PDA

View Full Version : How should skills and augs be handled in DX4?



McFlabbergasty
30th Dec 2011, 23:15
Should they be separate factors like in DX1 or one entity like in HR? I think DX4 ought to return to the former. The HR system was a nice experiment but tipped over a little into over-simplification territory.

Of course, DX4's skill and aug system will probably hinge on what kinds of augs are available. Are we sticking to mechs? Are we returning to nano-augs? Are we finally going to play as a physio-pharmaceutical aug?

If you have not yet noticed, I'm assuming that DX4 takes place between HR and DX1...in the 2030s to be particular. Right around the time of the MJ12-Illuminati schism.

Ideally, IMO, a combination of mech-augmentation and physio-pharmaceutical augmentation would make a most interesting experience for DX4, in addition to creating the sense that the world is moving away from Adam Jensen's time of mech-aug monopolies and into the more varied world of JC Denton's time: where there is more than one way to "uplift" oneself into a superhuman state of being.

Perhaps your skills in DX4 will govern the use of weapons, certain important items, hacking, etc. And your two kinds of augs will affect your character's appearance in two diverging ways. Tack on enough mech-augs and by the end of the game you would make Gunther Hermann jealous. Or if you load up on physio-augs you will eventually have the milky pallor of the MIBs and WIBs of the original Deus Ex.

jkruse
31st Dec 2011, 02:37
I wouldn't mind having it similar to HR, but there need to be more augs, and more interesting ones. Combine the idea of more augs with less experience, so players are forced to be more specialized. I do like the idea of introducing physio-pharmaceutical augs.

McFlabbergasty
31st Dec 2011, 05:40
Just brainstorming some ideas for a possible skill set...

"Heavy Weapons" - Your skill with unconventionally large firearms such as missile launchers and heavy-caliber automatics.

"Long Guns" - Your skill with rifles, shotguns, and SMGs.

"Sidearms" - Your skill with any small and concealable firearm. The most obvious examples would be pistols.

"Close-Quarters" - A skill governing effectiveness of melee weapons. Perhaps additional upgrades would allow the use of grapples, weaves, and more strikes.

"Signals" - Your ability to use a radio wave-based decryption device to intercept secret messages, possibly revealing passwords, helpful details in quests, and the locations of goodies.

"Medical" - The player's skill in alleviating conditions such as blood loss through the use of medical materials. Can be used on the player or on NPCs if necessary.

"Computers" - Plays a similar role to hacking in DX1, i.e. the tool used to bypass computer terminal security and gain access to cameras, turrets, robots, etc. Another way of gathering intel in addition to the "Signals" skill.

"Lock-picking" - A return to form for the series. Used to access many different doors and containers. This time, though, I would prefer for there to a be distinct mini-game associated with lock-picking.

sonicsidewinder
31st Dec 2011, 13:37
They should be handled...with skill.

:lol:

nomotog
31st Dec 2011, 15:48
I didn't like how DX1 handled augments. You never really had much choice with them. You found them when you found them and could only make a choice between two options for each slot. It also didn't help that most of the choices where no brain choices or too alike to really be much difference. Maybe if they worked more like weapons that you could put on or take off.

Skills returning could be nice. Though as a general thing, I don't really like it when you have abilities that just change numbers.

MaxxQ1
31st Dec 2011, 16:16
I didn't like how DX1 handled augments. You never really had much choice with them. You found them when you found them and could only make a choice between two options for each slot.

OTOH, my biggest issue with DX:HR was *because* there was no choice involved, other than which aug to install at which time. I much preferred the built-in limitation on aug selection in DX. It gave your choices more weight, and you really had to decide which you wanted, because there was no going back or adding the other one later. The best thing about that is that it contributed immensely to replay, since, for your second playthrough, you could choose everything you *didn't* take the first time, and try a completely different approach to the game. You also could only fully upgrade maybe half your augs, adding to the decision-making.

That's the kind of thing I *like* seeing in games - really hard choices. That was also one of the big disappointments of IW. By being able to swap out augs at will, it made any decision you made earlier pointless.

With HR, it didn't matter what aug you chose at what time, because by the end game, you could have every single available aug. Most of (if not all) them could be fully upgraded, especially if you exploit the hacking to get the skill points, which EM made all too easy to do. One reason I haven't played the game a second time is because the playthrough will be no different that the first, unless I just simply go in guns blazing, which I don't really like doing in *any* game.*


It also didn't help that most of the choices where no brain choices or too alike to really be much difference. Maybe if they worked more like weapons that you could put on or take off.

I'm afraid we're simply going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. Doing what you suggested is too close to how augs worked in IW, and as I mentioned, I have an extreme dislike for that sort of system.

My preference is limited and permanent choice. HR fails the former, and IW fails the latter. Unfortunately, a majority of gamers nowadays don't seem to want to make the hard decisions. They're not thinking about multiple playthroughs - they just want to get everything they can (including achievements :rolleyes: ) the first time around, so that they can then move on to the next "big" game.

<whine>It's too hard to choose. Why can't we have everything?</whine>

*Which is why I never play CoD or any other similar game.

nomotog
31st Dec 2011, 17:00
OTOH, my biggest issue with DX:HR was *because* there was no choice involved, other than which aug to install at which time. I much preferred the built-in limitation on aug selection in DX. It gave your choices more weight, and you really had to decide which you wanted, because there was no going back or adding the other one later. The best thing about that is that it contributed immensely to replay, since, for your second playthrough, you could choose everything you *didn't* take the first time, and try a completely different approach to the game. You also could only fully upgrade maybe half your augs, adding to the decision-making.

That's the kind of thing I *like* seeing in games - really hard choices. That was also one of the big disappointments of IW. By being able to swap out augs at will, it made any decision you made earlier pointless.

With HR, it didn't matter what aug you chose at what time, because by the end game, you could have every single available aug. Most of (if not all) them could be fully upgraded, especially if you exploit the hacking to get the skill points, which EM made all too easy to do. One reason I haven't played the game a second time is because the playthrough will be no different that the first, unless I just simply go in guns blazing, which I don't really like doing in *any* game.*

I'm afraid we're simply going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. Doing what you suggested is too close to how augs worked in IW, and as I mentioned, I have an extreme dislike for that sort of system.

