PDA

View Full Version : Through the development of Human Revolution, JFD learned...



Shralla
29th Apr 2013, 01:24
Nothing, apparently. He doesn't seem to think there was anything wrong with the game at all.

http://truepcgaming.com/2013/04/11/deus-ex-human-revolution-retrospect-interview/

Actually, scratch that. He thinks that the already stupid AI should have been "toned down," and that there should have been MORE CONSUMABLES. There were too many to carry even with the first level of the inventory stacking mod! What game is this guy playing, or watching other people play?!

I was all hopeful for the next game, and now I'm worried already.

Oh, and he said that lack of mod tools was a "business decision." Though normally said business is the sale of DLC, of which there was ONE. Dishonored is really pissing all over Deus Ex in terms of success, both short and long-term. I wonder if they're going to notice.

CyberP
29th Apr 2013, 01:45
What a shame.

He did say he wasn't happy with the visuals though. :rolleyes:
The least of my concerns, the game looked very nice.

I won't be getting hyped for next Deus Ex then, well, maybe a little, I just won't expect much of an improvement.

AlexOfSpades
29th Apr 2013, 02:16
Oh, and he said that lack of mod tools was a "business decision."

pffft, what

Modding tools increase game's replayability and gametime several times fold. Heck, there are still Fallout 2 mods (http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62962&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0) being released to this day.

I understand that the engine used isnt very mod friendly though. Or am i wrong? If i'm wrong, then there is sincerely no reason to suffocate the game's modding community. Any veteran here surely remembers how we got pretty much a thread per day asking for modding tools back in the development days.

-Neon-
29th Apr 2013, 02:19
Actually, scratch that. He thinks that the already stupid AI should have been "toned down," and that there should have been MORE CONSUMABLES. There were too many to carry even with the first level of the inventory stacking mod! What game is this guy playing, or watching other people play?!


In retrospect, I think our game is a tad too hard on normal difficulty.
The first playthrough was pretty rough for me and several of my friends. I found myself starved for energy and health quite a few times, probably because I was picking up more weapons and whatnot than consumables. If he meant toning down AI on every difficulty, I'd have to facepalm. And yeah, the AI can be pretty stupid at times, but for a first time player, it's not as easy as you make it sound.

AlexOfSpades
29th Apr 2013, 03:38
The game was indeed hard even at normal difficulty, but in my opinion it wasnt because of the AI - it was because of level design + no knockout option other than takedown + extremely long loading screens made mistakes costly.

On the first mission on the warehouse you already face several rooms filled with baddies on patrol. I sincerely dont recall any room with that much concentration of enemies on the same place on Deus Ex 1 - perhaps during the Ton Hotel Raid with Paul, but even then it was something you werent supposed to go through. There are several rooms on this game on the following missions (such as the main floor of the Police Department) with many guards on all sides and the only thing you can rely on is cover.

On Metal Gear you can knock enemies from behind as far as i know. On Thief, you have your blackjack. Deus Ex 1 had the baton and the prod. HR had no "insta-knockout" tool other than the takedown, and its a very limited ability. You are often forced to use the dart gun (that isnt instant, causing alarm between baddies) or the PEPS (rare ammo, calls too much attention). In other words, the combination of lack of a "blackjack" with rooms filled with baddies made the game much harder in my opinion.

And the loading screens just made you pay over 20 seconds of wait for every mistake you commited, putting a lot of pressure on the player.

Edit: He says here that some people that complained about the highlightning ended up using it. Is this true? Any of you decided that the highlightning was better on than off?

Shralla
29th Apr 2013, 04:13
Headshots with the dart gun are instant. :3

I personally used highlighting because the game was so full of static clutter and the interactive stuff was so few and far between (and more than a couple times I found static versions of objects the game had previously "taught" me were interactive) that I had a hard time discerning between the two, especially with things like doors. They did a poor job of making interactive objects stand out from the scenery, which was a problem DX1 definitely did not have, as pretty much everything in the scenery WAS interactive.

