PDA

View Full Version : They all could be dead because everybody lies



no149
3rd Sep 2012, 14:02
I didn't quite get the ending. Adam chooses a buton other than the self destruction one and in the post-credits scene, the conversation suggests that the Hyron the whole Panchea was trashed and also there's no hint that Adam or David or William are alive, quite the opposite Megan alludes that Sarif and Adam are dead when she says "where else could I go?" At least, that's what I gather.

Does that all mean that even Eliza was lying about the choices because you know, according to her "everybody lies"; Perhaps all the choices lead to destruction of the Hyron in the end? Also notice her line" this is not end of the world, but you can see it from here."

Ilves
3rd Sep 2012, 14:28
The ending narrative was construed under time pressure, and I believe the team even went on record saying that the ending they had initially envisioned was technically too ambitious to pull off.

So, if I were you, I'd save myself the headache of looking for any coherence. ;P

Check out this series (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNZOLwyHH8&feature=BFa&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0), if you can tolerate the minutiose nitpicking:

YRNZOLwyHH8&feature=share&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0

sKz13hMZ5tM&feature=share&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0

n3HOIYGJxbo&feature=share&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0


Dear god there's eight parts and it's not even finished aarghghhh

no149
3rd Sep 2012, 15:22
Holy crap, people have too much time on their hands. :p Thanks though, I'll watch the ones related to the ending.

Smoke Screen
3rd Sep 2012, 22:38
Wow.
Well,personaly im not that into analysing but yeah,the landing platforms... The first time that
made me :lol:,the second time just :mad2:. But hey,this game had to fit into a Xbox or PS3 so
i give it a slack. Its a freakin crossplatformer.

Romeo
4th Sep 2012, 04:27
Wow.
Well,personaly im not that into analysing but yeah,the landing platforms... The first time that
made me :lol:,the second time just :mad2:. But hey,this game had to fit into a Xbox or PS3 so
i give it a slack. Its a freakin crossplatformer.
Not sure if trolling or uneducated... PS3 has more memory available to "fit" its games on than the PC does, by several factors at that. And hell, even the Xbox can fit Dragon Age: Origins on it which is one of the most open-ended games (Story-wise) in recent memory.

no149
4th Sep 2012, 12:13
Did the guy downplay the intro from Bob Page scene forward?!

Smoke Screen
4th Sep 2012, 15:34
Not sure if trolling or uneducated... PS3 has more memory available to "fit" its games on than the PC does, by several factors at that. And hell, even the Xbox can fit Dragon Age: Origins on it which is one of the most open-ended games (Story-wise) in recent memory.

What ? Trolling ? :lol: A PS3 has 256MB and a XBox 360 has 512MB RAM. A decent gaming PC has nowadays 8GB RAM
but 16 Gb are not uncommon because DDR3-RAM is very cheap. Not to mention stronger CPU`s and way more power-
full GPUs with dedicated VRAM with a least 1GB. To make it short: A actual gaming PC is now WAY more powerfull
than the next generation of consoles who will come out in x years. And on the date of that release the PC will have
them already outrunned powerwise by a large margin. Its just the advantage of a flexible vs. fixed system.
Crossplatformdevelopment has hit the brakes hard from a PC perspective because a game is always designed for
the weakest platform. So consequently the strongest will suffer most from a creative and technical standpoint.
That said crossplatformdevelopment has come a long way and is now way better than some years ago. Both DX
sequels are clear evidence of that. Still, a game made for PC exclusive will give the developer the largest freedom
available compared with other gaming platforms but is now commonly underused for added gfx effects.

Raxxman
4th Sep 2012, 15:41
Not sure if trolling or uneducated... PS3 has more memory available to "fit" its games on than the PC does, by several factors at that. And hell, even the Xbox can fit Dragon Age: Origins on it which is one of the most open-ended games (Story-wise) in recent memory.

Pardon?

PS3 with it's half gig memory/vram and 320 GIG HD has more memory than the PC which can easily get 4 gig vram, 32 gig Ram, and terabites of storage capacity?

The PS3 is many things, but more powerful than a gaming PC it is not. I mean the new MGS demo was on a PC specced as powerful as a PS3, and that's not some supercomputer it was more than likely someones gaming spec laptop.

As for the video, I know the voice, that'd be Smudboy, he has a very liner objective reasoning, I remember him getting into a massive and odd argument with me (and others) about the intro to ME2, ending up with him getting banned on Biowares forums, which is quite a feat if you ask me.