My preference is limited and permanent choice. HR fails the former, and IW fails the latter. Unfortunately, a majority of gamers nowadays don't seem to want to make the hard decisions. They're not thinking about multiple playthroughs - they just want to get everything they can (including achievements :rolleyes: ) the first time around, so that they can then move on to the next "big" game.


<whine>It's too hard to choose. Why can't we have everything?</whine>

*Which is why I never play CoD or any other similar game.

I think I hit a nerve some how, but I still think what I said mostly. Dx1 didn't have a lot of choice when it came to augs. First aug canister you get you can pick between two augments. Do you want the silent running augment, or maybe the fast running augment that also functions as silent running meaning anyone who picks the other is crazy. First praxis point you get, you can choose between something like 10 different augments. That is a lot more choice.

MaxxQ1
31st Dec 2011, 17:50
I think I hit a nerve some how, but I still think what I said mostly. Dx1 didn't have a lot of choice when it came to augs. First aug canister you get you can pick between two augments. Do you want the silent running augment, or maybe the fast running augment that also functions as silent running meaning anyone who picks the other is crazy. First praxis point you get, you can choose between something like 10 different augments. That is a lot more choice.

True, but as I said, in HR it doesn't matter, because you will eventually get whatever you *didn't* initially choose. In DX, you were stuck with what you first chose, and you had to deal with the consequences (or benefits) of that choice the rest of the game. I agree that maybe there could have been three to five choices, just for more variety in DX, but what I don't want to see again in DX4 (if it ever gets made) is being able to have *all* available augs (as in HR), or being able to swap any time you want (as in IW).

Choices should be limited and permanent. The trick is balancing, as well as making the augs useful. Taking your case in point: I always choose fast run, but rarely actually *use* it (the only reason I pick fast running is for the jump/fall abilities associated with it, and not the actual running). If I ever were to pick silent running, I'd probably never use that one either. That's not to say that if either or both are implemented in DX4 that I'd never use them - it's just that I've played DX so many times at this point that I know where I *might* have used them, but don't need to now, since I can slow down to a walk prior to getting to the point where I would need them.

McFlabbergasty
31st Dec 2011, 18:38
I think the ingredients are in place for effective use of all three kinds of augs in one player character. A nano-pharma-mech aug, if you will.

Right now I'm thinking it would be most appropriate if mech augs work pretty much the same way augs did in DX1 and HR. That is, abilities that you activate at the expense of BE energy or use passively.

And if we assume that this game takes place soon/soonish after HR, then there *might* be rudimentary nano-augmentation taking its first baby steps. My idea is that nano-augs in DX4 manifest themselves in powerful abilities that siphon away at your hit points rather than your BE. This could create a sense that the player is harnessing almost god-like abilities at a mortal price. There might be a proto-Gray Death at work here. You're not a Denton. You weren't born to accept these nanites.

Finally, I think pharmaugs could be made distinct from the other two types of augs if they granted temporary advantages to the player. These pharmaugs might take the form of short-term buffs. If the mech-augs require the expenditure of BE energy, the nano-augs require the expenditure of health, then these pharmaugs would require the expenditure of the player's limited inventory space.

Jamza
31st Dec 2011, 19:14
I'm not sure when they could set another Deus Ex game to be honest. Not many people liked IW, so setting it after that might be unpopular. Squeezing another game in between HR and DX1 would be possible, but I felt one of HR very few weaknesses was that the story had limited scope due to being shackled to the established canon.

Here's an idea, a DX1 remake! Although there are probably already threads about that.

nomotog
31st Dec 2011, 19:16
True, but as I said, in HR it doesn't matter, because you will eventually get whatever you *didn't* initially choose. In DX, you were stuck with what you first chose, and you had to deal with the consequences (or benefits) of that choice the rest of the game. I agree that maybe there could have been three to five choices, just for more variety in DX, but what I don't want to see again in DX4 (if it ever gets made) is being able to have *all* available augs (as in HR), or being able to swap any time you want (as in IW).

Choices should be limited and permanent. The trick is balancing, as well as making the augs useful. Taking your case in point: I always choose fast run, but rarely actually *use* it (the only reason I pick fast running is for the jump/fall abilities associated with it, and not the actual running). If I ever were to pick silent running, I'd probably never use that one either. That's not to say that if either or both are implemented in DX4 that I'd never use them - it's just that I've played DX so many times at this point that I know where I *might* have used them, but don't need to now, since I can slow down to a walk prior to getting to the point where I would need them.

The fact that you can pick up a new ability latter dosen't invalidate your original choice. Your still limited to so many pints per section. If you pick up cloaking in Detroit, it's a completely different experience then if you pick up wall punch. The game could do with some tightening on the number of points. Mostly radically lowing the amount of EXP hacking gives. And maybe setting a max amount of points.

The fact that you don't use the augs in DX is anther thing wrong with them. You didn't have to actually want the aug to get it. You almost get forced into them. You will have a leg! You will!

Overall I like more choice in games. Not always more consequence. The idea that all choices need to have consequence is kind of a bad thing. It looks good on the outside, but if you put to much weight on consequence then it can totally take away your choice. The fact that DX was heavy on choice, but not consequence was one of the good parts of it.

"Oh you never put any points in lock pick and now your out. No worries we got you back pick up that grenade and use that." The game wasn't about punishing choices. "You pick lockpicks now or you can't play!" It was about giving the player the freedom to make any choice they want and have the game work out.

MaxxQ1
31st Dec 2011, 21:35
The fact that you can pick up a new ability latter dosen't invalidate your original choice. Your still limited to so many pints per section. If you pick up cloaking in Detroit, it's a completely different experience then if you pick up wall punch. The game could do with some tightening on the number of points. Mostly radically lowing the amount of EXP hacking gives. And maybe setting a max amount of points.

Agreed on the last three sentences above.

