:mad2: Come on JC, let's not trot out that old argument again. You've been on here more than long enough to have heard all the debate around that line, and exactly why it's fallacious.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 16:32
To get funding and make a profit for a game like this, you can't just target the 10,000 hardcore fans.


Incorrect. You can profit from releasing a game like the original Deus Ex in the modern market. You just might not make Call of Duty or Halo money. That's the problem- everything is so driven by the need to make huge, windfall profits...a small success is subsequently considered a failure.

I'm sorry, but I don't think every game has to be an absolute blockbuster to be considered worthy or successful. Yeah, your Eidos shareholders certainly want to make as much $$$ as possible. That's what Tomb Raider is for. That's what Kane & Lynch and all of your other properties are for. Fun games, brand name games, games that are popular but not incredibly deep and easy to mass produce.

Deus Ex is not those games. Quite honestly, I kind of bristle at the idea of Deus Ex ever becoming a "franchise" in the first place. Something about the Law of Diminishing Returns...?




I think they've done a lot for us. The references, the easter eggs, the community Questions and Answers, they gave us the toggle of highlighting and objective markers etc. People are being too critical of the developers.


These are appreciated, for sure, but they amount to little more than fan service.

What I want is to feel the jaw-dropping "holy crap, this game is watching me!" sensation when I perform an action and witness characters respond to my decisions in dynamic ways. I want to feel like I really can do whatever the **** I want to and the game world will react accordingly. I want to feel the genuine hatred for a jerk like Walton Simons, or real attachment to my brother Paul (and a desire for vengeance when he is killed, or joy when I discover I saved him).

All of those things made Deus Ex special. That's what the developers should've been aiming for, not amping up the "coolness" factor or gunplay.

MaxxQ1
16th Sep 2011, 16:35
What I want is to feel the jaw-dropping "holy crap, this game is watching me!" sensation when I perform an action and witness characters respond to my decisions in dynamic ways. I want to feel like I really can do whatever the **** I want to and the game world will react accordingly. I want to feel the genuine hatred for a jerk like Walton Simons, or real attachment to my brother Paul (and a desire for vengeance when he is killed, or joy when I discover I saved him).

All of those things made Deus Ex special. That's what the developers should've been aiming for, not amping up the "coolness" factor or gunplay.

Marry me!












:rasp:

JCpies
16th Sep 2011, 16:55
I'm too lazy to post a proper response right now, but I'm just going to say that I'm sure the developers have no prejudices against the hardcore fans, like someone said, it's not an easy to make game and they had to cut a lot of content anyway. If I ever become a multi-multi-millionaire, I'll be sure to pay for the perfect Deus Ex game at the expense of lack of profit (I'm being serious) although I'd rather spend the money on advancing science or helping the world.

unbeatableDX
16th Sep 2011, 17:07
I'm too lazy to post a proper response right now, but I'm just going to say that I'm sure the developers have no prejudices against the hardcore fans, like someone said, it's not an easy to make game and they had to cut a lot of content anyway. If I ever become a multi-multi-millionaire, I'll be sure to pay for the perfect Deus Ex game at the expense of lack of profit (I'm being serious) although I'd rather spend the money on advancing science or helping the world.

creating the perfect deus ex game is advancing science :thumb:
be sure to get enough money to help the world AND make the perfect dx game. all hope lies with JC.

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 17:49
Incorrect. You can profit from releasing a game like the original Deus Ex in the modern market. You just might not make Call of Duty or Halo money. That's the problem- everything is so driven by the need to make huge, windfall profits...a small success is subsequently considered a failure.

Actually, you can't do an AAA game and sells little, not if you don't have several games successfull on the side. And Square Enix is not in this category anymore (less and less)




What I want is to feel the jaw-dropping "holy crap, this game is watching me!" sensation when I perform an action and witness characters respond to my decisions in dynamic ways. I want to feel like I really can do whatever the **** I want to and the game world will react accordingly. I want to feel the genuine hatred for a jerk like Walton Simons, or real attachment to my brother Paul (and a desire for vengeance when he is killed, or joy when I discover I saved him).

All of those things made Deus Ex special. That's what the developers should've been aiming for, not amping up the "coolness" factor or gunplay.

Well they just aimed for others things, that they did successfully, like the emotion impact on the player. It's more subtle and it doesn't work on all people, but it's something that is more in adequation with the present time and where the media wants to go. And Malik is exactly like Paul in that regard, except that you aren't surprise that you can save her, because this is Deus Ex, so your jaw drop moment is lost right here. They can't really do a thing about it, it's just not unique anymore, that's all.
For the others tries, t's not better, it's not worst (except if you didn't feel it), just different than the first one.

itsonyourhead
16th Sep 2011, 18:37
To get funding and make a profit for a game like this, you can't just target the 10,000 hardcore fans.

There is so much wrong with this statement.

Video game culture is transforming independent of what the developers do. This is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc. I'd hold that had video games attained and maintained the level of quality of Deus Ex, we'd still be seeing the massive number of video game players we are today. The fact is that video games are gaining popularity regardless of it's type.

If you are going to make a Deus Ex game -- target the Deus Ex audience. It's huge!! Over 2 million people and climbing. But if you are going to make a Deus Ex game, make it as good of a Deus Ex game as you can.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 18:56
Actually, you can't do an AAA game and sells little, not if you don't have several games successfull on the side. And Square Enix is not in this category anymore (less and less)


I get so tired of all this talk about "AAA titles" and whatnot. Gaming studios are huge now, and yet the overall quality of the games has suffered.

It's like when Infinity Ward hires Sam Worthington, Ice Cube, and Gary freakin' Oldman to voice characters in the game- why?? Isn't that a budget item that could be better spent on building a smarter AI system, or a command menu for friendly NPCs, or an actual plot that makes any kind of sense?

Games are prettier these days, no question. But they are also:

1. Easier (why make a game difficult when the average gamer is expected to play a new game for less than three weeks, then move on to the next disposable piece-of-junk?)
2. Rushed (crank out as many titles as you can for maximum profit)
3. Generic (familiarity is safe, no risk involved, what has sold in the past will sell again in the future)
4. Less Stable (no time for adequate bug testing, gotta make that release date!)








Well they just aimed for others things, that they did successfully, like the emotion impact on the player. It's more subtle and it doesn't work on all people, but it's something that is more in adequation with the present time and where the media wants to go. And Malik is exactly like Paul in that regard, except that you aren't surprise that you can save her, because this is Deus Ex, so your jaw drop moment is lost right here. They can't really do a thing about it, it's just not unique anymore, that's all.
For the others tries, t's not better, it's not worst (except if you didn't feel it), just different than the first one.

Do not try to tell me the reason I don't connect with DX:HR's characters as much as DX1's is because "they are more subtle." Just...don't.

Reven
16th Sep 2011, 19:03
...1. Easier (why make a game difficult when the average gamer is expected to play a new game for less than three weeks, then move on to the next disposable piece-of-junk?

I think you nailed part of the problem right there. Modern games are treated like slush fund currency and many Dev's know it and that lets them get away with the pure lazyness that is affecting the rest of the industry.

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 19:03
Do not try to tell me the reason I don't connect with DX:HR's characters as much as DX1's is because "they are more subtle." Just...don't.

Good because it's not what I meant...
It's the emotions that they tried to convey to the players that are more subtle, or less generic if you want.
I mean, your brother in the game, of course it's gonna be way easier to feel something about him, that all the innocents of the Alice Pod ambush or a random NPC that had a caring wife. Like I already said, it would have been dumb to try to exactly replicate the first one, because it probably wouldn't have been better. They tried to make something a little different, some things worked, some things didn't. In Deus Ex, we remembered almost all things that worked but we tend to forget what didn't.



It's like when Infinity Ward hires Sam Worthington, Ice Cube, and Gary freakin' Oldman to voice characters in the game- why?? Isn't that a budget item that could be better spent on building a smarter AI system, or a command menu for friendly NPCs, or an actual plot that makes any kind of sense?


Taking the worst example sure makes a lot of sense. I don't see how Human Revolution is generic or rushed... 4 years of development, they didn't have enough time to make the game they wanted, but it wasn't rushed at all. 4 years are a lot nowadays. Besides, Square Enix had already delay the game once, and it's more that a lot of editors would have done (The Fallout games are ******* awful because they're full of bugs, and it's still the case several years after their release... well for Fallout 3 anyway)
Human Revolution is easier, but they didn't go in a New Game+ bull**** at least, and there is replayability (not as much as in Deus Ex but still)

itsonyourhead
16th Sep 2011, 19:13
Deus Ex was not rushed, generic, or slush at all.

But they decreased the team size as well as increasing the development cycle.

What they needed to do was keep a sizeable team as well as increase the development cycle, and not be afraid to divy up the work a little more.

I don't see why they couldn't have one team working on one city hub, and another working on another, and a certain group that coordinates the common threads between them.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 19:15
Good because it's not what I meant...
It's the emotions that they tried to convey to the players that are more subtle, or less generic if you want.
I mean, your brother in the game, of course it's gonna be way more easier to feel something about him, that all the innocents of the Alice Pod ambush or a random NPC that had a caring wife.


I think what you're aiming at is the scope, which is certainly more concentrated in DX:HR (you're not really dealing with world-changing conspiracies and massive organizations like in DX1). I don't necessarily mind this. It's okay for me to deal with a smaller sub-section of the Deus Ex universe.

But the way you connect with characters is to get to know them, be they heroes (Paul, Nicolette, Jaime), villains (Gunther, Anna, Simons), or middle-of-the-road types (Harley Filben, Daedalus, Jock, Tracer Tong).

In DX:HR, you spend almost no time around characters like Barrett, or Fedorova, or Zhao, or Darrow. You don't know their individual quirks, you don't really find out much about their past, or their goals, or their perspective. I mean, remember reading the journal in the Paris cathedral about the MJ12 agent who was creeped out by Gunther and had overheard him crying? Where is that kind of character development in DX:HR?

The three characters you spend the most time around (Pritchard, Malik, and Sarif) are the strongest developed. What a shocker! And yeah, Malik has some emotional attachment connected to her fate. Megan Reed? Not so much.

And if you want me to care about bossfights, why not give Barrett the same treatment? And don't tell me to go buy a copy of The Icarus Effect.

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 19:28
Well I already had this conversation with someone, maybe it was already you. In Deus Ex, you got to work with the villains before they were actually revealed to be villains, even Maggie Chow. So, again, it was much easier to connect with them.
Here, if they would have been the same kind of thing, it would have been dumb and predictable. I mean, I'm probably not the only one that waited Sarif's betrayal at one point or another because I thought they fell for this kind of obvious path (again, because we are in a Deus Ex game), and in fact, they didn't so it's a good thing.

The Tyrants are simple pawns so it doesn't really matter much to me. Again, it's just different than in Deus Ex and I prefer 10 000 times that than bosses like MGS completely ridiculous.
But I agree with you on the neutral ones.
Again, for Pritchard and Sarif for example, they tried to convey a lot of thing to the players if you watch their office environment. Same with Adam's appartment, and that is a new thing that wasn't in the first one. Malik was a different one because she had subquest related to her, so it was more like Deus Ex-y for her.

itsonyourhead
16th Sep 2011, 19:32
In any case no one has been able to answer this question for me. Seriously! I want someone to answer this question.

What was boring in Deus Ex because of the immersive sim design?

Seriously. I want to know what people found boring. I was never bored. But I think if I understood what and why people found something boring in Deus Ex I would be better able to understand their design decisions.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 19:35
Well I already had this conversation with someone, maybe it was already you. In Deus Ex, you got to work with the villains before they were actually revealed to be villains, even Maggie Chow. So, again, it was much easier to connect with them.
Here, if they would have been the same kind of thing, it would have been dumb and predictable. I mean, I'm probably not the only one that waited Sarif's betrayal at one point or another because I thought, they fell for this kind of obvious path (again, because we are in a Deus Ex game), and in fact, they didn't so it's a good thing.

The Tyrants are simple pawns so it doesn't really matter much to me. Again, it's just different than in Deus Ex and I prefer 10 000 times that than bosses like MGS completely ridiculous.
But I agree with you on the neutral ones.
Again, for Pritchard and Sarif for example, they tried to convey a lot of thing to the players if you watch their office environment. The same with Adam's appartment, and that is a new thing that wasn't in the first one. Malik was a different one because she had subquest related to her, so it was more like Deus Ex for her.

Well, I agree that the Big Twist wouldn't have worked in DX:HR because everyone would've been expecting it.

But look at the terrorist in the top of the Statue of Liberty. Or the guy in the hidden room in the Mole People tunnels. These could've easily been turned in to boss battle moments. But JC still has a chance to speak to Leo Gold, and the guy (who you never see again) has some of the most memorable dialogue in the game. "You can't fight ideas with bullets." Could very well be the game's motto.

There is never a chance to try to "talk down" a boss. Yeah, there's the cutscene with Zhao. And you have no control over what Adam says or does in this cutscene. You are forced to sit back and watch. Besides, does anyone think Adam behaved as anything other than a total moron in this scene? Why force that on us?

Give us a chance to hear villains speak. At the very least, let us find some back story to them through an e-mail or something. Anything at all! For god's sake, give them at least one line of dialogue (Fedorova, I'm looking at you).

itsonyourhead
16th Sep 2011, 19:39
Well, I agree that the Big Twist wouldn't have worked in DX:HR because everyone would've been expecting it.

Right...
Because we weren't expecting the save Malik moment?
Or the... you've been in the woman's bathroom moment?

Coyotegrey
16th Sep 2011, 19:57
Games are prettier these days, no question. But they are also:

1. Easier (why make a game difficult when the average gamer is expected to play a new game for less than three weeks, then move on to the next disposable piece-of-junk?)
2. Rushed (crank out as many titles as you can for maximum profit)
3. Generic (familiarity is safe, no risk involved, what has sold in the past will sell again in the future)
4. Less Stable (no time for adequate bug testing, gotta make that release date!)

If you're saying DX:HR was rushed...that's madness!

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 20:01
If you're saying DX:HR was rushed...that's madness!

I'm not saying it was rushed, and we all remember the release date being pushed back from Q1/Q2 2011 (after the Final Fantasy XIII debacle).