That side-mission in Heng-sha you do for Malik would have driven me crazy without it, because the game had "taught" me that those objects were static already.

CyberP
29th Apr 2013, 08:03
Difficulty was borderline acceptable for me. Stealth was a joke, easy, but shooting was a fair challenge thankfully but nothing that needs toning down. You have regenerating health AND regenerating superpowers (augs) and also the power to control time to some extent (quicksave/load). Impossible to offer a true challenge. If you keep dying/getting spotted over and over you are just doing it wrong, you have so much power, and the power of choice.



I personally used highlighting because the game was so full of static clutter and the interactive stuff was so few and far between (and more than a couple times I found static versions of objects the game had previously "taught" me were interactive) that I had a hard time discerning between the two, especially with things like doors. They did a poor job of making interactive objects stand out from the scenery, which was a problem DX1 definitely did not have, as pretty much everything in the scenery WAS interactive.

That side-mission in Heng-sha you do for Malik would have driven me crazy without it, because the game had "taught" me that those objects were static already.

This is spot on. There is very little interactivity and of what there is plenty of it is inconsistent, which just gives you a headache.
So you feel pushed to use across the room highlighting which is ugly as hell & does all the exploration work for you.

Playing with it on or off is not ideal, and that is objective, Mr. Dugas.

68_pie
29th Apr 2013, 09:12
When you release a demo, it needs to sell the game properly. How do you make the audience experience what a Deus Ex game is all about in 15 minutes or less?

Apparently you leak the early section of the game that journalists were given to play. Playing the leak was the only reason I eventually decided to buy DXHR.

Also, who says that a demo has to be 15 minutes? Perhaps he doesn't remember the demo for the original DX?

Pinky_Powers
29th Apr 2013, 14:38
I've only played the game on "Give Me Deus Ex" difficulty (3 times now), and I thought it was perfect as far as the challenge of it. The only thing I thought was unacceptably hard were the boss fights.

Ashpolt
29th Apr 2013, 16:09
I thought the difficulty of DXHR on normal was pretty much perfect for a first run. I didn't even find the bosses particularly hard, they were just terribly designed. If people found normal too tough, that's what easy is for: no need to tone down normal.

But yeah, this doesn't really give much hope that the next game will be significantly better. It might be as good (and will probably have better bossfights, natch) but I think it's safe to expect largely more of the same rather than a real "We learned from the mistakes of DXHR..." game.

Ilves
29th Apr 2013, 18:18
This quote...


Believe it or not, we were confident with what we had – we’d already conducted playtests at that point and we were receiving positive feedback. So, we knew there was no problem with the feature, not even remotely. But people look at a video (probably more than once) and start to analyse every bit and piece of it, until they start to see problems in what they see. Like many did with the highlighted objects.

... is unfortunate.

CyberP
29th Apr 2013, 18:32
Just the other day I was listening to that podcast and JFD said the fans were "outraged" by the highlighting, 3rd person, regen health etc etc. I wasn't here at the time but "outraged" is a strong word, and represents an immediate reaction I imagine. I know I would have blew up at the time, and I trust you guys did good in my place? :lol:

It's Deus Ex. Go ahead and butcher any other franchise like most already have been, just not Deus Ex. :mad2:

Ashpolt
29th Apr 2013, 18:45
Just the other day I was listening to that podcast and JFD said the fans were "outraged" by the highlighting, 3rd person, regen health etc etc. I wasn't here at the time but "outraged" is a strong word, and represents an immediate reaction I imagine. I know I would have blew up at the time, and I trust you guys did good in my place? :lol:

Trust us.

We did good.

-Neon-
29th Apr 2013, 19:37
Having never heard of Deus Ex as a franchise, Human Revolution was my gateway into the series. I played the original Deus Ex twice in the last year, and I can see how different it is highlighting things across the room from having to get close to interactive items.
I found the object highlight in HR a bit annoying at times where there were items on top of items on top of items, but I liked it way more than having it off. It's a nice aesthetic for me.