As for the first part, sure, it doesn't invalidate your choice, but in the long run, which is what I'm getting at, it doesn't matter. My point is that I don't feel like *every single aug* should be able to be used in a single playthrough. The only way to make the game a bit more of a challenge in subsequent playthroughs is to not take any augs, or only take certain ones. This also applies to the quoted paragraph below - you are *not* forced to take any augs in any of the games. You don't want it? Don't take it. I never said I didn't want silent running/fast running. I just said I rarely use one, and never use the other. I *could* just simply not install either, and still get the same gameplay that I usually do.


The fact that you don't use the augs in DX is anther thing wrong with them. You didn't have to actually want the aug to get it. You almost get forced into them. You will have a leg! You will!

Just to reiterate: you most certainly are *not* forced to take any aug you don't want - in *any* of the games.


Overall I like more choice in games. Not always more consequence. The idea that all choices need to have consequence is kind of a bad thing. It looks good on the outside, but if you put to much weight on consequence then it can totally take away your choice. The fact that DX was heavy on choice, but not consequence was one of the good parts of it.

The thing is, there is *always* a consequence to a choice, even in real life. You *can't* have one without the other. The thing people forget, or fail to realize, is that "consequence" doesn't always mean a bad thing. Consequences can be good as well as bad, it's just that most people use the term "consequence(s)" to denote negative benefits (and use "benefits" in place of "positive consequences"). As for the last sentence you wrote there^^^, again, in the long run, it doesn't matter. You have a choice of three paths to take to get to an objective - one is just as valid as the other two, and which one you choose makes no difference overall. It's like having three paths laid out before you to your destination: one path is one kilometer long, the second is 1000 meters, the third is 100,000 centimeters.

Sure, there are *some* choices you make that make a little bit of a difference in the game. Giving Sandra Renton's dad a gun at the 'Ton means she doesn't show up at the abandoned gas station later in the game. There are other examples, but in the overall scheme of the game, they're all minor. Even killing or not killing Anna in the 747 doesn't make all that much difference.

I know it sounds like I'm really criticizing DX, but I'm not. I'm just able to enjoy playing the game despite those flaws and illusions of choice.


"Oh you never put any points in lock pick and now your out. No worries we got you back pick up that grenade and use that." The game wasn't about punishing choices. "You pick lockpicks now or you can't play!" It was about giving the player the freedom to make any choice they want and have the game work out.

I never said that's what I wanted to see in the game.

What I want is *limitations* on the choices you make. In your current playthrough, if you take X aug, then you cannot get Y aug, ever. That's *not* a bad thing, IMO, and as you mentioned, there are ways to make up for not getting a particular augmentation. This is the only time having multiple paths to an objective is useful, but again, it makes no real difference in the game overall.

In the end, for all three games, the only choice you can make to give you a significantly different playthrough, overall, is to not take any augs at all.

Frankly, what *I* want to see in any future DX game is that by choosing certain augs, some objectives are completely cut off, and if you choose an alternate aug, then those objectives are open, but the ones for the other augs are closed. Designed right, you could have two completely different games depending on which augs you take - three if the devs take into account that some people are masochists and will attempt the game without augs at all :eek:

Realistically? That'll never happen. It would mean basically designing three different games covering the same storyline, and if you think four years was a long time to develop DX:HR...

nomotog
31st Dec 2011, 22:06
Frankly, what *I* want to see in any future DX game is that by choosing certain augs, some objectives are completely cut off, and if you choose an alternate aug, then those objectives are open, but the ones for the other augs are closed. Designed right, you could have two completely different games depending on which augs you take - three if the devs take into account that some people are masochists and will attempt the game without augs at all :eek:

Realistically? That'll never happen. It would mean basically designing three different games covering the same storyline, and if you think four years was a long time to develop DX:HR...

That would be like the worst way to make a DX game. You must have aug A to complete mission B. They actually did that with some of the missions in HR and they are the missions that everyone complains about.

Also locking content is the lazy way to encourage replay. DX already dose a good job of offering verity in replay. First time I played HR, I was combat based, second time I was sneaking. Both totally different experiences and they where even made better because I never had to make cut and dry tradeoffs like DX1's argument system. I could pick up both the cloaking and the armor and combine them into what I call Rambo style. If Augments where one or the other, then I wouldn't have been able to do that.

Actually the number of ways I have completed my missions is just astounding. The ability to take any augs like stealth right after the first level, just opens up so many possibilities right out the gate.

I'm going to stop to point out that this is how DX1 actually worked. Augs where for the most part, very minor. The real meant of advancement was in skills. The skills in DX working a lot like the augments in HR. You can take any or even every skill. (Cheat codes I will miss you.)

Zoet
31st Dec 2011, 22:29
I liked generally liked DX:HR's aug system, and I also liked that upgrading the augs had no visible effect on the character, because it is an odd quirk of mine that visuals often trump utility (in games like Fallout 3/New Vegas, I always hold onto and use my favourite looking gear, even if it is low-level), and I would have hated Adam's nice and sleek design to be ruined by tacky-looking add-ons!
The main problem that I feel with the current aug system is that you can get too many augs, allowing you to get to a point where you are just upgrading stuff for the sake of it. The simplest fix would simply be lowering the amount of XP you get. I would think that this could also be remedied by having more levels to each augmentation, rather than having more augs, for instance, rather than 3 levels of cloak, have 5, etc. This could encourage and reward increased specialisation. Also, some augs are more useful than others, but I've yet to see an upgrades system in a game where this is not the case.

I want Adam to return as the protagonist in any DX4, so my main wish is that the current system - which I like - is maintained and refined.

MaxxQ1
31st Dec 2011, 22:32
That would be like the worst way to make a DX game. You must have aug A to complete mission B. They actually did that with some of the missions in HR and they are the missions that everyone complains about.

Also locking content is the lazy way to encourage replay. DX already dose a good job of offering verity in replay. First time I played HR, I was combat based, second time I was sneaking. Both totally different experiences and they where even made better because I never had to make cut and dry tradeoffs like DX1's argument system. I could pick up both the cloaking and the armor and combine them into what I call Rambo style. If Augments where one or the other, then I wouldn't have been able to do that.