However, if you are telling me that content such as Montreal and upper Shanghai wasn't cut because of development time, I'm going to quite frankly say, "I don't believe you." Sure, it's extremely common for developers (including the Ion Storm team) to come up with big, broad plans that eventually get whittled down in to a more coherent end product. Obviously there is no moon mission in DX1, or Texas mission, or White House, etc.

But Coyote, are you honestly saying that most games out there aren't rushed out to meet more demanding deadlines?

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 20:05
But look at the terrorist in the top of the Statue of Liberty. Or the guy in the hidden room in the Mole People tunnels. These could've easily been turned in to boss battle moments. But JC still has a chance to speak to Leo Gold, and the guy (who you never see again) has some of the most memorable dialogue in the game. "You can't fight ideas with bullets." Could very well be the game's motto.


Well there is this kind of things. Zelazny for example and pretty much all the subquests can be completed with killing people or talking to them. But yeah, there is no "useless discussion" (storywise I mean) though, and that was a great thing in Deus Ex.



Besides, does anyone think Adam behaved as anything other than a total moron in this scene? Why force that on us?


Yeah, I thought so too. I read a possible (fanmade?) explanation that Zhao had a CASIE aug in fact but even if it's greatly plausible, it's not mentionned anywhere so... :rolleyes:
I agree completely that Adam seemed really dumb. I still don't understand if Adam was too dumb to correctly set the bomb in the Belltower Docks or if it was a trap from Tong's explosives ^^
I think that the cutscenes exist because they didn't have time to rethink the boss battle. It's pretty much heavy related because Zhao is the final boss.



Give us a chance to hear villains speak. At the very least, let us find some back story to them through an e-mail or something. Anything at all! For god's sake, give them at least one line of dialogue (Fedorova, I'm looking at you).

Well, you just said that they tried to tempting you in buying the book. If there was some lines, it would've been more obvious to me.
You buy the book, the Tyrants are developed and explained. They worked several times for the Illuminatis and they know what/who they are. I haven't read the book so I might be mistaken (well 100% sure tbh ^^), and I think that Federova is mute in the book, which is explain why she hadn't one line of texts (not sure like I said ^^)
You don't buy the book. They're simple pawns, just blocking your path.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Sep 2011, 20:10
Well, you just said that they tried to tempting you in buying the book. If there was some lines, it would've been more obvious to me.
You buy the book, the Tyrants are developed and understood. They worked several times for the Illuminatis and they know what/who they are. I haven't read the book so I might be mistaken, and I think that Federova is mute in the book, which is explain why she hadn't one line of texts (not sure like I said ^^)
You don't buy the book. They're simple pawns, just blocking your path.

Look, I like the idea of the Deus Ex universe being expanded and fleshed-out in novel form. But don't make it essential for me to read the book in order to care about the villians.

It's not even that big a deal if Fedorova is a mute (it makes her a unique character). So why not have her stalking you throughout the game, like Jason or Michael Myers? A silent, murderous, bloodthirsty killer who is tracking your every move. Toss in warnings from people over the infolink. "Jensen, there's someone else in the building. I don't know who, but she's definitely augmented. Watch your back." Or read in a police officer's report about how an unknown assassin matching Fedorova's description was spotted in the area and killed an officer who was tailing her. Or something.

Just give us time to grow to love/hate/fear the characters. Don't throw them at us in some artificial arena and go "well, here ya go. Kill or be killed, buddy."

imported_BoB_
16th Sep 2011, 20:13
Yeah I agree, a Metroid Fusion kind of relation would have worked wonderfully in empty offices of Picus HQ :D

It's actually the first thing I thought about when I discover the area because I knew that the fight with the second boss was imminent timewise ^^

Coyotegrey
16th Sep 2011, 20:25
But Coyote, are you honestly saying that most games out there aren't rushed out to meet more demanding deadlines?

I never said such a thing, nor implied it.

unbeatableDX
16th Sep 2011, 20:28
well in the end we got to experience the masterpiece that is DX1.
cherish it forever, there will never be another one like it.
well maybe dishonoured, but i remain skeptical.

unbeatableDX
16th Sep 2011, 20:47
:)

JCpies
16th Sep 2011, 21:04
:)

I guess you don't have anything constructive to say after all.

thedosbox
17th Sep 2011, 00:05
Really? Why? I'm on my second play-through (and still loving it) and can certainly see where the simulation is heavily gimped.

Absolutely. But did that stop me from having some of the most gaming fun in years? Nope.

But then I don't feel that being able to "simulate" a melee assault in first person was that important to the experience of the game (in reference to a post further down-thread).

unbeatableDX
17th Sep 2011, 00:23
I guess you don't have anything constructive to say after all.

like what smartass? he didnt require a response at all i just put a face cos otherwise id rage.

maybe there will be a better game, maybe there wont. chances are there will be but i doubt it anytime soon the way the industry is atm. and like i said, dishonoured could well be that game but i shall remain skeptical for now.

imported_BoB_
17th Sep 2011, 00:30
Actually there won't be one for people completely blind about the flaws of the game and that don't know to put aside all their love for the game they got through multiple playthroughs and several years to compare the others games objectively.

I think that someone that don't know the first one can have the same shock about Human Revolution that Deus Ex had on us 10 years ago. And he won't necessarily enjoy the first one more even after playing it.

unbeatableDX
17th Sep 2011, 06:53
I think that someone that don't know the first one can have the same shock about Human Revolution that Deus Ex had on us 10 years ago. And he won't necessarily enjoy the first one more even after playing it.

we shall see about that. i have convinced a friend to play dx1 once he has completed human rev and dead island. and i dont think anyone is blind to its flaws- just look at how the AI moves! you cant miss it! only immersion breaker in the game. graphics i dont see as a flaw at all though. they were limited by technology and in Warren Spector's postmortem of dx1 he states that they concentrated on gameplay more than graphics, and that is how it always should be imo.

anyways apologies for moaning about the game EM. it is a masterpiece in its own right and one of the greater games of recent years.

Pinky_Powers
17th Sep 2011, 07:30
Absolutely. But did that stop me from having some of the most gaming fun in years? Nope.

Nor me. But I'll never forgive them for removing melee weapons. :D

Painman
17th Sep 2011, 09:41
I'm a pragmatist. I've been trying to look at the brighter side of gaming ever since Ion Storm consolized IW and Deadly Shadows, knowing that you have to accept the bad with the good if you want to halfway enjoy much of anything nowadays.

There are a handful of studios still making games for diehards. Look at Egosoft and the X series of games, pushing ahead with what was established decades ago with Elite and also Wing Commander: Privateer. Egosoft is far from being a commercial giant, though, and relies heavily upon its modding community in order to keep its games viable and playable.

We have both extremes nowadays. Big studios making mostly dumbed-down games for mainstream genres, and small studios supporting niche genres, but at the same time, biting off far more than they can chew.

I think EM managed to thread the needle with this game. Casuals and diehards both can find something to like within, but if you were expecting some sort of conceptual purity, then maybe it's time to find another hobby. And if this is the first time you've ever felt the harsh sting of blown expectations over a game, then you're about 8 years late to the party. But there are still plenty of kazoos and funny hats to go around.

I've been at this gaming thing for longer than many of you have even been alive. Not trying to invalidate anyone's opinion here; just providing some context for my own opinion. You gotta roll with the changes, for better or for worse.

imported_BoB_
17th Sep 2011, 13:37
I think EM managed to thread the needle with this game. Casuals and diehards both can find something to like within, but if you were expecting some sort of conceptual purity, then maybe it's time to find another hobby. And if this is the first time you've ever felt the harsh sting of blown expectations over a game, then you're about 8 years late to the party. But there are still plenty of kazoos and funny hats to go around.

I've been at this gaming thing for longer than many of you have even been alive. Not trying to invalidate anyone's opinion here; just providing some context for my own opinion. You gotta roll with the changes, for better or for worse.

Exactly.

If you want to judge a game now, you have to judge it on his own time period because if you always compare it to previous generation of games, it will never satisfy you and the nostalgia factor can slant your opinion even more.

And if you do that, well Human Revolution is one of the best game of the last 5 years. Like you said, every type of players can find something in it, and I will go further to say that every platform (PC and console players) can enjoy the game and it's been pretty rare lately because console games have crappy ports on PC and vice versa.

Jibbajabba
17th Sep 2011, 13:55
I see the the tag of this thread is 'crying fanboys' - it should reallybe 'whinging fanboys'. I have played every DX game and I love HR. In the last few years there were only three games I loved to bits and made sure I even get every single achievement, oh which DX:HR is one of them.

I think it is very reasonable that they needed to make sure not just DX:1 owner love the game, but everyone does, or at least the majority, and the sales proved them right ..... There will always be a few here and there who hate the game, so sell it, move on and go back to the game you love... no need to spread your hate :p

Krankor
17th Sep 2011, 14:41
We put it in because it made stealth better and workable by allowing you to see your environment and move while remaining hidden.


I think they could have left the 3rd person out and use the Augmentations!

This way the player would use the 'see-through' augment to know when to move around instead of having a free survey tool.


Casuals and diehards both can find something to like within, but if you were expecting some sort of conceptual purity, then maybe it's time to find another hobby.

Except 'stock footage' endings... Everyone hates those... I'd rather the game came out 2~3 months later and be 'complete.'

ⓣⓐⓕⓕⓔⓡ
17th Sep 2011, 15:51
http://perennialreflection.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/aussie-haterade.gif

Psiven
17th Sep 2011, 16:37
I don't understand why they think that first-person only means no cover system, no takedowns, etc.

I want a cover system, in first person with peeking around corners. DX1 had a very primitive version.

I want takedowns, that happen in first person and don't freeze time for the duration.

I want everything in the environment to be interactive, and I don't know why they would mention that in the same breath because it was clearly not a gameplay issue. It was development time better spent elsewhere, CPU usage better spent elsewhere, and it screws up the golden highlight system. I get it (but I still blame the consoles for the CPU considerations and highlight system).

All of these things should be possible through mods. I look forward to the possibilities.

itsonyourhead
17th Sep 2011, 17:31
I see the the tag of this thread is 'crying fanboys' - it should reallybe 'whinging fanboys'. I have played every DX game and I love HR. In the last few years there were only three games I loved to bits and made sure I even get every single achievement, oh which DX:HR is one of them.

I think it is very reasonable that they needed to make sure not just DX:1 owner love the game, but everyone does, or at least the majority, and the sales proved them right ..... There will always be a few here and there who hate the game, so sell it, move on and go back to the game you love... no need to spread your hate :p

Lol. This is fallacious. DX:HR would have sold just as well if not better had the developers stuck truer to the design principles of the original.

Defending their design decisions on the basis of sales is ridiculous. (Post hoc ergo propter hoc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc)).

They could have made a better game had they stayed truer to the principles driving the first game and done a better job in several areas. Period.

imported_BoB_
17th Sep 2011, 18:47
Lol. This is fallacious. DX:HR would have sold just as well if not better had the developers stuck truer to the design principles of the original.


You're wrong. Period.

Funny it works too :D

I don't know how you can affirm that the game would have sell more or not, but I can definitely see how it wouldn't have been the case if you look at the best sales in videogames of the last few years and the sales of the first and even the second game.

itsonyourhead
17th Sep 2011, 20:06
You're wrong. Period.

Funny it works too :D

I don't know how you can affirm that the game would have sell more or not, but I can definitely see how it wouldn't have been the case if you look at the best sales in videogames of the last few years and the sales of the first and even the second game.

I'm not saying that you are most assuredly wrong. I'm saying that you have nothing to back up your statement with. It is just as likely that staying truer to the design principles of the original would have netted more sales as it is that breaking from the original design features has let it do well.

Comparing Deus Ex sales to DX:HR sales is like comparing apples to oranges. Deus Ex has sold more than DX:HR ever will, and it came out 10 years ago when video games were far far less mainstream.

imported_BoB_
17th Sep 2011, 22:31
Deus Ex has sold more than DX:HR ever will, and it came out 10 years ago when video games were far far less mainstream.

OK, so you just don't know what you're talking about.
Deus Ex has never been a commercial hit, and in 2009, the sales were only of 1 million copies, and 1.2 million for Invisible War. Yeah... that bad (http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/46400/Eidos-Square-Enix-Sales-Figures-Revealed).

Squadr0n
17th Sep 2011, 23:19
I'm extremely disappointed by alot of the comments people have in been making in these threads.

Coming from someone who hasn't played any of the previous games in the series, this game has been a huge breath of fresh air. I've been a metal gear fan mainly but since there hasn't been a new metal gear in about a year I had been looking forward to this game for awhile thanks to the amazing trailers and previews.

After playing through DE: HR I purchased the original on steam and loaded up all the new texture packs to get the rest of the story and see what all the hype is about. Honestly I can't play it, I've tried many times and just can't get into it. The gameplay is soo bad. I think the main problem is how open and free the original is. There's no direction, just here's 3 weapon choices and an objective....go!

Human revolution deserves all the praise it's been getting because it can capture a hole new audience like me. Yea the boss fights aren't the best but I blame it on the fact that the bosses weren't given enough attention in the story. Metal gear is known for having some of the most memorable boss fights because they are developed so well in the story. You know about them individually before you go up against them. They each have a separate back story that's developed as the game progresses.

Anyone that's decided not to purchase this deus ex because they heard there's ads during the loading screens is just being rediculos. They aren't intrusive in anyway and don't make the experience any less amazing.

My only complaint is there's no way to no leathely finish a boss fight.

I applaud eidos for an amazing game and will pay any amount for more content to keep me playing!!! Please make more deus ex games in this universe, I will be patiently waiting!

Squadr0n
17th Sep 2011, 23:29
I work at gamestop full time. Whenever I have someone trading in DE:HR I ask how did they feel about it and almost every complaint is that they spec for stealth and hacking and the first boss just rapes them. I ran into the same issue my first play thru too but I learned that it still doesn't matter, theirs enough stuff to use in the environment to kill each boss easily no matter how you spec your character.

The other people who don't like it are the cod fans just looking for a new fps to keep them occupied and fins out they were completely wrong expecting this to be another fps.