JCpies
4th Sep 2012, 15:57
As for the video, I know the voice, that'd be Smudboy, he has a very liner objective reasoning, I remember him getting into a massive and odd argument with me (and others) about the intro to ME2, ending up with him getting banned on Biowares forums, which is quite a feat if you ask me.

rofl. :lol:

Itkovian
4th Sep 2012, 17:33
This is actually quite accurate: we know for a fact that Panchaea depended on the Hyron Core in order to regular ocean pressure, for its very survival.

Once you disable the Hyron Core, Panchaea is doomed. It's just a question of time. Using the "self-destruct" switch destroys it before anyone can make it out alive, whereas the other options give you and everyone else time to escape (who knows how long it might last, hours? days? long enough to be rescued, at least).

Therefore, there is no contradiction between the chosen ending and the conversation between BP and Megan.

As for why she says "where else could I go", there are any numbers of interpretation. It could be, for example, that working with BP is the best way to continue the work on Omega Ranch, work which she obviously found interesting. It does not necessarily mean that she literally had no other choice.

Itkovian

Romeo
5th Sep 2012, 05:17
What ? Trolling ? :lol: A PS3 has 256MB and a XBox 360 has 512MB RAM. A decent gaming PC has nowadays 8GB RAM
but 16 Gb are not uncommon because DDR3-RAM is very cheap. Not to mention stronger CPU`s and way more power-
full GPUs with dedicated VRAM with a least 1GB. To make it short: A actual gaming PC is now WAY more powerfull
than the next generation of consoles who will come out in x years. And on the date of that release the PC will have
them already outrunned powerwise by a large margin. Its just the advantage of a flexible vs. fixed system.
Crossplatformdevelopment has hit the brakes hard from a PC perspective because a game is always designed for
the weakest platform. So consequently the strongest will suffer most from a creative and technical standpoint.
That said crossplatformdevelopment has come a long way and is now way better than some years ago. Both DX
sequels are clear evidence of that. Still, a game made for PC exclusive will give the developer the largest freedom
available compared with other gaming platforms but is now commonly underused for added gfx effects.
Having multiple paths through the story has absolutely nothing to do with RAM, so I fail to see the relevence. The only thing it takes is more physical memory - of which Blu-Ray has significantly more of than a DVD (Which is the standard for PCs).

Raxxman
5th Sep 2012, 09:23
Having multiple paths through the story has absolutely nothing to do with RAM, so I fail to see the relevence. The only thing it takes is more physical memory - of which Blu-Ray has significantly more of than a DVD (Which is the standard for PCs).

Oh man... Where to start.

So for a start DVD's aren't even the standard nowadays, digital download is. (http://www.pcworld.com/article/205735/pc_game_digital_downloads_dramatically_outpace_retail_sales.html)

PCs have huge amounts of physical storage. Entry level gaming laptops (http://www.dell.com/au/p/alienware-m14x-r2/fs) come with a min of 500 gb of storage, with the ability to have way more via external disks.

PCs don't load games off portable disks, if you use a DVD to install a game, you'd only ever need to put it in for copy protection. As such even if a game does go past the 8 GB limit of a DVD a PC wouldn't have an issue bar the first install where you'd have to swap disks. In terms of all things memory restrictive, the PS3 is way more limited.

You can actually see the pull back of the graphical revolution. Crysis 2 remains the benchmark for PC gaming power comparisons but Crysis 1 still runs as one of the if not the most graphically intensive games ever. (http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/114961-13-most-demanding-game) A game that came out 4 years ago is the most demanding game? Why would that be? well the makers of the game Crytek claims its because of limitations with the current gen consoles, not the PCs. (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Crytek-Crysis-3-Keplar-FPS-Melting-PC,16928.html)

You really don't know what you're on about with PC gaming

El_Bel
5th Sep 2012, 12:22
The ending narrative was construed under time pressure, and I believe the team even went on record saying that the ending they had initially envisioned was technically too ambitious to pull off.

So, if I were you, I'd save myself the headache of looking for any coherence. ;P

Check out this series (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNZOLwyHH8&feature=BFa&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0), if you can tolerate the minutiose nitpicking:
Dear god there's eight parts and it's not even finished aarghghhh

This is great! Thank you Ilves!

Romeo
7th Sep 2012, 05:15
Oh man... Where to start.

So for a start DVD's aren't even the standard nowadays, digital download is. (http://www.pcworld.com/article/205735/pc_game_digital_downloads_dramatically_outpace_retail_sales.html)

PCs have huge amounts of physical storage. Entry level gaming laptops (http://www.dell.com/au/p/alienware-m14x-r2/fs) come with a min of 500 gb of storage, with the ability to have way more via external disks.