Actually the number of ways I have completed my missions is just astounding. The ability to take any augs like stealth right after the first level, just opens up so many possibilities right out the gate.

I'm going to stop to point out that this is how DX1 actually worked. Augs where for the most part, very minor. The real meant of advancement was in skills. The skills in DX working a lot like the augments in HR. You can take any or even every skill. (Cheat codes I will miss you.)

Your very last sentence (the one in parentheses) tells me a lot. The only time I have ever used a cheat in any DX game was the Matrix mode once or twice just for giggles. Even with Skyrim, Oblivion, Fallout 3 - all the cheating-style mods available - I never use them. Balance tweaks, graphics mods, new weapons/armor/etc. yes, I'll use those. But never anything that could ever be mistaken for a godmod.

I apologize in advance if you take this the wrong way, but it seems to me that you want everything available without having to work for it. I don't play that way.

Before this thread degenerates, I think I'm going to bow out gracefully. It's clear neither one of us is going to see what the other is trying to say, so I'll just leave up what I've written, and leave the thread to others to continue.

Tverdyj
31st Dec 2011, 22:57
I'm guessing the aug system may depend on which of HR's endings is canon.

nomotog
31st Dec 2011, 23:51
Your very last sentence (the one in parentheses) tells me a lot. The only time I have ever used a cheat in any DX game was the Matrix mode once or twice just for giggles. Even with Skyrim, Oblivion, Fallout 3 - all the cheating-style mods available - I never use them. Balance tweaks, graphics mods, new weapons/armor/etc. yes, I'll use those. But never anything that could ever be mistaken for a godmod.

I apologize in advance if you take this the wrong way, but it seems to me that you want everything available without having to work for it. I don't play that way.

Before this thread degenerates, I think I'm going to bow out gracefully. It's clear neither one of us is going to see what the other is trying to say, so I'll just leave up what I've written, and leave the thread to others to continue.

You can't really be graceful when you make a post like that. I do see what you are trying to say. I just think it's the wrong way for DX to go. DX is about options. Removing options is a bad thing for DX.

MaxxQ1
1st Jan 2012, 08:35
You can't really be graceful when you make a post like that. I do see what you are trying to say. I just think it's the wrong way for DX to go. DX is about options. Removing options is a bad thing for DX.

Okay, I lied - I can't let this go.

No, you really *don't* see what I'm trying to say.

I'm not suggesting they remove options. I'm saying that as implemented in HR, it's not so much an option as it is deciding at what point you get what aug, when it doesn't really matter since you can eventually get them all (god, I sound like a broken record). In DX, you could only get half the available augs. This, IMO, is A Good Thing. It prevents JC from becoming a god-like character (well... before he's *supposed* to, anyway ;) ), and makes him different from one playthrough to the next, as long as you choose different aug combinations. OTOH, Adam can just get every damn aug in the game, which means no matter how many times you play the game, he ends up being pretty much the same 2/3 - 3/4 of the way through the game.

What you want is to be able to have everything possible in a single playthrough, and just changing up at what point you get any given aug. What I want is to have to make a hard choice on which aug to take the first time around, and by making that choice, being denied the use - in *that* playthrough - of the other aug available for that slot. That most definitely is not removing options, but it *does* limit them, making you think hard on what you want to do. It's the thinking about it that I enjoy.

Saerain
1st Jan 2012, 09:49
I'm not sure when they could set another Deus Ex game to be honest. Not many people liked IW, so setting it after that might be unpopular. Squeezing another game in between HR and DX1 would be possible, but I felt one of HR very few weaknesses was that the story had limited scope due to being shackled to the established canon.

Here's an idea, a DX1 remake! Although there are probably already threads about that. My hope has been that HR is the beginning of a reboot for the IP, rather than a shackled prequel. That EM's intention is to keep the Illuminati/MJ12/Templar/Roswell stuff in the realm of conspiracy theory, that the previously established timeline is not set in stone, and so on. That by the time this new series reaches the 2050s, if ever, it's not the 2050s imagined 12 years ago. We can do better than that. We're already off to a more realistic start. Keep the momentum.

Jamza
1st Jan 2012, 17:47
My hope has been that HR is the beginning of a reboot for the IP, rather than a shackled prequel. That EM's intention is to keep the Illuminati/MJ12/Templar/Roswell stuff in the realm of conspiracy theory, that the previously established timeline is not set in stone, and so on. That by the time this new series reaches the 2050s, if ever, it's not the 2050s imagined 12 years ago. We can do better than that. We're already off to a more realistic start. Keep the momentum.

That would be an interesting idea. A lot of sub-plots, incidental characters and political situations mentioned in the game do seem intended to gear up to the story of Deus Ex 1, but I suppose a reboot would still be possible. I'd like to see some more city hubs in the new Deus Ex away from the US and China. I think maybe London, or Dubai.

Darthassin
1st Jan 2012, 18:27
I would like to see Las Vegas city hub. Why? Casinos, banks, 5*hotels, nightclubs and nightlife in neon-filled dark enviroment. Hazard, sex, money, drugs, alcohol and so on ...

It could be interesting.

nomotog
1st Jan 2012, 22:37
Okay, I lied - I can't let this go.

No, you really *don't* see what I'm trying to say.

I'm not suggesting they remove options. I'm saying that as implemented in HR, it's not so much an option as it is deciding at what point you get what aug, when it doesn't really matter since you can eventually get them all (god, I sound like a broken record). In DX, you could only get half the available augs. This, IMO, is A Good Thing. It prevents JC from becoming a god-like character (well... before he's *supposed* to, anyway ;) ), and makes him different from one playthrough to the next, as long as you choose different aug combinations. OTOH, Adam can just get every damn aug in the game, which means no matter how many times you play the game, he ends up being pretty much the same 2/3 - 3/4 of the way through the game.

What you want is to be able to have everything possible in a single playthrough, and just changing up at what point you get any given aug. What I want is to have to make a hard choice on which aug to take the first time around, and by making that choice, being denied the use - in *that* playthrough - of the other aug available for that slot. That most definitely is not removing options, but it *does* limit them, making you think hard on what you want to do. It's the thinking about it that I enjoy.