Tverdyj
17th Sep 2011, 23:32
OK, so you just don't know what you're talking about.
Deus Ex has never been a commercial hit, and in 2009, the sales were only of 1 million copies, and 1.2 million for Invisible War. Yeah... that bad (http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/46400/Eidos-Square-Enix-Sales-Figures-Revealed).

hmm
keep in mind 2 things.
1) what was the size of the target audience (FPS+RPG players) in 2000?
2) what was the budget of the original?

somehow, I can guarantee you that if you look at "actual number of sales :target audience size" ratio and the "money from sales:production cost" ratio, DX will come out much more favorably to HR.


I'm extremely disappointed by alot of the comments people have in been making in these threads.

Coming from someone who hasn't played any of the previous games in the series, this game has been a huge breath of fresh air. I've been a metal gear fan mainly but since there hasn't been a new metal gear in about a year I had been looking forward to this game for awhile thanks to the amazing trailers and previews.

After playing through DE: HR I purchased the original on steam and loaded up all the new texture packs to get the rest of the story and see what all the hype is about. Honestly I can't play it, I've tried many times and just can't get into it. The gameplay is soo bad. I think the main problem is how open and free the original is. There's no direction, just here's 3 weapon choices and an objective....go!

Human revolution deserves all the praise it's been getting because it can capture a hole new audience like me. Yea the boss fights aren't the best but I blame it on the fact that the bosses weren't given enough attention in the story. Metal gear is known for having some of the most memorable boss fights because they are developed so well in the story. You know about them individually before you go up against them. They each have a separate back story that's developed as the game progresses.

Anyone that's decided not to purchase this deus ex because they heard there's ads during the loading screens is just being rediculos. They aren't intrusive in anyway and don't make the experience any less amazing.

My only complaint is there's no way to no leathely finish a boss fight.

I applaud eidos for an amazing game and will pay any amount for more content to keep me playing!!! Please make more deus ex games in this universe, I will be patiently waiting!

you know, I honestly fail to see the problem in the underlined. can you please elaborate?

Fluffis
17th Sep 2011, 23:38
The gameplay is soo bad. I think the main problem is how open and free the original is.

Wow. Those are two sentences I never thought I'd hear in conjunction with each other... I mean, the second one is a doozy all on its own.

Daedatheus
17th Sep 2011, 23:43
I think the main problem is how open and free the original is. There's no direction, just here's 3 weapon choices and an objective....go!

What....?

The one thing you choose to pick on in DX1 is the one thing that's probably the single best thing about the game?

Not sure if serious. Videogames aren't meant to be movies, and DX1 knew that. It's an interactive medium. DX1 let us actually play.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 00:11
Yea easily, most people on this board started with the original when it was fresh and new. It's hard for you to understand how people like me just trying it for the first time can't get into the outdated mechanics. Waiting for a targeting reticule to zoom in just to shoot accurately is disturbing.

The open world design is fun for a while but most of the time I'm just lost. I've started the first area atleast 4 times and cannot get through it.

What was good 10 years ago isn't always good now.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 00:18
Wow. Those are two sentences I never thought I'd hear in conjunction with each other... I mean, the second one is a doozy all on its own.

It's a good thing that eveyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I'm sure the game is still great, it wouldn't have achieved goty if it wasn't at the time. Games have come so far in 10 years,nthe original deus ex just doesn't stand the test of time.


Metal gear is the same way, I'll be the first to admit that. The birds eye view is jarring and makes the game almost harder. I don't want to have to put up with bad mechanics when I'm trying to play a great game.

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 00:22
Yea easily, most people on this board started with the original when it was fresh and new. It's hard for you to understand how people like me just trying it for the first time can't get into the outdated mechanics. Waiting for a targeting reticule to zoom in just to shoot accurately is disturbing.

The open world design is fun for a while but most of the time I'm just lost. I've started the first area atleast 4 times and cannot get through it.

What was good 10 years ago isn't always good now.

Wow... okay...

1. Outdated? No. RPG? Yes. Building a character from the bottom up.
2. It's not hard to understand. I won't expand on it.
3. What was good 10 years ago (Deus Ex), may still be considered the best PC game ever made. It's considered that for a reason.

Taking that into consideration, plus the underlined bit: ever considered that it may not be the game's fault?



the original deus ex just doesn't stand the test of time.

Basically every single PC game reviewer disagrees with you... just FYI.

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 00:27
hmm
keep in mind 2 things.
1) what was the size of the target audience (FPS+RPG players) in 2000?
2) what was the budget of the original?

somehow, I can guarantee you that if you look at "actual number of sales :target audience size" ratio and the "money from sales:production cost" ratio, DX will come out much more favorably to HR.


You're wrong.
Deus Ex in 2001/2002: 100,000/200,000 games sold top.
Deus Ex between 2001 and 2004: 500,000 games sold.
Half-Life between 1998 and 2004: 8 millions games sold.

When you create a game, you don't target the RPG/FPS market, you target the entire market or you're kind of dumb. Besides it would be FPS market + RPG market so potentially a larger market than Half-Life for example, so...

If there is an Invisible War, it's not because Deus Ex had made a huge profit, it's because the game was critically acclaimed like the best of all time (or near it, doesn't matter)
If that wasn't the case, they wouldn't had tried to dumbing it down/making it more approachable for larger audience in the first place, nor released it on console (with a remake of Deus Ex in the process)
And if Invisible War was profitable (I think that we can safely supposed that at least 1.1 million games were sold in 2004/2005 and that almost no one bought it after this time period :D), we wouldn't have waited 7 years for a new one.

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 00:45
I'm extremely disappointed by alot of the comments people have in been making in these threads.

Coming from someone who hasn't played any of the previous games in the series, this game has been a huge breath of fresh air. I've been a metal gear fan mainly but since there hasn't been a new metal gear in about a year I had been looking forward to this game for awhile thanks to the amazing trailers and previews.

After playing through DE: HR I purchased the original on steam and loaded up all the new texture packs to get the rest of the story and see what all the hype is about. Honestly I can't play it, I've tried many times and just can't get into it. The gameplay is soo bad. I think the main problem is how open and free the original is. There's no direction, just here's 3 weapon choices and an objective....go!

This is who I need to talk to.

What do you find off-putting about being able to tackle your objectives in an open environment? Is it too hard? Do you dislike challenges? Do you get lost easy? Do you not like being lost? What would you have wanted added to the tutorial to help you get a grasp on the game? Are you averse to similar situations in real life? Do you dislike experimenting and trying new things? Do you have persistence in the face of failure? Do you have a short attention span? Do you demand immediate gratification and rewards? Do you become impatient easily? Do you believe things should be easy?

How old are you? What was the first game you played? What games have you played over the years and which are your favorite?

How well do you/ have you done in school? What's your IQ? What's your job?

YoungZer0
18th Sep 2011, 00:54
Man, some of you people really make me sad.

You keep saying that no game will reach the greatness of DX1, while complaining that DX:HR didn't reach the greatness of DX1.

You keep saying that Eidos Montreal didn't understand what made DX1 so great, (even accuse them of just doing it for the money) while not saying what made DX1 so great. Which would've been useless anyway, since we all liked DX1 for different reasons. I found some of those things in DX:HR, while missing others. Don't hear me ***** and cry like a 12 year old.

You keep saying that DX1 is simulation, while it's not a simulation at all.

Sim City, Sims, ArmA. Those games are simulations. DX1 never was a simulation. It might have had some Sim Elements, but they weren't an important part of the gameplay. Calling it a simulation just proves how little you understand about the subject. I suggest you stop embarrassing yourself. There is a reason why these people have a job in the videogame industry and you don't.

Now, i have to say the responses from Frank comes off as pretty arrogrant and - if you care - very angry, but i can understand why. He and his team did seem to have been working very hard to make sure it still felt like a DX game. Then comes some Basement Creature, with no experience what-so-ever and tells them they f*d up Deus Ex. The Basement Creature didn't just say "I think you could've tried to go a different path with stealth, instead of using a 3rd person view, i mean".

The question had no style was a complete provocation. And now people feel offended and angry after his equally offended and angry response? You shouldn't be. You would have reacted the same way. There are simply things you can, can't, should and shouldn't do. You've to make those decision in the early stage, you can't just decide to include new features in the middle of development, you'll get delays (Harder Crunch Time) or worse; you'll end up with another Duke Nukem Forever. There, the developers were trying and trying and trying for years.

You can critize, but asking them "Why did you f'd up the whole game?", who wouldn't be angry about such question?


I don't see what's so difficult about doing stealth in first person. The developers of Riddick's Butcher Bay and Dark Athena have done it perfectly.

I agree, though i don't think it would've fit the current Art-Direction. While the game mixes the colors Black and Gold together, it's never dark. In facts it's very bright. The Stealth in BB and DA worked because the game had huge, dark shadows.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 00:54
Wow... okay...

Taking that into consideration, plus the underlined bit: ever considered that it may not be the game's fault?



Basically every single PC game reviewer disagrees with you... just FYI.



So ur implying it's my fault I don't like the game's design? LoL

And your second statement is just wrong. Every pc game reviewer that has done a retrospective on the original since HR has come out agrees with me that it does not stand the test of time. Please try to find a new review stating that it's still the best game ever

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 01:00
Yea easily, most people on this board started with the original when it was fresh and new. It's hard for you to understand how people like me just trying it for the first time can't get into the outdated mechanics. Waiting for a targeting reticule to zoom in just to shoot accurately is disturbing.

The open world design is fun for a while but most of the time I'm just lost. I've started the first area atleast 4 times and cannot get through it.

What was good 10 years ago isn't always good now.

The problem isn't that it isn't good. It's that you don't understand it.

Do this.

Start a new game.

Pick a gun type, I suggest pistols or rifles, and upgrade it to advanced, or if you wish, expert (if you can).

Now play the game.

Use your head.

Use stealth when a frontal assault will be suicide.

Use gas grenades to control large crowds. Or other explosives to take down groups or more difficult enemies.

Deus Ex was made in a culture where developers assumed players were of average intelligence, rather than complete idiots like they do now.

You want to be good with a gun? Make a character that's good with a gun. It's not that hard.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 01:02
sorry double post while trying to edit my original.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 01:33
This is who I need to talk to.

What do you find off-putting about being able to tackle your objectives in an open environment? Is it too hard? Do you dislike challenges? Do you get lost easy? Do you not like being lost? What would you have wanted added to the tutorial to help you get a grasp on the game? Are you averse to similar situations in real life? Do you dislike experimenting and trying new things? Do you have persistence in the face of failure? Do you have a short attention span? Do you demand immediate gratification and rewards? Do you become impatient easily? Do you believe things should be easy?

How old are you? What was the first game you played? What games have you played over the years and which are your favorite?

How well do you/ have you done in school? What's your IQ? What's your job?

Haha

The open environment works its just easy to get lost and loose intrest while playing. I need to sit down and really just get into it and see what works for me i guess. I just loved how Human Revolution worked and going from that to the original which is such a different play style was alil difficult for me.

The story and setting were what made me interested in DE:HR and i think the switch from augs to nanos really does make a difference for me.

to answer some of your questions tho, im 24... the first game i played was the original DOOM other than a few older games on the original 45 floppys. Im a HUGE metal gear fan and thats all i really play other than the occasional Gears of War or RPG.

I do well in school, and im a manager at my local Gamestop so i basically play games for a living.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 01:40
This thread isnt about which game is better between the original and DE:HR....

its about why the developers chose to drop most of the mechanics that made the original so great. Its because of people like me who havent played the original, a new audience to capture. Its hard to understand i know but times have changed. Deus Ex doesnt mean the game has to be completely open with ATMs. Its a story line and if they feel that a new play style is needed to capture a new audience then that is what has to be done.

Personally i feel they did an amazing job with HR and would gladly pay for more of this style of Deus Ex.

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 01:52
So ur implying it's my fault I don't like the game's design? LoL

No. It's the environment/your experience. You're used to playing rail-shooters and hand-holding games, so it's no big surprise that you don't like an open game, with multiple ways of solving problems.



And your second statement is just wrong. Every pc game reviewer that has done a retrospective on the original since HR has come out agrees with me that it does not stand the test of time. Please try to find a new review stating that it's still the best game ever

That's going to be hard to do, since there haven't been any "Top 100" or something like that, since HR came out - but here's the latest I can think of, off the top of my head: Places 10-1. (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/02/16/the-100-best-pc-games-of-all-time/10/) Guess which one's at the top?

Edit: From the review in PCGamer:


Is it as good as Deus Ex? Not quite – that slight shift away from improvisation and wide open spaces stops it just short. But it is absolutely the Deus Ex of our age, a genuinely worthy prequel, and a game that puts almost everything else in the genre to shame.


Note the use of "as good as", not "better than".

Edit2: From Eurogamer:


Sometimes, Deus Ex: Human Revolution is just the best Deus Ex tribute act ever.

[snip]

Sometimes, though - probably enough of the time that die-hard fans won't hold it up as high - Human Revolution doesn't quite live up to its ancestor.


"Tribute act"...

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 02:11
No. It's the environment/your experience. You're used to playing rail-shooters and hand-holding games, so it's no big surprise that you don't like an open game, with multiple ways of solving problems.


Wrong again lol, i dont play rail shooters or hand holding games.... the last three games ive played other than Dues Ex were Fallout 3, NV, and Demon's Souls....

Im sure if DE:HR was intended to be a pc only game Eidos would have considered making the game in the same tradition as the original but it wasnt. It was designed for all consoles so everyone could experience it. What do you think would sell more? appealing to the minority (the hard core Deus Ex fans.... ie : you) or the majority (people who own a pc or home consoles that havent been playing only Deus Ex since its release 10 years ago)

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 02:25
Wrong again lol, i dont play rail shooters or hand holding games.... the last three games ive played other than Dues Ex were Fallout 3, NV, and Demon's Souls....


Then I really don't understand how you can't get into Deus Ex, since it was basically the benchmark which games like that are trying to live up to.



Im sure if DE:HR was intended to be a pc only game Eidos would have considered making the game in the same tradition as the original but it wasnt. It was designed for all consoles so everyone could experience it. What do you think would sell more? appealing to the minority (the hard core Deus Ex fans.... ie : you) or the majority (people who own a pc or home consoles that havent been playing only Deus Ex since its release 10 years ago)

So do you consider simplification (or even dumbing down) in order to turn a fast buck, a good thing?