Pinky_Powers
29th Apr 2013, 19:43
Just the other day I was listening to that podcast and JFD said the fans were "outraged" by the highlighting, 3rd person, regen health etc etc. I wasn't here at the time but "outraged" is a strong word, and represents an immediate reaction I imagine. I know I would have blew up at the time, and I trust you guys did good in my place? :lol:

It's Deus Ex. Go ahead and butcher any other franchise like most already have been, just not Deus Ex. :mad2:

Outraged is indeed entirely accurate. :cool:

For myself, I defended (and still do) the way in which some of the 3rd-person was used in Human Revolution. I love the cover-system for stealth and combat. It is, however, a heinous crime that it's all but forced on the player, though. All they needed was to add Lean keys and 90% of the complaints would have vanished. Also, the takedowns (which I use predominately) would have been far more visceral in 1st-person. And there is no excuse for removing melee weapons.

Spyhopping
29th Apr 2013, 20:01
Yes, there was much crossness!


Having never heard of Deus Ex as a franchise, Human Revolution was my gateway into the series. I played the original Deus Ex twice in the last year, and I can see how different it is highlighting things across the room from having to get close to interactive items.
I found the object highlight in HR a bit annoying at times where there were items on top of items on top of items, but I liked it way more than having it off. It's a nice aesthetic for me.

I didn't like it mainly because of the way the orange highlighting was rather in your face, and it was like it was playing the game for me. I liked to be able to investigate my surroundings to find important items, it made the game feel more alive as any item lying around could potentially be significant.

I'd be interested as to whether the little LA Noir style mission was any different with highlighting. I really liked investigating the apartment, it took me a while to find the broken clock. I remember wondering if the highlighting would indicate to you the interactive items in the room.

Tverdyj
29th Apr 2013, 21:20
Outraged is indeed entirely accurate. :cool:

For myself, I defended (and still do) the way in which some of the 3rd-person was used in Human Revolution. I love the cover-system for stealth and combat. It is, however, a heinous crime that it's all but forced on the player, though. All they needed was to add Lean keys and 90% of the complaints would have vanished. Also, the takedowns (which I use predominately) would have been far more visceral in 1st-person. And there is no excuse for removing melee weapons.

The way stealth works now is passable. I've only played on GMDX and i've never used the cover system once.

Of course, since we also have that radar being pushed into our faces, it's remarkably difficult to mess up stealth. Unless the game refuses to acknowledge your takedowns.

Edit: and yes, the outrage when we first heard about all the "modern features" was strong.

WildcatPhoenix
29th Apr 2013, 21:37
Outraged is indeed entirely accurate. :cool:

For myself, I defended (and still do) the way in which some of the 3rd-person was used in Human Revolution. I love the cover-system for stealth and combat. It is, however, a heinous crime that it's all but forced on the player, though. All they needed was to add Lean keys and 90% of the complaints would have vanished. Also, the takedowns (which I use predominately) would have been far more visceral in 1st-person. And there is no excuse for removing melee weapons.

This gets close to how I feel about all of DXHR's controversial gameplay mechanics. Just make them optional.

Seriously, EM, it's not difficult. Other than the third-person cover mechanic, everything else could logically be an augmentation.

Radar? Make it an aug.
Highlighting? Make it an aug, one that can be upgraded (longer distances, detect heat sources or valuable items through surfaces like lockers/desks, etc).
Takedowns? Make them an aug that has to be installed, not available from the get-go.
Regenerating health? You know the drill.

Seriously, just give me an alternative to all of these things (and give me proper lean keys and melee weapons in case I don't chose to play a certain way) and I'll be satisfied.

Ilves
29th Apr 2013, 21:40
Of course, since we also have that radar being pushed into our faces, it's remarkably difficult to mess up stealth.

Still bummed that the public's response prior to release didn't make short with that radar the way it did with the highlighting.