PCs don't load games off portable disks, if you use a DVD to install a game, you'd only ever need to put it in for copy protection. As such even if a game does go past the 8 GB limit of a DVD a PC wouldn't have an issue bar the first install where you'd have to swap disks. In terms of all things memory restrictive, the PS3 is way more limited.

You can actually see the pull back of the graphical revolution. Crysis 2 remains the benchmark for PC gaming power comparisons but Crysis 1 still runs as one of the if not the most graphically intensive games ever. (http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/114961-13-most-demanding-game) A game that came out 4 years ago is the most demanding game? Why would that be? well the makers of the game Crytek claims its because of limitations with the current gen consoles, not the PCs. (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Crytek-Crysis-3-Keplar-FPS-Melting-PC,16928.html)

You really don't know what you're on about with PC gaming
*Facepalm*

Alright, go find a modern release for PC that's more than 25Gb. Hell, find me one that's even just 25Gb. I'll wait.

Chances are, you couldn't find one. Because, despite the fact that Digital Distribution is where most sales are, DVD's still represent a fair amount of sales, because internet connections still suck in many places. Which means keeping the game sizes reasonable is still good fiscal sense. And while some of them do simply "link" to a digital download, I think you may overestimate the amount that do. My Dawn of War II for example is a DVD that also features Steam, but I installed without having an internet connection of any kind, so I am fairly certain it didn't download.

Going on to your HDD argument, are you seriously posting Alienware as a reasonable example? Hell, for that price I could just pay a troupe to act out my games in real life, giving me the best graphics yet. But hell, I'll even bite: Even with a 500Gb hard drive, you're trying to pit that against the Playstation's Blu-Rays, which are 25Gb a pop. I'll save you the math: Even assuming you had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE ON THAT HDD WHAT-SO-EVER (Including an OS), that means your HDD has the capacity of... Twenty PS3 games. That's pitiful.

I'm not sure where graphics came from? We were talking about branching stories. Which, again, has nothing to do with graphics capacity or RAM.

No, you're right, having built up a few rigs already, and doing a good portion of my gaming on PC, I make it a habit to not know what I'm on about with the PC... :rolleyes:

Senka
7th Sep 2012, 06:36
TW2 is about ~20 gigs, I believe Max Payne 3 was somewhere in the 20-30 range?

Also you're assuming each ps3 game uses the whole 25gb of the blueray disc, which is clearly false. Additionally 500gb hdd's are quite small these days, it's not uncommon for gamers to have multiple TB / 2TB hdd's. Your claim that 'ps3 has more memory' is silly, since a PC can be built to much higher limits than a PS3 can.

Smoke Screen
7th Sep 2012, 21:05
Yeah well,i dunno what the mod is implying here. It sure reads weird.
PC vs. consoles is a no brainer. PC wins in all categories that are relevant
by large margin: raw computation speeds (CPU and GPU),busspeeds,FAST
accessibel data storage (like SSD-raids),memory amount and speed etc. pp..
The only things a PS3 is way better than a dedicated gaming rig is power
consumption and waste heat production....;)

Raxxman
7th Sep 2012, 23:36
*Facepalm*

Alright, go find a modern release for PC that's more than 25Gb. Hell, find me one that's even just 25Gb. I'll wait.



Age of Conan = 26 odd gigs (not including the 16 gig expansion)
WoW = 30 odd gigs
Aion = 27 odd gigs
Xplanes = 78 gigs (yeah 78 gigs)
Football Manager, while not that huge (I think the latest one is 12 gigs ish) spools data out in save games as it records everything, as such FM databases often end up in the 30/40 gig line.
Battlefield 3 is also 26 gigs without any addons.



Chances are, you couldn't find one. Because, despite the fact that Digital Distribution is where most sales are, DVD's still represent a fair amount of sales, because internet connections still suck in many places. Which means keeping the game sizes reasonable is still good fiscal sense.


This misses the point, PCs just use DVDs to install the game, and for copyright, PS3s require the blu ray to load from and run. It doesn't matter if the game is 2 or 3 dvd long, you don't disk swap bar the first install.

Additionally the majority of the games that come out do so for consoles ergo, they can't be bigger than a console can handle. You might note that all the games I listed are PC exclusives (BF3 on the PC is expanded compared to the consoles because, you guessed it, they lack the memory to run the big maps).



And while some of them do simply "link" to a digital download, I think you may overestimate the amount that do. My Dawn of War II for example is a DVD that also features Steam, but I installed without having an internet connection of any kind, so I am fairly certain it didn't download.