You have to understand something here: None of the people you're attacking here have actually only been playing DX for 10 years. We have probably played, jointly, most (if not all) games that have come out during that time. We still consider DX to be the greatest (or at least one of the greatest) games of all time.

The thing is: your arguments in this are more telling about you. You're the one who couldn't even get past the first level of DX, in order to try and see what the fuss is about. You're the one who gets lost on Liberty Island. You're the one who considers a game giving you multiple options "bad gameplay".

We've experienced exactly the same games as you, and we can still handle games like that... And you're trying to tell me that we're the bad ones here? Please.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 02:34
Then I really don't understand how you can't get into Deus Ex, since it was basically the benchmark which games like that are trying to live up to.



So do you consider simplification (or even dumbing down) in order to turn a fast buck, a good thing?

You have to understand something here: None of the people you're attacking here have actually only been playing DX for 10 years. We have probably played, jointly, most (if not all) games that have come out during that time. We still consider DX to be the greatest (or at least one of the greatest) games of all time.

The thing is: your arguments in this are more telling about you. You're the one who couldn't even get past the first level of DX, in order to try and see what the fuss is about. You're the one who gets lost on Liberty Island. You're the one who considers a game giving you multiple options "bad gameplay".

We've experienced exactly the same games as you, and we can still handle games like that... And you're trying to tell me that we're the bad ones here? Please.

I dont think i was attacking anyone here lol...you seem to be pretty much the only one who cares that i didnt like the first DX and you for sure cant take a joke.

this is a video game forum, a place where someone can post opinions. I didnt come here to get raped because you dont agree with how i feel. Just giving a fresh perspective from someone that didnt start with the original.

Ill keep trying to get into DX, i never got lost....i got bored lol. Its about the fun factor

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 02:52
appealing to the minority (the hard core Deus Ex fans.... ie : you) or the majority (people who own a pc or home consoles that havent been playing only Deus Ex since its release 10 years ago)


That is an attack. It is also severely uninformed.



this is a video game forum, a place where someone can post opinions. I didnt come here to get raped because you dont agree with how i feel. Just giving a fresh perspective from someone that didnt start with the original.


And I'm posting my opinions... the same as you. Only I have actual references and foundation to my posts. You're claiming that DX is a bad game that hasn't stood the test of time, because you can't manage to get past the first mission. I'm just pointing out how ridiculous that looks, on a forum where a majority of the members hold that very game as one of the greatest (possibly the greatest) of all time. And I've also provided evidence that it is still being hailed as one of the greatest (the greatest in one instance) of all time, by at least parts of the computer press.



Ill keep trying to get into DX, i never got lost....i got bored lol. Its about the fun factor


I'm getting the feeling that it is more about the speed-of-gratification factor.

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 02:54
I dont think i was attacking anyone here lol...you seem to be pretty much the only one who cares that i didnt like the first DX and you for sure cant take a joke.

this is a video game forum, a place where someone can post opinions. I didnt come here to get raped because you dont agree with how i feel. Just giving a fresh perspective from someone that didnt start with the original.

Ill keep trying to get into DX, i never got lost....i got bored lol. Its about the fun factor

How can you get bored?

I just don't understand it.

What, are you just standing there?

“Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.”

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 02:55
No. It's the environment/your experience. You're used to playing rail-shooters and hand-holding games, so it's no big surprise that you don't like an open game, with multiple ways of solving problems.



That's going to be hard to do, since there haven't been any "Top 100" or something like that, since HR came out - but here's the latest I can think of, off the top of my head: Places 10-1. (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/02/16/the-100-best-pc-games-of-all-time/10/) Guess which one's at the top?

Edit: From the review in PCGamer:


Note the use of "as good as", not "better than".


Edit2: From Eurogamer:


"Tribute act"...

Its funny, when i said find me a review i was just testing you to see what kind of person you were lol. defenitly have too much time on your hands if all your worried about is proving people online wrong and attempting to "own" people. Have fun hating on the Deus Ex Human Revolution fans on the Deus Ex Human Revolution Forum

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 02:58
Its funny, when i said find me a review i was just testing you to see what kind of person you were lol. defenitly have too much time on your hands if all your worried about is proving people online wrong and attempting to "own" people. Have fun hating on the Deus Ex Human Revolution fans on the Deus Ex Human Revolution Forum

I think DXHR is the best game of 2011.
I'm a fan of the game.
I just don't think it's as good as it's predecessor.

If you're taking your time "testing" people, I'm guessing you're not overly taxed by life yourself. If I wasn't on sick-leave from work, I wouldn't even be posting right now.

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 03:14
All i was trying to say earlier was that i just cant get into it because i wasnt there when the original came out. You cant understand why i cant get into it because you played it when it was the best game ever made. I never said it was a bad game, just that on today's standards its not that easy to hop into.

- Everything looks like crap, none of the starting environments look appealing.
-Shooting does not feel like shooting, its a dice roll similar to fallout 3
-DE:HR VO is by no means great but its award winning compared to the original
-stealth=being in shadows
-the ui and interface is so ugly
-hacking is just watching a blue bar fill up


i do like the fact that you can walk up on people as their having conversations that give insight as to whats going on and the base after you finish the combat on liberty island was cool. Being able to talk to everyone is what i like to do. But i have no drive to continue on. its nowhere near as engaging as HR to me.

If i was there from the beginning when Deus ex was Brand New im sure i would have loved it,

Tverdyj
18th Sep 2011, 03:46
All i was trying to say earlier was that i just cant get into it because i wasnt there when the original came out. You cant understand why i cant get into it because you played it when it was the best game ever made. I never said it was a bad game, just that on today's standards its not that easy to hop into.

- Everything looks like crap, none of the starting environments look appealing.
-Shooting does not feel like shooting, its a dice roll similar to fallout 3
-DE:HR VO is by no means great but its award winning compared to the original
-stealth=being in shadows
-the ui and interface is so ugly
-hacking is just watching a blue bar fill up


i do like the fact that you can walk up on people as their having conversations that give insight as to whats going on and the base after you finish the combat on liberty island was cool. Being able to talk to everyone is what i like to do. But i have no drive to continue on. its nowhere near as engaging as HR to me.

If i was there from the beginning when Deus ex was Brand New im sure i would have loved it,

I first played DX to completion in 2006. the same year I discovered Invisible War and Bloodlines.
it's a game that got me interested in First perspective games (prior to that I was an RTS junkie, and I always disliked pure shooters (still do))
Seeing as this was halfway between the time it came out and now, I don't really see your point.

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 03:52
All i was trying to say earlier was that i just cant get into it because i wasnt there when the original came out. You cant understand why i cant get into it because you played it when it was the best game ever made. I never said it was a bad game, just that on today's standards its not that easy to hop into.


Like I said: It is still considered the best (or at least one of the best) games ever made - by fans and professionals alike. That hasn't changed. It is just the product of a different era, and a different over-arching design philosophy - and so am I. You're the product of another over-arching game design philosophy. The difference here is; I can understand "your" design philosophy, and enjoy it for what it is. You can't understand "mine", and enjoy it for what it is.

Like I'm saying; it is not DX' fault that people of the "new generation", like you, can't get into it. It's the change in development philosophy that has made things that way. You're a product of it, and that is not your "fault" (insofar as there is any kind of fault here) in any way - it's just a simple fact.



- Everything looks like crap, none of the starting environments look appealing.
-Shooting does not feel like shooting, its a dice roll similar to fallout 3
-DE:HR VO is by no means great but its award winning compared to the original
-stealth=being in shadows
-the ui and interface is so ugly
-hacking is just watching a blue bar fill up


i do like the fact that you can walk up on people as their having conversations that give insight as to whats going on and the base after you finish the combat on liberty island was cool. Being able to talk to everyone is what i like to do. But i have no drive to continue on. its nowhere near as engaging as HR to me.

If i was there from the beginning when Deus ex was Brand New im sure i would have loved it,

* The graphics were considered sub-par when it came out. That's not a new issue. It's the reason why there is a sentiment like "I'm a DX fan! I don't care about graphics!", and it's only partially meant as a joke.
* Shooting is actual shooting, it's just that you start out really bad at it. No dice roll involved. Where the aim is, is where the bullet hits. You'll see it if you use laser sight and scope.
* You can stealth both in shadows and in cover. It's specified in the tutorial. In fact, cover is the best way to keep hidden.

DX basically has all the things EM put into DXHR - and more (hacking being an exception, but that really started to grate on me towards the end of my first playthrough, tbh). DX is a deeper game experience, but it also requires more of the person playing it in order for that person to have that experience. If you're ready to put in the work, DX rewards you for it. If you're not, then you'll miss out on a lot. If you hold out your hand hoping for it to be held, it will bite you - or blow your legs off. ;)

Of course, most of this is pure opinion - but there are a lot of others out there, who share this opinion almost exactly.

Daedatheus
18th Sep 2011, 04:37
DX is a deeper game experience, but it also requires more of the person playing it in order for that person to have that experience. If you're ready to put in the work, DX rewards you for it. If you're not, then you'll miss out on a lot. If you hold out your hand hoping for it to be held, it will bite you - or blow your legs off. ;)

Of course, most of this is pure opinion - but there are a lot of others out there, who share this opinion almost exactly.

Totally agreed here, in fact I've even seen people playing DX:HR and getting confused (despite obnoxious objective markers, detailed objective lists, interactive maps, etc). It's amazing how little many gamers are willing to invest in the play experience, and how some barely pay attention.

Now I will say that the first time I played DX1 I put it down for a few months because I hated the first mission. But later on, spurred by the wave of "it's the greatest game ever" recommendations, I soldiered on, "learned 2 play," and thought it was amazing.


What was good 10 years ago isn't always good now.

In fact, I was absolutely floored by DX1 the first time I played it... and this was in 2008.


The story and setting were what made me interested in DE:HR and i think the switch from augs to nanos really does make a difference for me.

Honestly man, and I say this with full belief that DXHR does almost all of the (returning) gameplay elements better than DX1 (shooting, hacking, conversation etc), that the DXHR story pales in comparison with the narrative arc of DX1. Trust me on this.

I also agree that the first mission can be a pain in the ass before you learn to play the game. I actually hated it the first time as stated above. But soldier on, you'll figure it out and the game will start to fit like a glove (try playing the first mission again after beating the game, and you'll really wonder what you thought was so hard about it). Because DX:HR's story is a haphazard mouse-chasing-cheese plot compared to the DX1 plot, especially in how you actually move the plot forward. Keep playing and you'll soon forget about the graphics, forget about the time you've spent playing, and see what people are talking about.

Just remember to explore, and try things your gut feeling tells you but the game doesn't explicitly tell you are possible...

Squadr0n
18th Sep 2011, 04:42
Im definitely going to give it a go again just because you make it sound like the rest of the game is going to get alot deeper than the first mission makes it feel. Playing DE:HR just makes me want to know more and find out where all these threads end up leading to. There are so many questions i have that i want answered. Who's bill pope lol

Do you have any sugestions on how i should spec when i start over for someone new to the game?

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 05:15
Im definitely going to give it a go again just because you make it sound like the rest of the game is going to get alot deeper than the first mission makes it feel. Playing DE:HR just makes me want to know more and find out where all these threads end up leading to. There are so many questions i have that i want answered. Who's bill pope lol

Do you have any sugestions on how i should spec when i start over for someone new to the game?

Spec the character you want to play...

Not hard.

Don't want to wait for cross-hairs to align --> dump points into a weapon skill.

I usually train pistols to advanced, hacking, swimming, environment training, and one of either lock picking or multi-tools to trained.

Daedatheus
18th Sep 2011, 05:46
Im definitely going to give it a go again just because you make it sound like the rest of the game is going to get alot deeper than the first mission makes it feel.

Do it. Like I said, the first mission can discourage a lot of people (this has happened to many many gamers), but it gets better. The final 3rd of the game does start to slow down/drag, but the first 2/3rds are golden.

Painman
18th Sep 2011, 06:18
Definitely stick with it. The plot is kinda slow at first, but things will develop, and it becomes much more compelling.

I usually develop pistol, rifle, hacking, electronics and lockpicking the most, and use stealth pistol, sniper rifle and crossbow the most, but also the assault rifle and auto-shotgun for certain things. There's a small glitch you can exploit at the character setup screen if you want. Downgrade your pistol skill to untrained, leave everything else untrained. When you start out at the dock, your pistol skill will be back up to trained, but you'll still have the extra 1250 skill points to spend.

OhSorryOldHorse
18th Sep 2011, 07:04
Alright, I'm gonna say this. In order to prepare myself for DX:HR, I bought DX1 on Steam and played the hell out of it. It took me like an hour and a half JUST to get past the Statue of Liberty mission, but I knew going in that I would have to take a different approach to this game. I loved the hell out of it, I still do, and am going to play through a second time.

Now, let's keep one thing in mind: I'm 20 years old, and have been playing since the N64 days (Mario Kart 64, Super Mario 64, Goldeneye, and the Banjo Kazooie games were my **** haha). Nowadays, I play GTA, COD, Gears of War, Elder Scrolls, Fallout, and now Deus Ex. To say that you can't get it, is ludicrous because many here would probably assume that someone of my age can't 'get' Deus Ex, when its complete horse****. You have to be in the right mindset if you didn't play DX1 when it originally came out in order to enjoy it today. hell, I even enjoyed IW knowing it was a completely different game and still had fun.

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 12:15
Do you have any sugestions on how i should spec when i start over for someone new to the game?

It all depends on what kind of gamer you are. You're not really limited by one type of weapon for stealth, for instance. Most of them work, since most things can have a silencer (though Heavy Weapons and Demolition are, understandably, not very silent). If you're a "walking tank", all categories of weapons work. Me, I spec into Rifles more often than not - Master Rifle, with Silenced Sniper is one of the most versatile things in the game (being able to take out cameras, for instance).

Don't spec hard into Environmental Training or Swimming, though "Trained" in each can help you out in places, especially Swimming, if you feel you can spare the XP.

The Augs all have their uses for all styles of gaming, but what style they're most suited for is fairly obvious from the name/description.