Just going by augs, you get two play playthrough in your idea. One and then the other one. Sense you can only make two choices for each slot, it's not a lot of choice. I don't want that. I want a lot of choices at all parts of the game. I like HR system where you have many choices. That is also the DX1 system. You can pick on of many skills each time you level.

I'm thinking that my ideal system would be a call back to DX. You would have a large skill tree of different skills and abilities. Each level or each point you get to puck up one skill. You would find skills form both DX and HR. Things like a skill that improves your inventory, a skill that improves your shooting. (I'm thinking going back to DX style shooting where you suck till you improve.)

In this system, augs are there own thing. They aren't skills or advancement they are items. You carry them in your inventory and have to equip them much like weapons. Different skills could unlock new powers with them, but that would be the same deal with weapons.

MaxxQ1
1st Jan 2012, 23:58
Just going by augs, you get two play playthrough in your idea. One and then the other one. Sense you can only make two choices for each slot, it's not a lot of choice. I don't want that. I want a lot of choices at all parts of the game. I like HR system where you have many choices. That is also the DX1 system. You can pick on of many skills each time you level.

Wrong. You may choose a different aug in your second playthrough for one slot, but also choose the same aug from your first playthrough for a different slot. You may end up keeping the same augs from your first play, except for one - or two, or three, or more. Granted, just changing it up by one aug would only change the gameplay slightly, but again, that's really no different than Adam getting every single aug available, and only changing the order in which he installs them.

Technically, you could have as many playthroughs as there are augs available the way I want to see it done.


I'm thinking that my ideal system would be a call back to DX. You would have a large skill tree of different skills and abilities. Each level or each point you get to puck up one skill. You would find skills form both DX and HR. Things like a skill that improves your inventory, a skill that improves your shooting. (I'm thinking going back to DX style shooting where you suck till you improve.)

I can more or less agree with this, although they would have to be careful not to cause an overlap between augs and skills, like DX had.


In this system, augs are there own thing. They aren't skills or advancement they are items. You carry them in your inventory and have to equip them much like weapons. Different skills could unlock new powers with them, but that would be the same deal with weapons.

This I cannot agree with. Augs should be a part of your character, not some sort of plug n' play item in your inventory. They should also be a permanent install - no changing your mind later on. At least HR kept *that* from DX, unlike IW.

Edit: Now that I think about it, of course HR made the augs permanent - when you can have every aug available, there's no need to swap. :rolleyes:

TrickyVein
2nd Jan 2012, 01:08
Reading through this discussion, particularly your comments, Maxx, once again I'm struck by how great a game New Vegas really is. It seems highly underrated, which is probably a good thing if the most popular games nowadays shy away from forcing the player to make really hard choices. In New Vegas, if a character dies who is involved in some quest even if you have no knowledge of this, you will fail that quest. If your reputation with a faction is too low, there are in all likelihood a whole circuit of quests, dialogue, story and characters that you will never see. You can fumble through the entire game and have absolutely no idea what kinds of changes you're affecting.

I am still trying to finish my first play-through of HR. I stopped playing when I realized just how quickly I was able to find weapon modifications for my pistol and advance my augmentations. In Detroit, even before going to the police station I could see every possible augmentation before me and in an instant the game became tedious.

I will absolutely say that 1) if the number of praxis kits available were severely limited (like the upgrade modules in System Shock 2) or 2) upgrading one kind of augmentation permanently removed the option to upgrade another I would still be playing the game right now, or have finished it.

Meanwhile, starting a second playthrough of New Vegas sounds pretty darned attractive to me right now.

MaxxQ1
2nd Jan 2012, 04:24
Reading through this discussion, particularly your comments, Maxx, once again I'm struck by how great a game New Vegas really is. It seems highly underrated, which is probably a good thing if the most popular games nowadays shy away from forcing the player to make really hard choices. In New Vegas, if a character dies who is involved in some quest even if you have no knowledge of this, you will fail that quest. If your reputation with a faction is too low, there are in all likelihood a whole circuit of quests, dialogue, story and characters that you will never see. You can fumble through the entire game and have absolutely no idea what kinds of changes you're affecting.

I am still trying to finish my first play-through of HR. I stopped playing when I realized just how quickly I was able to find weapon modifications for my pistol and advance my augmentations. In Detroit, even before going to the police station I could see every possible augmentation before me and in an instant the game became tedious.

I will absolutely say that 1) if the number of praxis kits available were severely limited (like the upgrade modules in System Shock 2) or 2) upgrading one kind of augmentation permanently removed the option to upgrade another I would still be playing the game right now, or have finished it.

Meanwhile, starting a second playthrough of New Vegas sounds pretty darned attractive to me right now.

Up to now, I haven't really been all that interested in NV. Now that you've mentioned some of the features of it, I may just have to pick it up. Those kind of gameplay elements are right up my alley.

As for the rest of your post, I have to agree 100%. I have yet to start a second playthrough, nor have I even gotten TML. Unfortunately, I think HR is going to end up on my "only played one time" shelf. It's a pity, because the game had so much potential, and it *is* a good game - just not good enough to play again, at least not this year (and by "this year", I mean 2012).

nomotog
2nd Jan 2012, 06:35
Wait you only played HR one time?

Senka
2nd Jan 2012, 08:52
I've only played through once. I started a second but never got very far into detroit even. It feels like there's very little left to discover or stumble upon, unlike Dx1. I just don't have any reasons to play again. I can't think of anything significant I could do differently.

MaxxQ1
2nd Jan 2012, 09:48
Wait you only played HR one time?

Yes, because as Senka said, there's not much else to discover once you've been through it once. OTOH, I've played DX at least once per year since release, and the last time I played at the beginning of this year (well, 2011 that is), I found some stuff that I hadn't seen before, and heard some new dialogue.

Also like Senka, I started a second playthrough, and pretty much got bored with it, even though I picked different augs to start off with. It just didn't feel any different - or even play any differently - than the first time around.

nomotog
2nd Jan 2012, 16:49
Well that explains a it.