Games link to steam and such so they can autopatch, but the link I posted shows hard stats about digital sales vs hard copies, in 2010 digital sales surpassed hard copy sales and that trend has continued. Steam is huge, and its no surprise that EA is trying to muscle in to the digital sales pie with Origin.



Going on to your HDD argument, are you seriously posting Alienware as a reasonable example? Hell, for that price I could just pay a troupe to act out my games in real life, giving me the best graphics yet.


Alienwares entry level computers represent realistic specs for entry level gaming setups. The price of the computer is irrelevant in this situation, it's just an easy example.



But hell, I'll even bite: Even with a 500Gb hard drive, you're trying to pit that against the Playstation's Blu-Rays, which are 25Gb a pop. I'll save you the math: Even assuming you had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE ON THAT HDD WHAT-SO-EVER (Including an OS), that means your HDD has the capacity of... Twenty PS3 games. That's pitiful.


20 games isn't actually pitiful, how many people regularly play more than 10 games at any one time? Additionally this assumes that every PS3 game is 25 gigs, which is not true, as far as I'm aware of only MGS4 maxed out a blu ray, and that actually caused issues because they wanted to make the game bigger than the PS3 could handle. Finally storage is cheap, I was using the entry level specs because that's what's deemed to be acceptable, reality is a PC can have terabytes of storage without any serious financial outlay.



I'm not sure where graphics came from? We were talking about branching stories. Which, again, has nothing to do with graphics capacity or RAM.


Graphics are a key component in gaming which compete for system resources. Audio and textures arguably take up the bulk of space in any modern game, the more branches to a story, the more audio must be within the game. As such the overall length of audio you can fit into a game is limited to whats left after you've added the game engine graphics etc. You can't gloss over these things as unimportant.

I was at a press conference by CDprojek red about the launch of the Witcher 2 on consoles. The entirety of the presentation was about how they had to cut down loads due to the limitations of the current gen tech. This being the Witcher 2, one of the most branching storyline out there.



No, you're right, having built up a few rigs already, and doing a good portion of my gaming on PC, I make it a habit to not know what I'm on about with the PC... :rolleyes:

Yeah...

EricaLeeV
8th Sep 2012, 00:20
The ending narrative was construed under time pressure, and I believe the team even went on record saying that the ending they had initially envisioned was technically too ambitious to pull off.

So, if I were you, I'd save myself the headache of looking for any coherence. ;P

Check out this series (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNZOLwyHH8&feature=BFa&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0), if you can tolerate the minutiose nitpicking:

Whoa, I didn't even know he did DXHR. Awesome, I like his analyses.

Thank you Ilves!

Romeo
8th Sep 2012, 06:48
TW2 is about ~20 gigs, I believe Max Payne 3 was somewhere in the 20-30 range?

Also you're assuming each ps3 game uses the whole 25gb of the blueray disc, which is clearly false. Additionally 500gb hdd's are quite small these days, it's not uncommon for gamers to have multiple TB / 2TB hdd's. Your claim that 'ps3 has more memory' is silly, since a PC can be built to much higher limits than a PS3 can.
It's 15Gb, I own the Digital Download of it. Max Payne I don't own, but a brief check online tells me it's 25Gb... Then I went to Rockstar and found out that's because there's a high and low texture for everything in the game. And they're both on the same download. It's not 25Gb worth of game. Even still, ignoring that, I believe that puts it squarely within PS3's storage capacity (And how odd it is that Max Payne takes up as much room as it does, because even the high-quality texture pack looks awful).

And yes, I'm aware that not every game uses the full 25Gb, just like quite a few games didn't use a full CD, and currently don't always use a full DVD. But it's there if needed. And to be honest, when a game like Oblivion, Forza Motorsport or Arkham Asylum takes up 7Gb, I have yet to see a single case where even the 25Gb of the PS3 is warranted.

As for the HDDs, yeah, I'm aware of that. But again, chances are you aren't dedicated even 90% of your hard drive to games storage, because your OS, browsers, downloaded files, pictures, movies et al take up room. And while hard drives have certainly come down in price, the cheapest 500Gb (Which is on special) from NCIX right now is $80, which is not an insignifant price point to consume in twenty games. Moving up to the 1Tb goes to $120 (Again on special). 2Tb jumps to $200 (No special). Again, remembering that a Blu-Ray has potential for 25Gb per disc, saying "direct download can be as big as we want!" is a bit much - I wouldn't want a game chewing up a fifth of my hard drive, for example.

But going back to my original point in this whole discussion, if one is honestly trying to pin a lack of branching stories on consoles lack of storage capacity, the argument simply doesn't work. 25Gb is massive - all the room in the world, really. The issue is not storage capacity, not by a longshot (Human Revolution is only 8Gb, remember). The issue is the simple fact that for them to code in all the various outcomes they'd have wanted, they'd have spent months, if not years, just doing that particular aspect alone, which would cost millions.