Most of all, though; don't take anything we say here at face value. We can only give suggestions. DX is a game that is quite possible to beat, no matter what you do - though if you master E.T. and Swimming, you just may be gimping yourself unnecessarily. :D

Random
18th Sep 2011, 12:47
You keep saying that DX1 is simulation, while it's not a simulation at all.

Sim City, Sims, ArmA. Those games are simulations. DX1 never was a simulation. It might have had some Sim Elements, but they weren't an important part of the gameplay. Calling it a simulation just proves how little you understand about the subject. I suggest you stop embarrassing yourself. There is a reason why these people have a job in the videogame industry and you don't.

Sigh.

Okay.

'Simulation' doesn't just mean 'it tries to be like real life' or 'it is in the Simulation genre'. Simulation in this case refers to the game's design. As I said in an earlier post (which I assume you didn't read):


For me the 'simulation' part means games that are designed systemically: you have a bunch of systems which interact with each other in interesting ways, allowing for player agency and creativity, and emergence. A game needs to be designed for this from the ground up, otherwise you end up with a bunch of band-aid solutions and it's ultimately restrictive and you can spot the inconsistencies if you push it too hard.

In other words, instead of being a mass of 'special case' rules and restrictions, the game is designed as interacting systems -- consistent rules that impact on each other and result in emergence. That's a major factor in Deus Ex's design.

The term 'immersive sim' has been used for over a decade to describe Deus Ex and Looking Glass's games, including by the developers themselves. It's not something that was made up in this thread.

So please, don't tell other people to stop embarrassing themselves when you're the one who doesn't understand what we're saying.

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 13:12
It's actually like OhSorryOldHorse said, you have to be in the right mindset to get it. It's exactly like in others media. I mean, when you want to watch old films in black and white, it sure ain't gonna be like now, same with old TV shows. They didn't have the same wrapping, nor the same objectives sometimes, nor the same budget.


Like I said: It is still considered the best (or at least one of the best) games ever made - by fans and professionals alike. That hasn't changed. It is just the product of a different era, and a different over-arching design philosophy - and so am I. You're the product of another over-arching game design philosophy. The difference here is; I can understand "your" design philosophy, and enjoy it for what it is. You can't understand "mine", and enjoy it for what it is.


Exactly, so why everyone keeps criticizing Human Revolution for not being the same than Deus Ex is beyond me...
Human Revolution is just the Deus Ex of this era, and EM perfectly managed to do that in fact and it's already a huge accomplishment.

@Squadr0n:
Here the only thing you have to know about Deus Ex anyway (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j8jMn2Kcgs) and this can be useful too (http://kentie.net/article/dxguide/) :D
If you read the previous pages, I was already talking about the first level being one of the worst ever in a video game (slight exaggeration) so yeah, you have to continue past that for sure.

Random
18th Sep 2011, 13:51
Ugh. Liberty Island is a wonderful demonstration of Deus Ex's design principles and is one of the standout maps in the game.

I'm utterly amazed that even some people who like Deus Ex don't like Liberty Island.

I mean if you don't like a map which you can approach from many different angles at your own pace, one that gives you so much freedom and control -- why would you like Deus Ex at all? Liberty Island is a triumph.

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 14:11
Did you actually read the previous pages?

Yeah... I didn't think so because it was not the point I made.

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 15:00
Ugh. Liberty Island is a wonderful demonstration of Deus Ex's design principles and is one of the standout maps in the game.

I'm utterly amazed that even some people who like Deus Ex don't like Liberty Island.

I mean if you don't like a map which you can approach from many different angles at your own pace, one that gives you so much freedom and control -- why would you like Deus Ex at all? Liberty Island is a triumph.

Gamers today have a certain psychological framework instilled from the rather horrid lowest-common-denominator type game design so prevalent.

The issue with coming into Deus Ex is that they aren't prepared for what type of game it is. And Deus Ex isn't designed to ease modern gamers into the type of game it is (more RPG than FPS). It just gives you a tutorial to teach you the basics of game-play and drops you in a huge sandbox to go have fun. It's a superior style of game, but modern gamers are going to be put off by the sudden deluge of idiosyncracies. Poor graphics, stat-based shooting, freedom, thinking-imagination required, and they don't understand the character creation process.

One of these days someone should make a Deus Ex mod that adds a "modern-gamer" tutorial to the start of the game, rather than just dropping them in.

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 15:25
It's not just modern gamers. The first level have discouraged a lot of gamers now or 10 years ago, it has always been true. So like it or not, it is kind of a design flaw.

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 15:37
It's not just modern gamers. The first level have discouraged a lot of gamers now or 10 years ago, it has always been true. So like it or not, it is kind of a design flaw.

It's not a design flaw. It's a sifter, separating the chaff from the wheat. There are those worthy of experiencing the greatness of Deus Ex. And there are those unworthy of it. Liberty Island merely separates them.

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 15:54
Not really. Even when you want to be innovative, you can't do what you like. I don't have a better example but if the television broadcast would have begun in black and white and the next step would have been 3D TV, it's kind of the same.
You have to do it step by step or you're not doing it right. You can be superior all you want but it won't change that.

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 16:33
Not really. Even when you want to be innovative, you can't do what you like. I don't have a better example but if the television broadcast would have begun in black and white and the next step would have been 3D TV, it's kind of the same.
You have to do it step by step or you're not doing it right. You can be superior all you want but it won't change that.

No. It's about staying-power. Some people just don't have it.
It's the same idea as with the first 100-or-so pages of The Lord of the Rings. Those pages are responsible for more people not finishing that trilogy (or even the first book), than anything else. Arguably, if you can't get through those 100 pages, you may not have the mental stamina to get through the rest of the books.
If you can't get through Liberty Island, you may not have the mental stamina to get through the rest of DX.

Now - just to nip it in the bud - I don't compare DX to LotR as such. I just mean that the first parts of both, serve to give people a warning (no matter if it was intended or not): "This will take effort to get through."

mahmoudd
18th Sep 2011, 17:02
It's NOT emergent gameplay... (not in the same way that Human Revolution anyway)



The same Harvey Smith that made Invisible War? OK...

the same harvey smith that had to cater to the consoles along side the PC version

gee i wonder why the game was bad!

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 17:24
And?

Human Revolution had also to cater to both sides so...

Oh yeah, I forgot that consoles are responsible for hunger and deaths all over the world, my bad.

mahmoudd
18th Sep 2011, 17:34
i did not know that consoles were responsible for death and hunger

despicable...

Tverdyj
18th Sep 2011, 18:34
And?

Human Revolution had also to cater to both sides so...

Oh yeah, I forgot that consoles are responsible for hunger and deaths all over the world, my bad.

yawn
old argument is old
Invisible war had to work withing the limitations of the original Xbox's hardware. that is the ONLY reason (admitted by the devs on numerous occasions) for the most maligned fault of IW--the absolutely tiny levels and long loading times.
The interface was also much simplified in order to accomdate the console controller.

now, while HR was also made with consoles in mind, the PC version was developed separately, with a PC-centric interface. the only gripe i've had with it is the fact that they didn't map lethal and non-lethal takedowns on separate buttons, and I had to put up with the "tap v. hold" crap. leading to a number of reloads when i'd accidentally kill on a non-lethal playthrough.

now, as much as i'd continue the playbox bashing, this isn't the place for it. that's why we have Rock, Paper, Shotgun. on top of which, i've gotta go to work.

imported_BoB_
18th Sep 2011, 18:44
Yeah but how can you explain that the remake of Deus Ex on PS2 still had all the augs controls. And how do you explain the unique ammo stuff, the possibility of overwriting your choice, and the fact that you always have the two factions sending you objectives even when you just betrayed one of them.

It's not only the tiny levels that are bad in Invisible War, it's a lot more than that and plenty of stuff not console related at all...
People thinking that it would have been a great game if it was only released on PC are just blind.

Fluffis
18th Sep 2011, 18:59
People thinking that it would have been a great game if it was only released on PC are just blind.

There is every chance that it wouldn't have been great. It is, however, fairly certain that it wouldn't have sucked quite as much as it did.

itsonyourhead
18th Sep 2011, 20:03
There is every chance that it wouldn't have been great. It is, however, fairly certain that it wouldn't have sucked quite as much as it did.

No. It probably wouldn't have been feasible without console sales. I think the game wouldn't have even existed without the console versions.

However, I think a PC centric design --> port to consoles might have resulted in a superior pc experience.

JulianP
18th Sep 2011, 20:43
yawn
old argument is old
Invisible war had to work withing the limitations of the original Xbox's hardware. that is the ONLY reason (admitted by the devs on numerous occasions) for the most maligned fault of IW--the absolutely tiny levels and long loading times.
The interface was also much simplified in order to accomdate the console controller.


I recall Harvey "Idiot" Smith saying that they hired a guy to work on the renderer for them, but he royally ****ed up and they didn't have time to fix it in the end. Sigh. They managed to patch it up somewhat for Thief 3, but too late is too late.

VectorM
18th Sep 2011, 20:59
The real reason the levels were so small in IW, was that they ****ed up with the engine. The guy that made it, was simply supposed to modify the unreal engine, but he ended up making an entirely new one, that simply couldn't handle anything bigger than what you got.

Edit: God damn it, I need to learn to read posts after the one I am responding to...

dxmt
18th Sep 2011, 23:50
Now - just to nip it in the bud - I don't compare DX to LotR as such. I just mean that the first parts of both, serve to give people a warning (no matter if it was intended or not): "This will take effort to get through."
I agree with everything you're saying, and I think it's a pretty sad indictment of today's gamers that a level as simple as Liberty Island actually requires "effort"

What I mean is that the level itself is simple -- get to the top of the statue -- but the multiple ways of accomplishing your objectives (and I don't mean some "four pillars" BS, I mean the capability for player adaptation and emergent gameplay) are what give it substance and depth

The fact that people actually have to expend effort just to be able to appreciate the game's core design principles is depressing

dxmt
18th Sep 2011, 23:52
And don't anybody say that that is a flaw on the game's behalf, because it isn't -- it's the reason why it's the greatest game ever made

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 00:35
Good, because nobody said that :)
The flaw is that the first level and the tutorial have nothing in common. The tutorial is inside and in small areas, and the first level is a big area, outside and you don't know where you have to go. The first level is just too open for a first level.
In a GTA game, you don't begin the game with the entire map available to you, you learn to drive around on one small area before going to another larger one, it's exactly what's missing in Deus Ex. Besides, Liberty Island is the largest area of the game that empty and with no visual marker (because it's empty ^^)
Battery Park would have been a much better first level because it has all of these elements and it's smaller (or it seems like it anyway, so it's a better design if it's not the case)

And where is the emergent gameplay on the first level exactly?
It's just large areas of emptyness... Except, the TNT crate that you can throw on the boat (or elsewhere) for blowing the door.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 00:58
Good, because nobody said that :)
The flaw is that the first level and the tutorial have nothing in common. The tutorial is inside and in small areas, and the first level is a big area, outside and you don't know where you have to go. The first level is just too open for a first level.
In a GTA game, you don't begin the game with the entire map available to you, you learn to drive around on one small area before going to another larger one, it's exactly what's missing in Deus Ex. Besides, Liberty Island is the largest area of the game that empty and with no visual marker (because it's empty ^^)
Battery Park would have been a much better first level because it has all of these elements and it's smaller (or it seems like it anyway, so it's a better design if it's not the case)

And where is the emergent gameplay on the first level exactly?
It's just large areas of emptyness... Except, the TNT crate that you can throw on the boat (or elsewhere) for blowing the door.

No visual marker? The main objective is at the top of the statue. When you get off the dock and into the island proper, look up slightly, and a bit to the right - there's your visual marker.

No, what I'm reading here is that people want a glowing path of breadcrumbs showing them exactly where to go and what to do.

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 01:08
I'm not talking about a visual marker, but several visual markers, you know for knowing where you are if you take this or that path. I mean, if you go to the right and to the left, there is a huge area where there is a wall at your right, a wall at your left, not a single enemy. You just don't know where you are anymore. And after taking this path, you can be a bit confused on where is what.

For keeping the same example. In Battery Park, you have several smaller areas. One with the weird statue, one with the subway, one with the big boxes (and Anna), the beginning area with the vending machine, You don't have to walk that much between them and there is people so if you talk to the same person twice, you're gonna know it. Liberty Island is very large and you have to walk much more, it's mostly dark and empty.

Keep in mind that we're talking about a first playthrough. I'm under the impression that a lot of you don't remember what it was like. Besides, it's not logical to say that you have to go straight if people tell you that they got lost, it's mean they didn't do that. If you have three paths when you enter the proper area, there is a good chance that you're not gonna go straight (66% chances to be precise ^^)

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 03:29
I'm not talking about a visual marker, but several visual markers, you know for knowing where you are if you take this or that path. I mean, if you go to the right and to the left, there is a huge area where there is a wall at your right, a wall at your left, not a single enemy. You just don't know where you are anymore. And after taking this path, you can be a bit confused on where is what.

For keeping the same example. In Battery Park, you have several smaller areas. One with the weird statue, one with the subway, one with the big boxes (and Anna), the beginning area with the vending machine, You don't have to walk that much between them and there is people so if you talk to the same person twice, you're gonna know it. Liberty Island is very large and you have to walk much more, it's mostly dark and empty.

Keep in mind that we're talking about a first playthrough. I'm under the impression that a lot of you don't remember what it was like. Besides, it's not logical to say that you have to go straight if people tell you that they got lost, it's mean they didn't do that. If you have three paths when you enter the proper area, there is a good chance that you're not gonna go straight (66% chances to be precise ^^)

Yeah, and...?

My point is that if you pay attention to what Alex says, or even Harley Filben (if you even bother trying to make it to the other dock) you can get a pretty good idea of where to go and what to do. Sorry DX doesn't hold anyone's hand. Maybe a lot of gamers were just smarter 11 years ago.

The thing is, it doesn't really matter what direction you take once you get onto the island proper - *all* paths lead to Rome in this case. It's not ******* rocket science. DX was my first ever RPG/FPS/sneaker (only played FreeSpace and homeworld prior) and I had no trouble at all figuring out what to do. In fact, there's no right or wrong way to go through Liberty Island. Just go through it any way you want to. Some ways might be a little more frustrating, but the joy of the game is that if one method doesn't work, you can try something else - and that something else is just as valid as a third way that someone else may have done/tried.