Tverdyj
29th Apr 2013, 21:50
This gets close to how I feel about all of DXHR's controversial gameplay mechanics. Just make them optional.

Seriously, EM, it's not difficult. Other than the third-person cover mechanic, everything else could logically be an augmentation.

Radar? Make it an aug.
Highlighting? Make it an aug, one that can be upgraded (longer distances, detect heat sources or valuable items through surfaces like lockers/desks, etc).
Takedowns? Make them an aug that has to be installed, not available from the get-go.
Regenerating health? You know the drill.

Seriously, just give me an alternative to all of these things (and give me proper lean keys and melee weapons in case I don't chose to play a certain way) and I'll be satisfied.

but-but-but..... NO!

think of "the modern gamers!" If you don't give them insta-gratification, if you make them WORK to get to do ultra-flashy-cool stuff, they'll say the game is TOO HARD!
If you don't put in hand-holding mechanics, they may GET BORED!

And what will the shareholders say? For the love of God, WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE SHAREHOLDERS!!
They're such delicate souls. They won't survive it if IGN gives their game less than a 9. To say nothing of all those mean users on Metacritic!

vallux
29th Apr 2013, 22:39
Dammit Shralla. You should have put the entire punchline in the title. I mean I could guess what it was by looking at your name.

CyberP
29th Apr 2013, 23:12
@Kud: :lol:

@ppl RE optional requests:

Deus Ex's health system has ten times the complexity of HR's regen health mechanic. The locational health system and it's effects such as lowering accuracy when damaged or making you crawl on the floor, health UI, healing individual body parts or all, medicine skill, medkits, food, medbots, regen aug on top. All of these things have their coding, models/textures and related systems.

Even the optional regen health itself in DX1 is arguably more complicated, the math involved in how it heals the individual body parts, knowing which one to heal at any given time, if all damaged then it priorities head, torso, arms then legs, then deactivates automatically, can be upgraded, has to be installed at a medbot and so on.

So either they

i) Wanted to appeal to casuals and regen health was an excellent way that saved them a lot of work.

ii) Genuinely think it makes the game better.

iii) Are just incompetent.

I'm guessing it's the former.

68_pie
29th Apr 2013, 23:27
@ppl RE optional requests:

Deus Ex's health system has ten times the complexity of HR's regen health mechanic. The locational health system and it's effects such as lowering accuracy when damaged or making you crawl on the floor, health UI, healing individual body parts or all, medicine skill, medkits, food, medbots, regen aug on top. All of these things have their coding, models/textures and related systems.

Even the optional regen health itself in DX1 is arguably more complicated, the math involved in how it heals the individual body parts, knowing which one to heal at any given time, if all damaged then it priorities head, torso, arms then legs, then deactivates automatically, can be upgraded, has to be installed at a medbot and so on.

So either they

i) Wanted to appeal to casuals and regen health was an excellent way that saved them a lot of work.

ii) Genuinely think it makes the game better.

iii) Are just incompetent.

I'm guessing it's the former.

We know. Have a search for the numerous long threads pointing out all of this years ago

CyberP
29th Apr 2013, 23:32
We know. Have a search for the numerous long threads pointing out all of this years ago

Yeah....my bad. Should have guessed as much, what with the mass "outrage" from many years ago. :hmm:

I used to visit before but only around the time of the release.


Outraged is indeed entirely accurate. :cool:

For myself, I defended (and still do) the way in which some of the 3rd-person was used in Human Revolution. I love the cover-system for stealth and combat. It is, however, a heinous crime that it's all but forced on the player, though. All they needed was to add Lean keys and 90% of the complaints would have vanished. Also, the takedowns (which I use predominately) would have been far more visceral in 1st-person. And there is no excuse for removing melee weapons.

In my opinion out of all the re-imaginings of the gameplay features, the only real improvement was the conversation battles which were entirely in first person. Similar to what you said, they should have done exactly the same with the cover system, made it intuitive like Far Cry 3's, or just lean keys/button onhold to activate leaning directions like Deus Ex on PS2 or Dishonored.