Senka
8th Sep 2012, 09:00
Tw2 is ~13gb compressed, ~21 gb installed (with latest updates). I just had a quick look at HDD prices, here's a 3tb hdd for $160 from a brisbane store: http://umart.com.au/pro/products_listnew.phtml?id=10&id2=129&bid=2&sid=87773

2tb can be around 100 to 200 depending on brand/features. Time and money to develop a branching story are the real limiting factors though, as you point out.

nomotog
8th Sep 2012, 16:27
Disk size is not really a issue. It's more about money, or time. (Time is money afterall) We are pushing up on disk size with a lot of games requiring two, but the only game that might be limited by disk size would be GTA.

EricaLeeV
10th Sep 2012, 17:48
Dear god there's eight parts and it's not even finished aarghghhh

After listening to him again, I am convinced that if Tom Hall is somehow unavailable for the part, Smudboy could voice Walton Simons in new Deus Ex games (should he appear) and it would be fine for me. Pretty sure I brought this up with someone else before but he gives me a strong Walton vibe in the voice department.

Romeo
13th Sep 2012, 06:32
After listening to him again, I am convinced that if Tom Hall is somehow unavailable for the part, Smudboy could voice Walton Simons in new Deus Ex games (should he appear) and it would be fine for me. Pretty sure I brought this up with someone else before but he gives me a strong Walton vibe in the voice department.
Wow, never thought of that, but you are completely right. Besides, even if it was slightly different, we could always attribute it to "age difference" (Assuming, of course, that it isn't set at the same time as the original).

hybridex
14th Sep 2012, 15:59
I absolutely love the endings. Playing through the first time (everyone knows how hard, exciting and challenging it was playing DXHR the first time; before discovering all the secrets and shortcuts that also made it excitingly easy) and then getting to the ending and following the ending narrative. That was nice. The narrative really wraps you in and gets you to think about life, in general and the future. As you know, DXHR was developed based upon current real-world technology of human enhancement and developing tech of future enhancement. There are current working right now of real-world robotic limb augmentation to people. The storyline itself is about the possibility of future real-world human/robotic augmentation. Many of Jensen's aug are quite possible. So, to sit and experience each of the endings really adds a nice touch.

Although, I have to say, I didn't quite understand the ending which Jensen commits suicide and brings the whole shabang down. After all that, why the heck would you want to kill yourself and everyone else on board??

Romeo
14th Sep 2012, 23:00
I absolutely love the endings. Playing through the first time (everyone knows how hard, exciting and challenging it was playing DXHR the first time; before discovering all the secrets and shortcuts that also made it excitingly easy) and then getting to the ending and following the ending narrative. That was nice. The narrative really wraps you in and gets you to think about life, in general and the future. As you know, DXHR was developed based upon current real-world technology of human enhancement and developing tech of future enhancement. There are current working right now of real-world robotic limb augmentation to people. The storyline itself is about the possibility of future real-world human/robotic augmentation. Many of Jensen's aug are quite possible. So, to sit and experience each of the endings really adds a nice touch.

Although, I have to say, I didn't quite understand the ending which Jensen commits suicide and brings the whole shabang down. After all that, why the heck would you want to kill yourself and everyone else on board??
It is supposed to be selfless, by removing all the dictators from the equation, yourself included. Essentially, you're saying "Humanity shouldn't be directed or controlled, they should choose for themselves". The other three, you'll notice, all place the future of humanity in the hands of a few (Yourself included).

hybridex
15th Sep 2012, 15:19
I got that. I guess I was saying I didn't enjoy that suicide ending and would had voted against including it during development. I know it's just an option, but it just a bad spin and a disservice to all Jensen had to endure throughout the gameplay. The other 3 endings are just good enough for such a masterful game.

Romeo
15th Sep 2012, 17:12
Really? It was my second favourite. I definitely appreciate the fact that it's in there.

hitmen74
16th Sep 2012, 04:44
I didn't really like the ending. It was so obtuse and nebulous. The choices were present, but reduced to "which button do you want to push?" It was like saying "there's a folder in the root directory; just watch the .avis and thanks for playing."

Plus Darrow's character doesn't make sense. He makes this massive investment in augmentation, has a random change of heart due to jealousy, and decides to frame the augmentation companies by killing everyone. That isn't a good storyline...some of it might work, but it's all predicated on Darrow and his character's contrivances.

Didn't like Megan...didn't like Sarif. Just a whole stable of amoral, backstabbing characters. Even Eliza manipulates.