The biggest game out before DX was what? Half-Life? A linear shooter that didn't need any hand-holding simply because there was nowhere else to go. People were so used to that sort of "freedom" that when confronted with something approaching true freedom of play/playstyle, they didn't know what to do. Do anything - do nothing. It doesn't matter with DX People are/were so used to rigid rules, that when the rules were relaxed, all they could do was scratch their heads. They're still doing it today - with DX (but not DX:HR, since that game pretty much *does* hold your hand - and practically orders you to play stealthy).

Edit: Oh, and BTW, if you wanted to know where you were on Liberty Island, there is a map/photo in one of the menus. I assume most people here could look at their surroundings and determine where they are in relation to what's shown on the map/photo. If you mean something like a minimap (like HR has), no thank you. Half the fun of the game is discovering areas. Hell, I've played the game at least once a year since release, and the last time I played, a few months ago, I actually discovered an area I'd never seen before. The time before that, I had some dialogue with someone in the game that I hadn't heard/seen before. That's after a *minimum* of 11-12 playthroughs. I estimate 2 or 3 times through HR before I've seen and heard everything there is in the game.

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 04:07
Maybe a lot of gamers were just smarter 11 years ago.


OK so you're one of the people that actually don't read previous posts before posting. I played Deus Ex 11 years ago, and I'm not the only one that had problem with the first level either. Just read the previous posts...

It's a (not so apparently) well known fact that a lot of players had trouble/put the game on hold before finishing the first level. Even hardcore fans actually. So think what you want, but a game that discourages you from the get go is flawed. A game must have a learning curve throughout your progression, Deus Ex has it only after the first level.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 04:23
OK so you're one of the people that actually don't read previous posts before posting. I played Deus Ex 11 years ago, and I'm not the only one that had problem with the first level either. Just read the previous posts...

It's a (not so apparently) well known fact that a lot of players had trouble/put the game on hold before finishing the first level. Even hardcore fans actually. So think what you want, but a game that discourages you from the get go is flawed. A game must have a learning curve throughout your progression, Deus Ex has it only after the first level.

You'll notice I said "a lot of gamers...", not *all* gamers, hardcore or not. Yeah, sure, it's well-known that a lot of hardcore gamers couldn't find their asses in the first level. Their loss if they quit. I was a barely-minted gamer and *I* figured out what I needed to do and where to go, so what does that say about these so-called "hardcore gamers"?

Also, I never said you didn't play the game 11 years ago. That's not the point of my side of the discussion. My point is that the game *tells* you what you need to do - it's then up to you how you decide to do it. Isn't that also what was done when the first Rainbow Six was released? Pre-mission planning and all that? You're given an objective, and you - the player - decided what loadout, and how to implement the rescue or whatever?

Like I said, it wasn't rocket science then, and it sure as hell isn't rocket science now. Can't you think for yourself, instead of having the game *tell* you where to go and what to do?

The first level of DX was perfect for all kinds of experimentation. There was no learning curve there because none was needed. I might be wrong, but I'll take a guess and say that you probably tried a run and gun, shooting everything that moved - probably multiple times - and then gave up. I'll bet it never even occurred to you to try something different.

Don't bother answering that last. I wouldn't believe you anyway, unless you actually admitted that I am right.

Squadr0n
19th Sep 2011, 04:34
The first level of every game should serve as a sort of introduction to how the game will be played. DE:HR doesnt have the best intro ever but its decent. It almost feels as a bait and switch, you start out thinking this is going to just be a cover based shooter. As the intro goes on the game starts to open up, you get to your first mission where you need to rescue the hostages and take out Zeke. Then you finally get to serif tower and then Detroit where the game really begins to shine. You start very small and then by the end your exploring an entire city.

I feel like they did this with new players in mind, those of us who didn't start out with the original and might not be familiar with the completely free style of game play that makes Deus Ex so great.

I was stuck for the longest time on liberty island until just recently. This was a design decision that they probably thought about for awhile. Games are designed differently now with more hand holding for players that are younger or are not necessarily looking to play something that actually requires you to think and use your head.

Like many have said before you need to use your gut instinct on what will work and not just rely on what the game tells you can be done and not many games are like this. I cant wait to get some free time to actually get into the original now that ive invested so much into the narrative of the Deus Ex universe.


For anyone interested in seeing what the first mission is like in Deus Ex Giantbomb.com did a quick look of the original Deus Ex just before DE:HR came out. They have a few people that have played it back when it came out giving insight to another one of the guys that has no previous experience with the series. I watched this just to get a feel for what its like and then i tried my own tactics. They are by no means the best pc gamers but at least it gives new players a chance to see what they are getting into. It really is completely different than the action movie style of game play found in DE:HR.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 04:37
The first level of every game should serve as a sort of introduction to how the game will be played. DE:HR doesnt have the best intro ever but its decent. It almost feels as a bait and switch, you start out thinking this is going to just be a cover based shooter. As the intro goes on the game starts to open up, you get to your first mission where you need to rescue the hostages and take out Zeke. Then you finally get to serif tower and then Detroit where the game really begins to shine. You start very small and then by the end your exploring an entire city.

I feel like they did this with new players in mind, those of us who didn't start out with the original and might not be familiar with the completely free style of game play that makes Deus Ex so great.

I was stuck for the longest time on liberty island until just recently. This was a design decision that they probably thought about for awhile. Games are designed differently now with more hand holding for players that are younger or are not necessarily looking to play something that actually requires you to think and use your head.

Like many have said before you need to use your gut instinct on what will work and not just rely on what the game tells you can be done and not many games are like this. I cant wait to get some free time to actually get into the original now that ive invested so much into the narrative of the Deus Ex universe.

Bingo! :thumb:

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 04:45
The first level of every game should serve as a sort of introduction to how the game will be played. DE:HR doesnt have the best intro ever but its decent. It almost feels as a bait and switch, you start out thinking this is going to just be a cover based shooter. As the intro goes on the game starts to open up, you get to your first mission where you need to rescue the hostages and take out Zeke. Then you finally get to serif tower and then Detroit where the game really begins to shine. You start very small and then by the end your exploring an entire city.

I feel like they did this with new players in mind, those of us who didn't start out with the original and might not be familiar with the completely free style of game play that makes Deus Ex so great.

I was stuck for the longest time on liberty island until just recently. This was a design decision that they probably thought about for awhile. Games are designed differently now with more hand holding for players that are younger or are not necessarily looking to play something that actually requires you to think and use your head.

Like many have said before you need to use your gut instinct on what will work and not just rely on what the game tells you can be done and not many games are like this. I cant wait to get some free time to actually get into the original now that ive invested so much into the narrative of the Deus Ex universe.


Bingo! :thumb:

:D

(I think that everyone here knows the first level of Deus Ex ^^)

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 04:52
Bingo! :thumb:

:D

(I think that everyone here knows the first level of Deus Ex ^^)

Yeah... HR holds your hand for you.

Squadr0n
19th Sep 2011, 04:53
(I think that everyone here knows the first level of Deus Ex ^^)

True but there are going to be alot of new fans, my self included, that are just getting into the series because of Human Revolution. Im a sucker for great trailers and man was that first DE:HR trailer amazing. Just wish that level of quality could have made it to the cut scenes. I know they had to cut corners just to fit this game on one disk so they wouldnt have to pay royalties to Microsoft. Damn you M$

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 04:55
Yeah... HR holds your hand for you.

Human Revolution is just better scoped than Deus Ex.

If you deactivate all the markers, you have basicaly the same thing than in Deus Ex, except that the levels scale have much more sense.

Squadr0n
19th Sep 2011, 05:02
Human Revolution is just better scoped than Deus Ex.

I was pretty disappointed with how aside from Detroit and Hengsha DE:HR was just isolated missions with very little exploration. They needed atleast one more hub to explore towards the end to break up the fast pace.

Does the original have missions like the FEMA camp and Picus or is it just Hubs that get bigger and bigger?

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 05:03
Human Revolution is just better scoped than Deus Ex.

If you deactivate all the markers, you have basicaly the same thing than in Deus Ex, except that the levels scale have much more sense.

No, because you still have that bleeping radar. Of course, a strategically placed Post-It note takes care of that. Like I said, you just needed your hand held. That's okay, there's no real shame in admitting it.

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 05:12
There is only one hub in Deus Ex, well it was not even called that at the time, and there is not much places that you can visit twice (actually, there isn't really one because most of the areas are closed off when you go back)


No, because you still have that bleeping radar. Of course, a strategically placed Post-It note takes care of that. Like I said, you just needed your hand held. That's okay, there's no real shame in admitting it.

Well, in Deus Ex, you don't need a radar because enemies are blind if you are in the shadows, even right in front of them so you just can't compare it. And once you have the regen aug, you're invincible anyway.
If you try to provoke me, it won't work but do what you want, I don't really care ^^

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 05:18
I was pretty disappointed with how aside from Detroit and Hengsha DE:HR was just isolated missions with very little exploration. They needed atleast one more hub to explore towards the end to break up the fast pace.

Does the original have missions like the FEMA camp and Picus or is it just Hubs that get bigger and bigger?

Certain missions in HR reminded me strongly of missions in DX. Outside the FEMA camp reminded me a lot of the Lebedev's Airport level of DX. The upcoming DLC seems like it's the HR equivalent of waking up in a prison cell in DX (since you haven't played the original, I'm trying to remain as spoiler-free as possible). The problem is that there are *many* areas that could be said to be reminiscent of DX, but it's like a note-for-note cover band: they get all the notes right, but the spirit - the *feeling* - just isn't quite there.

I wish I could say more, but let me just add this: I wish I could get selective amnesia so that I could experience DX again for the first time. You're lucky in that you don't need to go to such an extreme.

Painman
19th Sep 2011, 05:22
I was pretty disappointed with how aside from Detroit and Hengsha DE:HR was just isolated missions with very little exploration. They needed atleast one more hub to explore towards the end to break up the fast pace.

Does the original have missions like the FEMA camp and Picus or is it just Hubs that get bigger and bigger?

Later in in DX1, there are several isolated missions, but DX1 also gives you 1 more city to run around in than HR does... it's not huge, but it's still pretty cool.

DX1 may have low res textures and totally synthetic music (it's done via Impulse Tracker), but they sure packed a hell of a lot of game onto one CD, you've gotta give 'em credit for that.

Side note: Microsoft doesn't hold the patent on DVD; a consortium called the DVD Forum does.

Their loss of the battle vs. Sony for the next generation of storage disc didn't really help anything.

Fluffis
19th Sep 2011, 05:23
Does the original have missions like the FEMA camp and Picus or is it just Hubs that get bigger and bigger?

It has a couple of "detached" missions, but even those usually have at least one fairly big area, which can function as a sort of "mini-hub". Think the "bullpen" at PICUS, but significantly larger, and almost always outdoors - it matters more than you'd think.

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 05:29
It has a couple of "detached" missions, but even those usually have at least one fairly big area, which can function as a sort of "mini-hub". Think the "bullpen" at PICUS, but significantly larger, and almost always outdoors - it matters more than you'd think.

Agreed.
Deus Ex had a lot of cooler maps because they were mostly outside. It's not a coincidence that the best map of Human Revolution are outside ones too, the DRB territory (even though you don't have enough augs to make it really fun), the FEMA Camp and the Belltower Docks.
The Belltower Docks felt the most like a true Deus Ex map.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 05:32
Ignore this post and see the one below. Had a brain fart...

itsonyourhead
19th Sep 2011, 05:33
It has a couple of "detached" missions, but even those usually have at least one fairly big area, which can function as a sort of "mini-hub". Think the "bullpen" at PICUS, but significantly larger, and almost always outdoors - it matters more than you'd think.

Several "detached" missions.
My favorite being
1. Sub-pen
2. Vandenberg
3. Under-sea lab

For everyone who thinks DX:HR's level design stands up to DX1's needs to go play DX1 again right now. I am and am amazed at how small, enclosed, and linear DX:HR seems in comparison.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 05:33
If you try to provoke me, it won't work but do what you want, I don't really care ^^

What? Me? Provoke? Perish the thought...

<Incidentally, just between you and me, I had the same problem with the beginning of Morrowind. There's a lot to be said *for* wide-open worlds... there's also a lot to said for a game world that's *too* wide open>


Several "detached" missions.
My favorite being
1. Sub-pen
2. Vandenberg
3. Under-sea lab

For everyone who thinks DX:HR's level design stands up to DX1's needs to go play DX1 again right now. I am and am amazed at how small, enclosed, and linear DX:HR seems in comparison.

^^^This.

Fluffis
19th Sep 2011, 05:43
For everyone who thinks DX:HR's level design stands up to DX1's needs to go play DX1 again right now. I am and am amazed at how small, enclosed, and linear DX:HR seems in comparison.

This.
They even managed to get the hubs to feel enclosed, which is a genuine feat considering the actual size of them.

Tverdyj
19th Sep 2011, 05:44
What? Me? Provoke? Perish the thought...

<Incidentally, just between you and me, I had the same problem with the beginning of Morrowind. There's a lot to be said *for* wide-open worlds... there's also a lot to said for a game world that's *too* wide open>



^^^This.

I really need to try Morrowind again one of these days.

also, since we're on the topic, imho, the most "Deus-exy" level in HR was, hands down, Hengsha. esp the rooftop district (I refuse to call it Yuzhao, because at least 80%of the time i was in it, I spent on the roof).

as far as detached, non hub maps go.... I agree with whomever mentioned the belltower docks. I didn't really like the mission, but the map was fun. even if I was majorly p-od when I found that invisible wall on the roof.
The Highland park map was pretty fun, too.

EDIT: one of my playthroughs, I'm going to steal every single fridge/vending machine in Hengsha. I shall put them on one roof. and then I will make it rain heavy appliances.

Painman
19th Sep 2011, 05:44
Agreed.
Deus Ex had a lot of cooler maps because they were mostly outside. It's not a coincidence that the best map of Human Revolution are outside ones too, the DRB territory (even though you don't have enough augs to make it really fun), the FEMA Camp and the Belltower Docks.
The Belltower Docks felt the most like a true Deus Ex map.