Turned out an excellent game, just not as good as it should have been. JFD's creative vision was inferior in many ways, but still led to a great game.
I'll happily pay full price for the next one, i'll just be down about the whole experience not living up again most likely.

FrankCSIS
30th Apr 2013, 00:15
You've got to admire a guy who admits to no wrong, and claims others have since seen the light and rallied to his thoughts!

I'm still quite furious about some decisions, because goddammit Bill, we were right. :p

Tverdyj
30th Apr 2013, 00:27
Yeah....my bad. Should have guessed as much, what with the mass "outrage" from many years ago. :hmm:

I used to visit before but only around the time of the release.



In my opinion out of all the re-imaginings of the gameplay features, the only real improvement was the conversation battles which were entirely in first person. Similar to what you said, they should have done exactly the same with the cover system, made it intuitive like Far Cry 3's, or just lean keys/button onhold to activate leaning directions like Deus Ex on PS2 or Dishonored.

Conversations were much better.
Hacking was an improvement.
Gunplay was made better.

Now they just need to go back to the drawing board and bring the rest of the features (level design, stealth, melee combat, physics) up to the same standard

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 00:52
Hacking was an improvement.

Most certainly was not. Yes, the mini game was clever and fun...to the detriment of everything else.

My partner wanted to implement a mini-game to feature alongside multitooling. We argued over this. I said resource based only, not luck/skill, as that would upset the balance of the game. Eventually I won that one, but I do believe it could have been done in HR resource based as well as skill/luck based. Well, it already has been done before: System Shock 2.


Gunplay was made better.

Yes, but they removed the depth that supported DX's gunplay, the locational health system, skill system etc.
They could have had a skill system for weapons that effected a combination of/all of the following: Aim down sights transition speed, Weapon Sway whilst aiming down the sights, movement speed whilst aiming down the sights and Hipfire accuracy. Heck, you can modify all those things in Call of Duty! It would totally work as a weapon skill if implemented right.

Then the locational health system could have effected some/all of those things too. Legs= Movement speed whilst ADS (and sprinting speed), Arms= hipfire accuracy, weapon sway & ADS transition speed. Additionally: 1 Leg dead= Limping, 2 legs=Crawling. Head critical/red=Flashing red screen hindering vision indicating concussion.

Not only would this have kept the locational health system, it would have expanded on it and made HR's gunplay even more interesting.

Was in the process of doing a similar system for our mod as an optional feature, but we need a 3dsmax artist to continue.

WildcatPhoenix
30th Apr 2013, 00:53
Conversations were much better.
Hacking was an improvement.
Gunplay was made better.

Now they just need to go back to the drawing board and bring the rest of the features (level design, stealth, melee combat, physics) up to the same standard

I'd agree with just about all of this. While I enjoyed DX1's skill-based aiming mechanic, I have to say that I prefer DXHR's straightforward approach more (and this seems unlikely to change for future DX releases in the console era).

Hacking was a pleasant surprise, but I still think it's ridiculous not to have any kind of mechanical locks whatsoever. I always prefer more options, and splitting computer hacking (or making this a component of the Computer skill) and lockpicking into separate skill trees is vastly preferable to DXHR's system.

Conversations were definitely the highlight of DXHR, and I'd love to see this expanded upon in later games.

Jerion
30th Apr 2013, 01:15
I'd agree with just about all of this. While I enjoyed DX1's skill-based aiming mechanic, I have to say that I prefer DXHR's straightforward approach more (and this seems unlikely to change for future DX releases in the console era).

Hacking was a pleasant surprise, but I still think it's ridiculous not to have any kind of mechanical locks whatsoever. I always prefer more options, and splitting computer hacking (or making this a component of the Computer skill) and lockpicking into separate skill trees is vastly preferable to DXHR's system.

Conversations were definitely the highlight of DXHR, and I'd love to see this expanded upon in later games.