Not sure if trolling or uneducated... PS3 has more memory available to "fit" its games on than the PC does, by several factors at that.

What you meant to say is that disk space isn't a limiting factor on the PS3. The PS3 doesn't have more of anything. It was defnitely true of invisible war and the X-BOX though.

hybridex
16th Sep 2012, 16:27
Really? It was my second favourite. I definitely appreciate the fact that it's in there.

It's good to hear other's opinion, and would like to hear more about what you like about the suicide option, if you don't mind. Glad to hear that it wasn't your favorite. The suicide option aside, the other three does make sense if combined and not standalone. Although I can't buy in the notion that our flesh will ever infuse with metal or inanimate object, human augmentation and enhancement functioning that efficiently and effectively as in DXHR is definitely a reality in the future. With such high caliber tech, govt would probably be one of the major funding sources, and I'm sure the private sector would want free range in the research and development, but like anything else as today if the Govt is involved, they would want control over the project. I'm sure there would be corps developing projects outside of Govt's eyes and may or may not be for the public's interests. I'm sure the people's voice would not tolerable anything not to their liking. Look at Apple tech today. Battle are ensuring between Apple and Samsung bringing the govt's involvement. The victims are the consumer who will be the ones paying the prices for the biggering. Just a thought..


I didn't really like the ending. It was so obtuse and nebulous. The choices were present, but reduced to "which button do you want to push?" It was like saying "there's a folder in the root directory; just watch the .avis and thanks for playing."

Plus Darrow's character doesn't make sense. He makes this massive investment in augmentation, has a random change of heart due to jealousy, and decides to frame the augmentation companies by killing everyone. That isn't a good storyline...some of it might work, but it's all predicated on Darrow and his character's contrivances.

Didn't like Megan...didn't like Sarif. Just a whole stable of amoral, backstabbing characters. Even Eliza manipulates.



So.. what you are saying is you don't like DXHR?! I admit it was a bit shrood that Darrow would conceive such act of violence, but it's a reality in real life. People are that capable of going mad, especially those with powerful mind. Past history have shown. Too much power will come back and bite. In Darrow's case, he started the creation of something extrordinary.. human evolution beyond just prostetic limb to a fully functioned prostetic augmentation that efficiently and effectively functioned as the extension of a human body. Imagine how much wealth and power that would bring for someone to achieve that and market that. That was what brought Darrow wealth and power. You're right.. he got mad crazy from his jealousy. I can't see a sane father of invention as the human aug go that berzerk, but only if his powerful mind had not failed him and turned him insane. Just a thought..

JCpies
16th Sep 2012, 20:11
He didn't say he disliked Human Revolution... He said he disliked the ending, like many other people do.

Romeo
17th Sep 2012, 07:04
It's good to hear other's opinion, and would like to hear more about what you like about the suicide option, if you don't mind. Glad to hear that it wasn't your favorite. The suicide option aside, the other three does make sense if combined and not standalone. Although I can't buy in the notion that our flesh will ever infuse with metal or inanimate object, human augmentation and enhancement functioning that efficiently and effectively as in DXHR is definitely a reality in the future. With such high caliber tech, govt would probably be one of the major funding sources, and I'm sure the private sector would want free range in the research and development, but like anything else as today if the Govt is involved, they would want control over the project. I'm sure there would be corps developing projects outside of Govt's eyes and may or may not be for the public's interests. I'm sure the people's voice would not tolerable anything not to their liking. Look at Apple tech today. Battle are ensuring between Apple and Samsung bringing the govt's involvement. The victims are the consumer who will be the ones paying the prices for the biggering. Just a thought..
I liked it for the simple fact it was the least defined, it has the most variables. If I follow Darrow's desires, I know Augs will be rejected and all-but-shutdown. If I follow Sarif, I know Augs will become commonplace. If I follow the Illuminati, I know Augs will be controlled. But the suicide ending? That could end up in any number of ways. It would be interesting to see how humanity evolved in the wake of order and control.

On top of that, there's also a more primal, barbaric desire for justice. Darrow, for example, I put a bullet in immediately after he gave me the password. Sarif is blinded by ideolism. Taggert openly admits tampering and shaping humanity to his will. And the augmented workers on the island are already damned. Assuming they weren't killed by you, they'll eventually kill eachother or starve out.


For what it's worth, my preferred ending is to side with Taggert. Besides the fact that it is the only option with any modicum of comprimise (Augs are not completely open, and not completely withheld), I also subscibe that humanity is far too chaotic and violent to save itself. Cruel as it may be, a single manipulative entity would probably be the safest future of the four.