Agreed on all 3. I just made my third run through DRB turf. The more I play through this game, the more I realize that it was probably playtested more than folks may be giving it credit for. There are lots of clever little setups and routes through there, like using the chunks of sewer pipe to stalk and ambush.

FEMA and the Belltower dock are probably my favorites for sure. Both took lots of time and care in order to neutralize without being discovered. Exactly what I play DX for.

Squadr0n
19th Sep 2011, 05:48
Side note: Microsoft doesn't hold the patent on DVD; a consortium called the DVD Forum does.

Their loss of the battle vs. Sony for the next generation of storage disc didn't really help anything.

well your right about one thing, Microsoft does not own the dvd format.....but they do charge a fee to third party developers who want to release a game on xbox360 that requires more than one disk. If Eidos did not have to worry this limitation their cut scenes would not have to be so compressed and maybe we could have had more content like another hub or more missions.

rokstrombo
19th Sep 2011, 05:50
Agreed.
Deus Ex had a lot of cooler maps because they were mostly outside. It's not a coincidence that the best map of Human Revolution are outside ones too, the DRB territory (even though you don't have enough augs to make it really fun), the FEMA Camp and the Belltower Docks.
The Belltower Docks felt the most like a true Deus Ex map.

The Belltower Docks reminded me a lot of Deus Ex too, but that level was extremely easy.

What I liked about the level design in Human Revolution was that the coverage of security systems and patrol routes/sectors was relatively tight and well-planned given the variety augmentations and playstyles. Although the NPCs were extremely vulnerable to takedowns, getting through a secure area stealthily (and thoroughly exploring that area) took some thinking and experimentation. Getting through a couple of linked, open areas would have required even more strategy, but it seemed that the AI usually limited to specific sectors of a map and in combination with the ability to easily split them up in most situations the difficulty level seemed to reset rather than stack from room to room.

imported_BoB_
19th Sep 2011, 06:09
<Incidentally, just between you and me, I had the same problem with the beginning of Morrowind. There's a lot to be said *for* wide-open worlds... there's also a lot to said for a game world that's *too* wide open>


Between you and me, I never got lost on Liberty Island ^^
Sure, I only found Filben after having completed the main objective but that's about it. But for watching a lot of friends that I forced to try the game, I know it's a big problem for some players so I still think that's a flaw.


Agreed on all 3. I just made my third run through DRB turf. The more I play through this game, the more I realize that it was probably playtested more than folks may be giving it credit for. There are lots of clever little setups and routes through there, like using the chunks of sewer pipe to stalk and ambush.


You can even use one to get to the big container near the fence and getting the rocket launcher without augs. The maps are overall well thought, they're just too small.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 06:17
Between you and me, I never got lost on Liberty Island ^^
Sure, I only found Filben after having completed the main objective but that's about it. But for watching a lot of friends that I forced to try the game, I know it's a big problem for some players so I still think that's a flaw.


And I still maintain that the flaw was behind the keyboard. Just because a few dozen - or a few hundred, or even a few thousand - had some problems doesn't make it a flaw. Not when at *least* several times that number had no problems.

jtr7
19th Sep 2011, 06:38
There's just no way to accommodate all types. Ever. The machinery may allow interfacing with a great majority of consumers, but the content delivered will never, and can never, appeal to all. Some level designs are well received by close to all, while others will be loved by a few and not endearing to most. This is normal. Deus Ex was not intended nor expected to appeal to most, and to make it appeal to most, something has to be sacrificed just for the fact that time and tech limits only allow a limited number of choices. Cutting off choices that appealed to the existing fanbase disturbs me, though.

Painman
19th Sep 2011, 06:44
The maps are overall well thought, they're just too small.

Ehh... I gotta disagree on this point, since the DRB area wasn't a distinct map - it was part of the Detroit Hub map, which was actually pretty damned massive.

Think about it - you had 3 distinct areas, all without loading zones: Sarif/Convention Center, DPD/Chiron Building, plus Derelict Row. Plus 2 networks of sewers. One connected Sarif/Convention with DPD/Chiron, and the other let you you skulk around DRB territory. Plus, there were the apartments. You only had loading zones for Sarif HQ, LIMB clinic, DPD and Chiron building.

Compare that to Hell's Kitchen from DX1. The loading zones may not seem so obtrusive on modern computers, but there's not much you can do in DX1's Hell's Kitchen besides run around the street or climb some ladders onto a few rooftops if you want to avoid one.

Was FEMA really that much smaller than VersaLife? Omega Ranch that much smaller than Vandenburg AFB? Panchaea smaller than A51?

The first "real" mission in HR is way too linear in comparison to Liberty Island, but other than that, I personally didn't have any overall problem in HR with map/hub size.

OhSorryOldHorse
19th Sep 2011, 07:04
The first level of every game should serve as a sort of introduction to how the game will be played. DE:HR doesnt have the best intro ever but its decent. It almost feels as a bait and switch, you start out thinking this is going to just be a cover based shooter. As the intro goes on the game starts to open up, you get to your first mission where you need to rescue the hostages and take out Zeke. Then you finally get to serif tower and then Detroit where the game really begins to shine. You start very small and then by the end your exploring an entire city.

I feel like they did this with new players in mind, those of us who didn't start out with the original and might not be familiar with the completely free style of game play that makes Deus Ex so great.

I was stuck for the longest time on liberty island until just recently. This was a design decision that they probably thought about for awhile. Games are designed differently now with more hand holding for players that are younger or are not necessarily looking to play something that actually requires you to think and use your head.

Like many have said before you need to use your gut instinct on what will work and not just rely on what the game tells you can be done and not many games are like this. I cant wait to get some free time to actually get into the original now that ive invested so much into the narrative of the Deus Ex universe.


For anyone interested in seeing what the first mission is like in Deus Ex Giantbomb.com did a quick look of the original Deus Ex just before DE:HR came out. They have a few people that have played it back when it came out giving insight to another one of the guys that has no previous experience with the series. I watched this just to get a feel for what its like and then i tried my own tactics. They are by no means the best pc gamers but at least it gives new players a chance to see what they are getting into. It really is completely different than the action movie style of game play found in DE:HR.

Seriously, invest time in it. I did, and I can see why the game got all the praise that it did, and it's highly deserved. It is completely worth it.

Brockxz
19th Sep 2011, 08:39
The flaw is that the first level and the tutorial have nothing in common. The tutorial is inside and in small areas, and the first level is a big area, outside and you don't know where you have to go. The first level is just too open for a first level.
In a GTA game, you don't begin the game with the entire map available to you, you learn to drive around on one small area before going to another larger one, it's exactly what's missing in Deus Ex. Besides, Liberty Island is the largest area of the game that empty and with no visual marker (because it's empty ^^)
Battery Park would have been a much better first level because it has all of these elements and it's smaller (or it seems like it anyway, so it's a better design if it's not the case)

And where is the emergent gameplay on the first level exactly?
It's just large areas of emptyness... Except, the TNT crate that you can throw on the boat (or elsewhere) for blowing the door.

lol visual marker?
You got mission:
- Find the informant at the docks.
- Rescue Gunther.
- Find the leader of the terrorists.

You have been already told that terrorists are in statue building (just look around and you see it and that there are primary entrance guarded by bot. So i guess you should find entrance pretty easy because there is only one enemy bot in this area. You even have been told that leader is on the top part of statue building. I think this pretty much explains everything you need to know about how to find your first main objective. What kind of visual market you still want for that. Also you get map and has been told that north docks is where the informant is. Just open map and you see straight path from your position or you can go around statue building.
Once you go up the ramp at starting docks you get info message:
"If you want to make a covert approach, remember the academy stealth course: stay
out of their field of view, walk slowly to stay quiet, and crouch behind cover.
Or if you have to get your hands dirty, remember that a headshot is a lethal
takedown.
Be careful; the NSF have set up patchwork security systems here."

Almost before every major enemy security encounter you got warning from Alex or some kind other warning (for example, datacube near statue entrance about security measures inside). Don't go into electricity, avoid cameras, avoid lasers, schematics show ventilation system etc - that is what you get from Alex and even if you decide to go to Filben you get more info about second entrance point.
If after that someone can't understand what to do and need more help than they shouldn't play Deus Ex game at all. I imagine after all that todays developers would most likely add objective markers, compass with pinpointing the way you need to go and even radar to show everything in there so you won't get lost in open area with 2 buildings and 2 docksides.

"And where is the emergent gameplay on the first level exactly?"

I almost always used TNT crate to blow the panel where medbot is inside near starting area, always used one TNT crate to destroy enemy bot and in the same time open the storage locker with money chits inside that small building infront of statue entrance. Used crates to hop on top of statue entrance doors to go threw small window there. Used crate to hop on rising platform to get past blown generator electricity box. How about planting gas grenade next to security panel and lasers and trigger alarm tripping laser system to Gunther's captivity place so that every NSF ran into gas trap. I even pushed gas barrels for more effective measures and did that without harming those patrolling lobby area. I can name a lot of more things you can experiment and make fun by trying to achieve mission objectives.
For me the first level was exactly the way tutorial showed me what to do and let me experiment a lot more giving me more area to run around and not restricting to narrow endour environment.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 08:58
You can also use LAMS and/or gas grenades to climb the walls outside the statue*, completely bypassing the multiple routes the designers *intended* you to find. That right there is an example of emergent gameplay that Warren Spector himself applauded, since LAM-climbing wasn't actually something that was designed into the game. It was an unintended, but permissible method of solving a problem - the very definition of emergent gameplay.

*You can't get *all* the way to the top where the terrorist leader is due to a slight overhang at one point, but you can completely avoid contact with NSF troops on the ground and first floor of the statue.

jtr7
19th Sep 2011, 09:33
The first time I ever played that mission, I completed it with no saves or reloads. I understood my character and listened to the instructions. I found it straightforward, even though I could choose my own approach.

Brockxz
19th Sep 2011, 10:27
The first time I ever played that mission, I completed it with no saves or reloads. I understood my character and listened to the instructions. I found it straightforward, even though I could choose my own approach.

Same for me. I remember how i wanted to play game for the first time i pressed new game and got message if i want to play tutorial first. And after tutorial I just played the liberty island mission for the first time and followed every instruction to the details and completed every objective with ease. That's why I never understood everyone who said that it is hard start that you are not told what you have to do, that it is poor mission and all other those excuses people give when they say that they could not complete that mission and even quit DX after fail attempts.
Actually that was the simple DX core mission. Lots of freedom and tools to get things done in your way.
There is nothing difficult and there is almost no danger at all in this mission even if you completely ****ed up every skill allocation (putting all points in swimming lol) before starting to play game.

KenTWOu
19th Sep 2011, 10:42
You can also use LAMS and/or gas grenades to climb the walls outside the statue*, completely bypassing the multiple routes the designers *intended* you to find. That right there is an example of emergent gameplay that Warren Spector himself applauded, since LAM-climbing wasn't actually something that was designed into the game. It was an unintended, but permissible method of solving a problem - the very definition of emergent gameplay.
I don't think that this is very definition of emergent gameplay. Wikipedia says (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_gameplay) that emergent gameplay refers to complex situations in video games... that emerge from the interaction of relatively simple game mechanics.

LAM-climbing is a glitch and only a small part of emergent gameplay. So lack of LAM-climbing in DE:HR just means that 'Eidos Montreal' has more beta-testers than 'Ion storm'. That DE:HR is more polished.

Anyway, DE:HR has elements of emergent gameplay. For example, you can drop any item from your inventory screen and detonate wall mine. Cause you can detonate wall mine by any fast movement. You can break weak wall and knock out any enemy behind it if he just walks nearby. You can shoot at weak wall and even throw metal crates in it. And If the wall collapses it also knocks out enemy which stands behind it. When you open up an airvent its door could move nearby object. These are good examples of believable interaction of relatively simple game mechanics!

That's why I'm sure that DE:HR has emergent gameplay and it is an immersive sim.

doodsmack
19th Sep 2011, 16:51
It's kind of silly to claim that he doesn't understand the concept of an immersive sim or the "Deus Ex legacy," since he explicitly stated that he felt that's not what the majority of players would want. You have no solid evidence that he doesn't understand the concept, even if he didn't explain each little detail of the Deus Ex legacy in this one on-the-spot interview. He could very well be right in his assertion that the majority of players would want the changes they implemented. Ultimately, Eidos Montreal has no reason to cater to the hardcore minority that the complainers in this thread represent. I for one played both previous Deus Ex games (although admittedly it has been a very long time since I played the original), and thoroughly enjoyed DX:HR and the true Deus Ex elements it contains. I loved the stealth, the fact that quests could be played in multiple ways with varying consequences, etc. It felt like a modernized Deus Ex to me, and I loved it.

MaxxQ1
19th Sep 2011, 17:01
LAM-climbing is a glitch and only a small part of emergent gameplay. So lack of LAM-climbing in DE:HR just means that 'Eidos Montreal' has more beta-testers than 'Ion storm'. That DE:HR is more polished.

Maybe, but considering how delighted Warren was when he mentioned it, I have to wonder if they would have left it in, had it been discovered during testing.

jtr7
20th Sep 2011, 01:28
Any sizeable creative endeavor will incorporate happy accidents, discovered pleasing quirks, and unintended consequential thrilling surprises, and the project vision can shift dramatically before shipping. LAM-climbing would be one of those "Oh really? Sure! Why not?" decisions.

Random
20th Sep 2011, 01:42
It's been interesting reading interviews about Dishonored. The designers mentioned that a combination of player powers resulted in players being able to cross a far larger distance than the designers originally intended. They could basically jump and teleport into a building's rafters. Instead of crippling those abilities, though, the designers redesigned the maps to accommodate them. That's a good attitude to take.


There's just no way to accommodate all types. Ever. The machinery may allow interfacing with a great majority of consumers, but the content delivered will never, and can never, appeal to all. Some level designs are well received by close to all, while others will be loved by a few and not endearing to most. This is normal. Deus Ex was not intended nor expected to appeal to most, and to make it appeal to most, something has to be sacrificed just for the fact that time and tech limits only allow a limited number of choices. Cutting off choices that appealed to the existing fanbase disturbs me, though.