MaxxQ1
2nd Jan 2012, 17:08
Well that explains a it.

All it explains is that the game wasn't different enough - or interesting enough - the second time to warrant playing it a second time. TBH, I was starting to get bored towards the end of the *first* playthrough. The fact that by that point, I was a super badass with no problems taking anyone out or sneaking past, and the game not presenting me with any challenges worth talking about, made it rather dull.

It was kinda the same with DX, but the rest of the game made up for it. HR doesn't do that. At least, not for me.

brangdon
2nd Jan 2012, 18:09
I think the Aug system is basically OK in DX:HR. With DX1 it was nice to have skills as well, but if things have to be simplified for consoles, merging skills with augs was a reasonable choice.

I agree that the game was a little too generous and that you end up with too much. However, that doesn't spoil the game for me. It's only the final section that's like that. I wouldn't want an arbitrary limit. One of the things I dislike about DX1 is after a while, I kept finding augs that I couldn't use because the slot was already full. I hate having "rewards" I can't possibly use. (It's bad enough working hard solving a puzzle only to get ammo for a weapon I don't carry - but at least that could have been useful.)

The number of praxis points available is more a matter of balance than of the system being fundamentally flawed. Having mutually exclusive augs would be a more basic change, but could fit into the current UI pretty smoothly. I hope they consider it for DX4.

I think the DX:HR augs are a bit too binary, a bit too powerful. For example, the rebreather doesn't just give immunity to gas for a few seconds, but indefinitely. I'd rather it use battery power like Cloak does. Similarly, EMP resistance is 100%. I'd rather it reduce effects by a percentage. Punching Walls is all or nothing, so is falling. Take downs work on everything. Cloak works against both humans and machines. These all solve problems too completely, and remove too much of the challenge.

That said, I felt the combat-related augs were too few and too weak. Armour maxes out at 45%, and I didn't feel the two accuracy augs really helped that much. It'd be nice if there were more augs to help us get the best out of weapons. I'm not asking for it to be more generous, necessarily. For example, weapon upgrades above a certain level could require an augs to install. Accuracy augs could be more weapon-class specific (as skills were in DX1). There should be at least as many augs related to weapons (and explosives) as there were for hacking.

As an aside, I think The Missing Link improves on several points that the original game gets wrong. Specifically, it gives you a handful of praxis kits near the start. That mirrors what DX1 did with initial skill points. I think it's good to play with a customised character from the beginning. DX:HR is arguably best from about the time you first leave Detroit, since by that point you have your character pretty well kitted out as you want, albeit with a few things missing. Secondly, TML being a shorter game does not award enough points for you to have everything.

[Edit:]Thirdly, it's possible to complete TML without using any additional augs, weapons or explosives at all. You even get a trophy for doing it. I just tried DX:HR that way and, of course, it's impossible because of the boss battles. (I tried dealing with them just using what I found in the room. Frankly, on a console, it was just too hard for me on the highest difficulty setting. For the third one I even on the lowest difficulty setting I had to get the Typhoon.)


I've only played through once. I started a second but never got very far into detroit even. It feels like there's very little left to discover or stumble upon, unlike Dx1. I just don't have any reasons to play again. I can't think of anything significant I could do differently.Well, that's you're choice. I've played through 4 times. Each time I made different choices. I discovered new things on each play-through. I'm impressed if you truly managed to get 100% of the trophies on the first play-through.

MaxxQ1
2nd Jan 2012, 19:31
I'm impressed if you truly managed to get 100% of the trophies on the first play-through.

Nothing wrong with the rest of what you said, but I just needed to comment on this.

Not everyone cares about trophies or achievements. I probably got less than half those available on my playthrough. I say probably, because I can't be arsed to check and see. IMO, achievements cheapen games anyway, especially for the completely useless ones like "Performed 5 nonlethal takedowns".

Woohoo... :rolleyes:

It's not like it gives you any actual gameplay bonus, or maybe a discount on DLC. It's all just fluff.

nomotog
2nd Jan 2012, 20:40
MaxxQ1 have you taken the Bartle test? With what you have posted, I made a guess on what you would score and I am wondering if I am close.

TrickyVein
2nd Jan 2012, 21:11
I think the DX:HR augs are a bit too binary, a bit too powerful. For example, the rebreather doesn't just give immunity to gas for a few seconds, but indefinitely. I'd rather it use battery power like Cloak does. Similarly, EMP resistance is 100%. I'd rather it reduce effects by a percentage. Punching Walls is all or nothing, so is falling. Take downs work on everything. Cloak works against both humans and machines. These all solve problems too completely, and remove too much of the challenge.

Good point. These augmentations function more like perks.

MaxxQ1
2nd Jan 2012, 21:23
MaxxQ1 have you taken the Bartle test? With what you have posted, I made a guess on what you would score and I am wondering if I am close.

No, I haven't, and no, I won't. I don't really care to provide you with some kind of perceived amusement (or an attempt to insult me). I don't even know (or care) what it tests for. Instead of trying to pigeonhole me into some ridiculous category some arbitrary test might place me in, why don't you try to realize that I have my opinion and you have yours... neither of us us is going to convince the other that we are right (or the other is wrong), so why don't we just drop this whole thing.

I've already said the game is good, just not good enough to replay as much as DX. IMO, it has faults, but so does DX. It's just that HR has different flaws, and they're not something I can "deal with". If you can't handle that (or even understand it), then let me know so I can put you on ignore.

Edit: OK, just out of curiosity, I looked it up. First off, it's gonna be skewed because it's primarily focused on online gamers. I don't play online, *EVER*. Nobody could pay me enough to deal with the idiots and *******s that invaribly show up on these things. I'm a loner - always have been, and always will be, both in gaming and in real life.

nomotog
2nd Jan 2012, 23:23
Good point. These augmentations function more like perks.