Jerion
17th Sep 2012, 07:24
I liked it for the simple fact it was the least defined, it has the most variables. If I follow Darrow's desires, I know Augs will be rejected and all-but-shutdown. If I follow Sarif, I know Augs will become commonplace. If I follow the Illuminati, I know Augs will be controlled. But the suicide ending? That could end up in any number of ways. It would be interesting to see how humanity evolved in the wake of order and control.

On top of that, there's also a more primal, barbaric desire for justice. Darrow, for example, I put a bullet in immediately after he gave me the password. Sarif is blinded by ideolism. Taggert openly admits tampering and shaping humanity to his will. And the augmented workers on the island are already damned. Assuming they weren't killed by you, they'll eventually kill eachother or starve out.


For what it's worth, my preferred ending is to side with Taggert. Besides the fact that it is the only option with any modicum of comprimise (Augs are not completely open, and not completely withheld), I also subscibe that humanity is far too chaotic and violent to save itself. Cruel as it may be, a single manipulative entity would probably be the safest future of the four.

An arm-sword would be more poetic than a bullet.

Interesting. I have a problem with Taggart's ending: While I like the idea of moderation, compromise, and regulation of augmentation, I rather dislike the group that would be handling it. The Illuminati demonstrated that they:


Have a hard time keeping order in their own house.
Tried to (and hopefully didn't) kill Malik.
Have, on at least four separate (and memorable) occasions, tried to do unpleasant things to me via their personal hit squad. Their very dead personal hit squad.

I find myself torn between the Illuminati and Sarif. The thing about Sarif Industries is that it is one of a shrinking number of players in the Human Augmentation industry. Yes, Sarif is blinded by idealism. That idealism though allows him to operate independently of the Illuminati. He actively rejects their overtures. It is a two-sided sword as well; Sarif is just one man, and sooner or later he won't be in a position of influence or power. Regulation finds it's way into the market sooner or later, and while nobody can pretend that the state of affairs with Neuropozine is a pleasant one, sooner or later the Illuminati will re-establish control. So, Going with Sarif: Illuminati gets a very public bloody nose. Going with Taggart: Jensen may or may not end up in a position to do some good in managing the world.

Locutus of BORG
18th Sep 2012, 15:51
I actually didn't mind any of the endings, although it would have been nice to have everything fleshed out beyond just pushing a button. Honestly, I thought the 3 choices were an intentional homage to DX1.




The ending narrative was construed under time pressure, and I believe the team even went on record saying that the ending they had initially envisioned was technically too ambitious to pull off.

So, if I were you, I'd save myself the headache of looking for any coherence. ;P

Check out this series (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRNZOLwyHH8&feature=BFa&list=PLC99482F18F54F8F0), if you can tolerate the minutiose nitpicking:


Dear god there's eight parts and it's not even finished aarghghhh

As always smudboy is exceptionally selective about his analysis and simple things like foreshoadowing just fly straight past him. I'd probably watch this whole series in its entirety, but I wouldn't take smud's opinions too seriously.

EricaLeeV
18th Sep 2012, 16:30
As always smudboy is exceptionally selective about his analysis and simple things like foreshoadowing just fly straight past him. I'd probably watch this whole series in its entirety, but I wouldn't take smud's opinions too seriously.

If you are referring to foreshadowing in what is going to happen later in the series, or what might happen a following installment:


Smud has actually only played a few hours of the original Deus Ex and he states that he is analyzing DXHR as it's own story; not the fact that it clearly is paying homage to the original in many ways and its hinting at things to come. I can understand why he would do this as many people who play DXHR will be very fresh to the series itself.

Romeo
18th Sep 2012, 22:01
An arm-sword would be more poetic than a bullet.

Interesting. I have a problem with Taggart's ending: While I like the idea of moderation, compromise, and regulation of augmentation, I rather dislike the group that would be handling it. The Illuminati demonstrated that they:


Have a hard time keeping order in their own house.
Tried to (and hopefully didn't) kill Malik.
Have, on at least four separate (and memorable) occasions, tried to do unpleasant things to me via their personal hit squad. Their very dead personal hit squad.

I find myself torn between the Illuminati and Sarif. The thing about Sarif Industries is that it is one of a shrinking number of players in the Human Augmentation industry. Yes, Sarif is blinded by idealism. That idealism though allows him to operate independently of the Illuminati. He actively rejects their overtures. It is a two-sided sword as well; Sarif is just one man, and sooner or later he won't be in a position of influence or power. Regulation finds it's way into the market sooner or later, and while nobody can pretend that the state of affairs with Neuropozine is a pleasant one, sooner or later the Illuminati will re-establish control. So, Going with Sarif: Illuminati gets a very public bloody nose. Going with Taggart: Jensen may or may not end up in a position to do some good in managing the world.
Well, perhaps I'm over-inferring, but I interpreted that Jensen would be working with the Illumnati at that point, which would steer them along a more productive path. And while they clearly aren't perfect, I would entrust them more being involved with their decision-making.