Exactly. It doesn't make sense to try to appeal to everyone because you end up with a game compromised in every department. Too open for some, too linear for others. You just need to embrace the game's strengths and make the best game you can. If some people don't like that kind of game, fine. I don't like fighting games like Street Fighter, but I don't expect Capcom to turn it into a open-ended game for me. I just won't play it. I would have liked Eidos to embrace the open ended nature of Deus Ex rather than reduce it in a misguided attempt to appeal to a wider audience.

I'm not convinced giving Deus Ex a somewhat more linear first mission would suddenly mean people embrace Liberty Island when they eventually get to it. To appeal to people who didn't like Liberty Island, you kind of need to change the design entirely. I respect its sink or swim approach; people know right away whether they'll like it or not.

I wonder how people who are turned off by Liberty Island would feel about a game like Stalker. That just dumps you into a big map and lets you go. But it does have objective markers so maybe they'd be okay ...

jtr7
20th Sep 2011, 02:22
Yep!


If some people don't like that kind of game, fine. I don't like fighting games like Street Fighter, but I don't expect Capcom to turn it into a open-ended game for me. I just won't play it.

:cool: :thumb:

Fluffis
20th Sep 2011, 03:13
It's been interesting reading interviews about Dishonored. The designers mentioned that a combination of player powers resulted in players being able to cross a far larger distance than the designers originally intended. They could basically jump and teleport into a building's rafters. Instead of crippling those abilities, though, the designers redesigned the maps to accommodate them. That's a good attitude to take.


I really hope they manage to squeeze all those amazing ideas into the game, and not have to cut down too much due to deadlines/budget constraints or whatever.
I'm still blown away by the description of the guy who was shot at, who stopped time, took control over the enemy and placed him in the path of his own bullets.

That is emergent gameplay.

satan claus
20th Sep 2011, 07:47
Deus Ex was not intended nor expected to appeal to most,
Deus Ex intended to appeal majority average gamer base because of modern gamedev.
Your Captain

jtr7
20th Sep 2011, 07:49
wut

KenTWOu
20th Sep 2011, 09:23
I'm still blown away by the description of the guy who was shot at, who stopped time, took control over the enemy and placed him in the path of his own bullets.
Dishonored has a lot of cool ideas, but unfortunately most of them are nearly impossible in Deus Ex universe. Anyway, I think it will be a great game too.

Painman
20th Sep 2011, 09:40
Deus Ex intended to appeal majority average gamer base because of modern gamedev.
Your Captain

Those elements mixed together is definitely like a sauce.

Jordasm
20th Sep 2011, 12:04
I really hope they manage to squeeze all those amazing ideas into the game, and not have to cut down too much due to deadlines/budget constraints or whatever.
I'm still blown away by the description of the guy who was shot at, who stopped time, took control over the enemy and placed him in the path of his own bullets.

That is emergent gameplay.

Words cannot describe how much I'm looking forward to Dishonoured. Shame it's not out for a while.

Zyme junkie
22nd Sep 2011, 00:09
but everything didn't have to be interactive as that is obviously quite taxing in a game.


no it was all that clutter that was taxing. if it could be done 11 years ago in dx1 it can be done now

Pinky_Powers
22nd Sep 2011, 00:53
no it was all that clutter that was taxing. if it could be done 11 years ago in dx1 it can be done now

I would be interested to see the numbers on how many physics objects each map has in both games. There's probably not much disparity between 'em.

Human Revolution has so many more "things" cluttering the environments, but not very many of them are weighted with physics. The maps looks delicious, but the inconsistency is glaring.

If you really want to prove to someone this generation of consoles can handle so much more physics, have them play Fallout 3 or Oblivion. Those games put Deus Ex to shame with their environmental interaction.

Personally I believe the meager physics in Human Revolution is owed to the company-wide abandonment of Warren Spector's simulation principles.

itsonyourhead
22nd Sep 2011, 00:56
I would be interested to see the numbers on how many physics objects each map has in both games. There's probably not much disparity between 'em.

Human Revolution has so many more "things" cluttering the environments, but not very many of them are weighted with physics. The maps looks delicious, but the inconsistency is glaring.

If you really want to prove to someone this generation of consoles can handle so much more physics, have them play Fallout 3 or Oblivion. Those games put Deus Ex to shame with their environmental interaction.

Personally I believe the meager physics in Human Revolution is owed to the company-wide abandonment of Warren Spector's simulation principles.

I'm not entirely sure it's due solely to that. I'm sure that played a part, but I think that the EM team was working with some really "not-so-good-at-their-jobs" programmers and "less-than-outstanding" tech.

Pinky_Powers
22nd Sep 2011, 01:10
I'm not entirely sure it's due solely to that. I'm sure that played a part, but I think that the EM team was working with some really "not-so-good-at-their-jobs" programmers and "less-than-outstanding" tech.

I don't see any evidence of shoddy programing. The physics that are there are very life-like. It's actually some of the best I've seen. And it never slows the game down when you throw things into a tower of moveable objects. These are the signs of bad programming.

EM was getting a lot of money at this point to staff their company (remember, a team of something like 160 at one point... lots of money!). There was no reason to hire anything less than top-notch Canadians. It makes much more sense the Heads were simply ignorant of the importance of an interactive, physical game world, and delegated their resources away from it.

Random
22nd Sep 2011, 01:40
There was no reason to hire anything less than top-notch Canadians.

As long as they speak fluent French anyway ...

imported_BoB_
22nd Sep 2011, 01:41
If you really want to prove to someone this generation of consoles can handle so much more physics, have them play Fallout 3 or Oblivion. Those games put Deus Ex to shame with their environmental interaction.

Personally I believe the meager physics in Human Revolution is owed to the company-wide abandonment of Warren Spector's simulation principles.

Well, they had a pretty old engine too.
Besides, it's a lot less buggy than the two games you mentionned. I don't even understand how a game like Fallout 3 could still be proclaimed GOTY and all that crap with how buggy it was. Even the GOTY version doesn't fix it totally, way to earn consumers respect (and money)...
It's just a shame and they did it again with New Vegas and people keep buying...

Zyme junkie
22nd Sep 2011, 02:00
I would be interested to see the numbers on how many physics objects each map has in both games. There's probably not much disparity between 'em.
.

nope i am currently on a playthrough of dx1 right now- bins, pillows, plant pots, human skulls, sofas omg the list goes on forever....
load up a hong kong save you have and go to maggie chows apartment- you can pick up and throw anything or interact with anything except for the cat- which you can kill by jumping on by the way, and if you step on it it growls and runs away so that is still a form of interaction. well you cant pick up a dresser or table, but thats about it. yet the dresser you can still destroy. i shot the glass roof and that had a alarm linked to it too(although the side windows did not, but i can forgive ion storm for a few slip ups here and there since it is such a complex game).

its not only physics objects anyway- piano, showers, hologram displays, hidden switches that open secret areas, use multitools on cameras and so on. then there is all the consumables you can pick up too.

warren spector is a ******* genius, along with his old team plus his looking glass influence deserves mentioning too.

itsonyourhead
22nd Sep 2011, 02:49
As long as they speak fluent French anyway ...

Yeah. What was with Anfossi's french elitism? I'd have hated working in an environment with a boss like that.

itsonyourhead
22nd Sep 2011, 02:57
nope i am currently on a playthrough of dx1 right now- bins, pillows, plant pots, human skulls, sofas omg the list goes on forever....

DX:HR interactable items:

Throw-able:
1. Vending Machine
2. Refrigerator
3. Wood Crate
4. Cardboard box
5. Basketball
6. Turret
7. Barrel
8. Fire Extinguisher
9. Printer
10. Trash-can

Inventory:
1. Weapons (Pistol, Assault Rifle, SMG, Revolver, Shotgun, Sniper, Rocket Launcher, Stun gun, Tranq Rifle, PEPS)
2. Grenades (frag, emp, gas, concussion)
3. Mine template - and combinations
4. Ammo - one for each weapon and Typhoon
5. Alcohol (Wine, Vodka, Whiskey, Hot Devil, bottled)
6. Cyber-boost energy (bars, packs, tubs)
7. AUD/Explosives
8. Weapon mods
9. Praxis kits

Otherwise interactable:
1. Door
2. Window
3. Alarm pad
4. Door lock
5. Computer
6. Safe door/door lock (kinda already in 1 and 4)
7. "Weak" wall
8. Vent covering
9. Ladder
10. E-book
11. E-pad
12. Searchable trashcans
13. News-stands
14. Newspapers

People:
NPC's

imported_BoB_
22nd Sep 2011, 03:03
7) Barrel (corrosive/explosive/normal)
8) Extinguisher

Zyme junkie
22nd Sep 2011, 03:07
dont make me do a DX1 interaction list in comparison.......
it will take ages.
DX:HR still has a fair amount at least.

EDIT: oh and you forgot searchable dead bodies and top draws, lots and lots of top draws. (throw bodies too)

imported_BoB_
22nd Sep 2011, 03:21
Yeah but we already had the same discussion in another thread (or even this one maybe) In Deus Ex, you couldn't really throw things, there was no physics except the basketball item because it used the Unreal engine, and it would have needed specific scripts for enabling physics to each object (I don't even know if it was really possible at all)

When you throw a TNT Crate without crouching, and that you die, it can't be considered like a throw, or a very bad one. All the interactable items of Human Revolution are usable gameplay wise, it's absolutely not the case in Deus Ex except stacking stuff, and the TNT Crate for blowing stuff.
Sure, the tutorial explains how to distract a guard but it was so badly done (again, you had to throw things 2 feet away so, not really useful) and the AI was so dumb and blind that I don't think that a lot of players actually used it.

Zyme junkie
22nd Sep 2011, 03:27
Yeah but we already had the same discussion in another thread. In Deus Ex, you couldn't really throw things, there was no physics except the basketball item because it used the Unreal engine, and it would have needed specific scripts for enabling physics to each object (I don't even know if it was really possible at all)

When you throw a TNT Crate without crouching, and that you die, it can't be considered like a throw, or a very bad one. All the interactable items of Human Revolution are usable gameplay wise, it's absolutely not the case in Deus Ex except stacking stuff, and the TNT Crate for blowing stuff.

they have a few other purposes- they add to immersion and freedom, you get a reaction off of NPCs (some have more than 1 reaction speech) you can decorate your office lol never done that myself but seen it on youtube. you can barricade doors, you can kill NPCs or damage them if thrown from a height, you can set em up like a firing range to see how your accuracy or range is since they are destructable, you can find stuff hidden under pillows ect sometimes. then there is loadsa interactive stuff that does have a more meaningful purpose.

Tverdyj
22nd Sep 2011, 03:49
Well, they had a pretty old engine too.
Besides, it's a lot less buggy than the two games you mentionned. I don't even understand how a game like Fallout 3 could still be proclaimed GOTY and all that crap with how buggy it was. Even the GOTY version doesn't fix it totally, way to earn consumers respect (and money)...
It's just a shame and they did it again with New Vegas and people keep buying...

FYI, Bethesda didn't make New Vegas.

Random
22nd Sep 2011, 05:29
Yeah but we already had the same discussion in another thread (or even this one maybe) In Deus Ex, you couldn't really throw things, there was no physics except the basketball item because it used the Unreal engine, and it would have needed specific scripts for enabling physics to each object (I don't even know if it was really possible at all)

When you throw a TNT Crate without crouching, and that you die, it can't be considered like a throw, or a very bad one. All the interactable items of Human Revolution are usable gameplay wise, it's absolutely not the case in Deus Ex except stacking stuff, and the TNT Crate for blowing stuff.
Sure, the tutorial explains how to distract a guard but it was so badly done (again, you had to throw things 2 feet away so, not really useful) and the AI was so dumb and blind that I don't think that a lot of players actually used it.

You can throw things, just not hard enough to kill people unless you drop them from very high. Personally I use the ability to throw objects to attract/distract guards pretty often when I play DX1. It's not accurate to say there were 'no physics'. Every object you could pick up or put in your inventory could be thrown.

Being able to kill people with boxes in HR is good, but Invisible War also had this so it's not a new thing. In fact I played through IW once by killing every person I could, but never using a conventional weapon. You could probably do that in HR too -- if not for the power consumption whenever you throw something heavy.

Zyme junkie
22nd Sep 2011, 05:31
You can throw things, just not hard enough to kill people unless you drop them from very high. Personally I use the ability to throw objects to attract/distract guards pretty often when I play DX1. It's not accurate to say there were 'no physics'. Every object you could pick up or put in your inventory could be thrown.

Being able to kill people with boxes in HR is good, but Invisible War also had this so it's not a new thing. In fact I played through IW once by killing every person I could, but never using a conventional weapon. You could probably do that in HR too -- if not for the power consumption whenever you throw something heavy.

oh yeah i forgot about distracting guards too...

JCpies
22nd Sep 2011, 05:38
I distract guards by throwing objects in Human Revolution all the time. Just saying. If I had a main complaint, it would be that there are a bit too many easy alternate routes.

Brockxz
22nd Sep 2011, 07:06
DXHR doesn't have a problem with interactable items. Yes, the list is shorter than it was in DX1 but they are there and quite enough of them are there but there is one big problem with that. Inconsistency. There is a lot of the same looking (even i think the exactly the same asset used) objects that aren't interactive and even sometimes in the same room. That's a big problem because in the end you end up poking around objects you think you will be able to interact but you can't. That's the reason why i ended up even turning on highlighting (i really don't like the look of that) because i was sick of going for crate and finding that i can't move it even room before it was movable there.

imported_BoB_
22nd Sep 2011, 13:28
You can throw things, just not hard enough to kill people unless you drop them from very high. Personally I use the ability to throw objects to attract/distract guards pretty often when I play DX1. It's not accurate to say there were 'no physics'. Every object you could pick up or put in your inventory could be thrown.

Being able to kill people with boxes in HR is good, but Invisible War also had this so it's not a new thing. In fact I played through IW once by killing every person I could, but never using a conventional weapon. You could probably do that in HR too -- if not for the power consumption whenever you throw something heavy.

I never said that it was a new thing. It's the best (only?) thing they could have take of Invisible War anyway (both the ability to really throw things and the muscle augs that make your inventory bigger and throw heavier stuff and/or with bigger force)