I would say that the majority of HR's augs are actually skills with a different flavor text.

chickensnack
3rd Jan 2012, 00:10
I think the augs are fine. These are what I hope they will improve upon:

a) XP system needs to be fine-tuned. Takedowns should reward the same XP regardless of lethal or non-lethal.

b) Lethal takedowns need to be silent but should engage a QTE so its not as easy as a non-lethal TD.

c) Health should regenerate more quickly or the PC should take less damage so the option of getting into firefights is more bearable.

d) Energy system needs to be better tuned. Instead of individual batteries it should just be one big charge that depletes and recharges slowly. Consumables will give you instantaneous recharges based on increments depending on food-type.

e) Better handling of inventory system. For example having a sidearm, 2 primaries, and limited grenades of each type. Weapon mods should not take up any inv space but instead have their own separate menu where you can combine mods to make more powerful ones. It would also be awesome if the mods are detachable so we can customize as we please. Hacking nukes and worms shouldn't take up inv space either and ammunition needs to stack higher or impose a superficial ammo cap so a player can only retain so much.

f) Praxis points need to be slightly more limited, especially in a full/complete playthrough. Its too easy to grab everything worth having towards almost 1-2 hrs before the end.

McFlabbergasty
3rd Jan 2012, 19:02
Maybe a skull-gun can be justified by acting like one of these (http://www.zahal.org/products/picatinny-mounted-glass-breaker) things.

Some police agency needs a convenient way of allowing officers to break through glass or plant a discrete surveillance device on some hard surface...and since this is Deus Ex and a skull-gun has to shoe-horned in at some point, why not use this (http://www.zahal.org/products/picatinny-mounted-glass-breaker)?

The link says the attachment has to be used at point blank range, but for augmentation purposes it should definitely be given a longer range than that.

Ilves
3rd Jan 2012, 21:24
I miss the separate skill & aug sets so much...

I have problems with the obvious simplicity of HR's leveling system, or the less than subtle augs, as brangdon points out, but aside from that I'm just really not too wowed by the a la carte, pick 'n choose model.

Acquiring aug and upgrade canisters in DX was so much more rewarding than HR's "software" system, just in terms of fiction alone. DX's augs felt like genuine treasures; you'd worked hard for them, or stumbled over one in a lucky break, and you didn't have a clue what else was out there. The illusion of choice and player agency was much more powerful.

In HR's context a proper model might be that you could find (buy? steal? :p) and replace unique physical augmentations, and to an extent maybe upgrade them through software, following the aug and upgrade canister templates respectively. I'm still not sure if this model was actually considered during HR's early development, but it's got my vote, hands down.

And do bring back separate skill and upgrade trees. The closet role player in me facepalms every time I resort to stupid tricks like excessive hacking & vent crawling simply to max out exp. :rolleyes:

McFlabbergasty
4th Jan 2012, 00:09
I like the idea of multiple sources for augs and aug upgrades. Will you spend thousands of credits at the clinic or just hope to find a similar aug lying in a ditch somewhere? Would rather spend that limited amount of money on consumables or weapons?

nomotog
4th Jan 2012, 05:06
What if brought back augment upgrades. Only lets have more of them like we do with weapons. Maybe each aug has one or two custom upgrades. Like the cloak can be upgrade to work on robots. Then you could have a pool of upgrades common to all the augs. The stranded energy reduction comes to mind. You would find/buy them like weapon upgrades, only you put them in your augments.

singularity
4th Jan 2012, 06:28
Wait you only played HR one time?

why would I play it again? I got nearly every single aug, and completed every single mission on my first play through (along with 85% of the achievements). As did nearely everyone else I talked to. First play through clocked 65 hours on Steam, and outside of one or two extra weapon upgrades I haven't found anything substantial in subsequent playthroughs.

Unlike DX, you can actually do everything in a single playthrough, so long as you upgrade hacking early on and pick up the cassie aug before halfway through.

Obviously I'm being a little snarky here, but you get my point. I played through DX 3 times (one on each difficulty and a variety of different play styles), but by the third play, I was done. Infact, it was a chore to beat it the third time.
Ive beaten the original DX over 20 times, and am STILL playing... hell, I even beat DXIW 4 times before I got rid of it.

What do I want in DX4? The aug system needs to be much more like the original, I argue. And with it, as mentioned by many others before, my choices in augs need consequences. If I don't have an awesome hacking aug, the hackers really shouldn't be interested in me. If I don't have some nifty combat augs, why would they be giving me combat missions? Same goes for stealth.
Sure - 70% of the game should be take any mission you want and complete it how you want based on your current player build, but the other 30% should pake a page out of games like The Witcher, Alpha Protocol and Vampire: Bloodlines. The choices I make need to open up and subsequently close off certain paths. This isn't lazy at all, its proper RPG design.
Being able to do everything means I'm not playing a role - I'm playing a shooter that has a nifty exp system (oh... hello Call of Duty).

DXHR was still one of my favorite games released in the last 5 years. But it needs some work done.

As for the OP: I would love to see skills return along with augs. If they keep it augs only, that's fine but there needs to be choice involved - not simply "you'll get everything soon - just keep knocking more guys out!" Perhaps a hybrid of the first and 3rd? You gain enough exp, you can buy an aug, but Mecha-Protagonist has only so many slots on his body for augs. Say - 10 slots across various body parts and 35 augs total? Augs need to be permenant (otherwise, again, there is no choice involved because there is no consequence if you can swap 'em). Buy augs in whatever order you want.

Thus - choice: you can pick augs in whatever order you want, you can pick augs that fit your play style, you get more augs for exploring more and completing more missions due to exp.
and Consequence: Pick carefully, as there are only a certain number of slots per body part, and a certain number of slots total. Must have foresight (what do I want my character to become) and must choose carefully, as certain augs will unlock certain missions for you to complete.

nomotog
4th Jan 2012, 07:22
So it's agreed. We all think hacking was OP.

You know I think I know why I am having such a better time replaying. I knew there was a good chance of me falling into the perfect play rut like what happened with DX1. (Pick the gep gun. Invest all points into locking, electrics and hand gun. Unlock or explode everything in sight. Use the speed aug with the energy reduction aug) So with HR I rigged my first playthrugh. I played a shooty kill a lot. I did only a about half the missions none that well and never put a point in hacking. Now that I am on my sneaky non lethal play through, it's a completely new animal.