Ilves
19th Sep 2012, 18:20
As always smudboy is exceptionally selective about his analysis and simple things like foreshoadowing just fly straight past him. I'd probably watch this whole series in its entirety, but I wouldn't take smud's opinions too seriously.

He gets tangled up in silly details more often than is healthy for him. But I like the way he points out flaws in story telling techniques. Proper story telling, as in creatively constructing and relating a narrative, is an art regretfully neglected in the bulk of contemporary games. HR no exception.


After listening to him again, I am convinced that if Tom Hall is somehow unavailable for the part, Smudboy could voice Walton Simons in new Deus Ex games (should he appear) and it would be fine for me. Pretty sure I brought this up with someone else before but he gives me a strong Walton vibe in the voice department.

Really? He sounds like a fussy uncle to me. :D

hybridex
20th Sep 2012, 15:53
Appreciates the different views and opinions of the endings. Whether like or dislike, you just can't denied that the different choices of the ending lends to the notion that DXHR and Adam Jensen's story is not yet over. In comparison to real world future possibility of fully functioning human augmentation, the endings also lend to the imagination that we do not know how the future will play out. We don't really know yet how corporation, government and mankind will coincide or how it will dictate the acceptance, development or eventual regulation when such becomes a reality. Who knows.. maybe warp drive, teleportation and cloaking will be also be a technological breakthrough by then as well..

LkMax
21st Sep 2012, 03:16
The ending narrative was construed under time pressure, and I believe the team even went on record saying that the ending they had initially envisioned was technically too ambitious to pull off.

So, if I were you, I'd save myself the headache of looking for any coherence. ;P

Any link with an article, statement or something explaining how it was supposed to end? I found the ending disappointing and I'm curious to know what was they original intention now.

Jerion
21st Sep 2012, 04:22
Any link with an article, statement or something explaining how it was supposed to end? I found the ending disappointing and I'm curious to know what was they original intention now.

More than likely that particular piece of information can only be found in design documents hidden under lock and key in Montréal.

Romeo
21st Sep 2012, 05:25
More than likely that particular piece of information can only be found in design documents hidden under lock and key in Montréal.
Found it! It's right here...
141

Jerion
21st Sep 2012, 05:27
Found it! It's right here...
174

Terrific! We've got our top men on the case.

Ilves
21st Sep 2012, 07:52
Any link with an article, statement or something explaining how it was supposed to end? I found the ending disappointing and I'm curious to know what was they original intention now.

Nothing more specific than this...


RPS: It was interesting to see how different people dealt with those themes in the ending they chose. And speaking of the ending, that was something else that drew a lot of criticism. How do you feel about the criticism of what you did there – four buttons in a room, rather than different scenes, different RPG style endings, perhaps?

Dugas: There are two aspects to the ending. The first aspect has to do with the buttons. In the original design we did not want it to just be you facing four buttons and you just press one, end of story. We wanted the players to get involved in doing something more that would make the choice mean more in their minds, but again it was just a constraint of production at some point. We simplified the ending to make sure that we could do it, that we could ship it. Just on that basis I can understand why players were disappointed to be faced with a four-button choice. Of course the endings are influenced by what you have done in the game, and then you get to the videos. For this part, the ending videos, I am totally happy with how that worked. That was the vision we had, and we fulfilled it. When I look at the endings and the feedback, it’s not unanimous that people hate them. Some players love them, other players feel disappointed because they just think “what happened next?” As an editorial decision it was the right decision, but I respect that some people did not feel good about the end, or did not get them.

From RPS. (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/09/23/deus-ex-interview-jean-francois-dugas/)

hybridex
21st Sep 2012, 14:51
"A masterpiece always has its critics. That's how we know it is a masterpiece.."

JCpies
21st Sep 2012, 16:48
The ending videos were good, but the 'walk into room' was pretty poor. I guess the end is a letdown but it doesn't tarnish the rest of the game in my opinion.

Romeo
21st Sep 2012, 21:38
"A masterpiece always has its critics. That's how we know it is a masterpiece.."
That makes Uwe Boll the greatest mind of our generation.

hybridex
23rd Sep 2012, 15:53
Is Boll and Hugh Darrow genetically related? Great minds think alike..