MaxxQ1
4th Jan 2012, 07:46
So it's agreed. We all think hacking was OP.

Yep. Definitely. It also didn't help that hacking was used for *everything* - computers, doors, security consoles, and so on. If they'd at least kept a few manual locks and put lockpicking in the game, it might have been a bit less tedious. After hacking the 25th-30th door, computer, whatever, it was just mind-numbingly boring. Sire the minigame was nice, but even though there were different patterns and difficulties, it still got to be too much of a good thing.


You know I think I know why I am having such a better time replaying. I knew there was a good chance of me falling into the perfect play rut like what happened with DX1. (Pick the gep gun. Invest all points into locking, electrics and hand gun. Unlock or explode everything in sight. Use the speed aug with the energy reduction aug) So with HR I rigged my first playthrugh. I played a shooty kill a lot. I did only a about half the missions none that well and never put a point in hacking. Now that I am on my sneaky non lethal play through, it's a completely new animal.

I never took the GEP gun right off the bat. I always stealth my way through Liberty Island, killing no one and only using TNT crates (with the pistol) to blow open sunken boat hatches and medbot crates.

68_pie
4th Jan 2012, 14:57
What do I want in DX4? The aug system needs to be much more like the original, I argue. And with it, as mentioned by many others before, my choices in augs need consequences. If I don't have an awesome hacking aug, the hackers really shouldn't be interested in me. If I don't have some nifty combat augs, why would they be giving me combat missions? Same goes for stealth.
Sure - 70% of the game should be take any mission you want and complete it how you want based on your current player build, but the other 30% should pake a page out of games like The Witcher, Alpha Protocol and Vampire: Bloodlines. The choices I make need to open up and subsequently close off certain paths. This isn't lazy at all, its proper RPG design.
Being able to do everything means I'm not playing a role - I'm playing a shooter that has a nifty exp system (oh... hello Call of Duty).

This. Alpha Protocol and Bloodlines did it really well and developers should take more heed of these games.

xaduha
4th Jan 2012, 15:31
Argh! Why didn't they listen the first time around?! I'd say scratch HR and start all over, but that will never happen. HR2, not DX4 folks.
Anyway, there isn't even a rumor, is there?

MaxxQ1
4th Jan 2012, 16:18
Argh! Why didn't they listen the first time around?! I'd say scratch HR and start all over, but that will never happen. HR2, not DX4 folks.
Anyway, there isn't ever a rumor, is there?

No rumors as far as I know, but HR sold well enough that it's within the realm of possibility.

brangdon
7th Jan 2012, 16:22
Not everyone cares about trophies or achievements.I mostly agree; I was just using them as a way to indicate how much of the game was completed. I do think they are a good thing in that they can hint at other options and play styles. It's easy with games like DX to think you've done it all, not realising you had the option to kill agent Navarre, or rescue Malik, or save both the scientists and the subjects.

MaxxQ1
7th Jan 2012, 19:53
I mostly agree; I was just using them as a way to indicate how much of the game was completed. I do think they are a good thing in that they can hint at other options and play styles. It's easy with games like DX to think you've done it all, not realising you had the option to kill agent Navarre, or rescue Malik, or save both the scientists and the subjects.

This is in no way meant as an insult to those who took ages to realize you could do/not do any of those things, but it does illustrate that some people don't think outside the box much.

It seems to me by what you said - "they are a good thing in that they can hint at other options and play styles" - it takes thinking away from the player. When one can just look at the list of achievements/trophies and realize that you can do this or that action, it doesn't require much creative thinking in getting through an objective. I suppose one way to alleviate that issue would be to have all achievements/trophies blank, until the player actually does it. At least Dragon Age did that with some of theirs. Unfortunately, even *that* is kinda pointless in the age of game forums, twitter, and strategy guides.

Also, the ability to get one achievement, save your game, and do it differently - in the same playthrough - and get both achievements is kinda cheesey, IMO. Kinda negates the argument that achievements contribute to replay value, like the 4 endings of HR. It might be better if games were set up to *require* subsequent playthroughs to actually *get* all achievements/trophies.

Like *that* will ever happen... :rolleyes:

Senka
8th Jan 2012, 02:17
Well, that's you're choice. I've played through 4 times. Each time I made different choices. I discovered new things on each play-through. I'm impressed if you truly managed to get 100% of the trophies on the first play-through.

Yes, I made the conscious decision to become disenchanted with the game I was currently playing, in order to complain about it on an online forum, perhaps in an effort to seem superior to all the lesser mortal who are still entertained by such a trivial thing? Please.

No, I didn't get 100% of the achievements. Was I trying to? No. Do I give a ****? No. Are they supposed to be motivation to play the game again? The game should be motivation to play the game again.

brangdon
9th Jan 2012, 16:08
Yes, I made the conscious decision to become disenchanted with the game I was currently playing, in order to complain about it on an online forum, perhaps in an effort to seem superior to all the lesser mortal who are still entertained by such a trivial thing? Please.It was your choice not to play a second time. You said there you thought there was little left to discover, and nothing significant that you could do differently. Trophies are a way to measure how much of the game you actually did see. I suspect that your belief that you have seen all the game had to offer, is wrong.


It seems to me by what you said - "they are a good thing in that they can hint at other options and play styles" - it takes thinking away from the player.If you do that before you play, sure. Once you've played through it a couple of times on your own, I don't have a problem with people using other sources to see what they've missed. We all have blind spots; I don't think we should be ashamed to admit that. And I think getting inspiration from elsewhere then playing again, is probably better than abandoning the game without appreciating its depth.

Senka
9th Jan 2012, 23:28
If achievements are a way to measure how much of a game we see, then I guess there isn't much worth seeing.

Of course it was my choice not to play a second time (although I did start a second playthrough, not getting very far in at all), but it was not my choice to feel disenchanted with the game, that's just the end impression the game gave me. The game did not give me reason to play again, it did not have anything worthwhile left to motivate me to play it. Additionally I didn't feel that playing differently would be rewarding, so I stopped playing. How is this hard to understand?