The lack of mechanical locks was a little bit absurd, and the reintroduction of that parallel but separate locking system would be welcome. I rather like DXHR's shooting, hacking and conversations, and even the "Augs as Skills" concept. I like it because it was a system that accurately fit my perception of true role-playing: It took this XP-based character upgrades idea, and moved it away from raw skill-point variables towards capabilities that shaped and expanded the role I could actually play. Upgrading Adam meant I could interact with the world in a new and different way, rather than simply being incrementally more proficient at X. Proficiency was up to me as the player, capability was more attached to Adam as the character. I would prefer to see that range of potential capabilities expanded in the next game.

As far as the 'depth' that weapon skills offered in DX go, they offered the wrong sort of depth IMO. Yes, the skills provided challenge, goals and customization, but got in my way instead of opening up new opportunities and possibilities. All it did was artificially (and sometimes ludicrously) handicap my options, rather than provide new options. Limb-based health would definitely be a plus though. There's plenty of room for a blending of augmentation-based regenerative health and location-based health. The beginnings of that idea are already present in HR: the Regeneration aug has "upgrade" slots (which are largely theoretical as they're active by default). Just start with a basic regeneration function for the torso and offer expansion options for healing rate, range, supported limbs, etc. Easier said than done I'm sure, but it would be an improvement.

Tverdyj
30th Apr 2013, 01:31
Most certainly was not. Yes, the mini game was clever and fun...to the detriment of everything else.

My partner wanted to implement a mini-game to feature alongside multitooling. We argued over this. I said resource based only, not luck/skill, as that would upset the balance of the game. Eventually I won that one, but I do believe it could have been done in HR resource based as well as skill/luck based. Well, it already has been done before: System Shock 2.



Yes, but they removed the depth that supported DX's gunplay, the locational health system, skill system etc.
They could have had a skill system for weapons that effected a combination of/all of the following: Aim down sights transition speed, Weapon Sway whilst aiming down the sights, movement speed whilst aiming down the sights and Hipfire accuracy. Heck, you can modify all those things in Call of Duty! It would totally work as a weapon skill if implemented right.

Then the locational health system could have effected some/all of those things too. Legs= Movement speed whilst ADS (and sprinting speed), Arms= hipfire accuracy, weapon sway & ADS transition speed. Additionally: 1 Leg dead= Limping, 2 legs=Crawling. Head critical/red=Flashing red screen hindering vision indicating concussion.

Not only would this have kept the locational health system, it would have expanded on it and made HR's gunplay even more interesting.

Was in the process of doing a similar system for our mod as an optional feature, but we need a 3dsmax artist to continue.

Please don't think for a second that I'm happy with the removal of the locational damage system. I'm not, expecialy since there's an example of current-gen triple-A game that did this (Fallout 3), so EM has no excuse of "it's just not modern enough".

With respect to hacking--I think you are conflating several issues here. When I talk about hacking, I'm talking about computer hacking--in that context, the new approach to hacking is much more preferrable to DX's "wait for progress bar, oh, and also have all the enemies wait patiently while you hack that turret behind them to shoot them while they wait politely for you to log out" (incidentally, I always though it funny that turrets in DX never had such preferences--you'd keep taking damage as you hacked untill it killed you). In that respect, it was a HUGE improvement.
Now, removal of lockpicks and multitools as player's way of interacting with the world--that is a whole different issue. Yes, conflating the 3 "infiltration" disciplines into one umbrella "hacking" was over-simplifying. I don't think it was the best possible solution. But to dismiss the whole concept as a negative is painting too broad a stroke, imho.

FrankCSIS
30th Apr 2013, 01:45
DX's hacking made sense, in the context of its more classical RPG approach.

HR's hacking was logical and consequential to its fluid approach.

I'm not prepared to say neither is better. They were contextual, and fit with a specific experience. Simply substituting HR's hacking approach and importing it into DX, without changing anything else, would've felt out of place. Engineering an experience is more complex than putting a mixed bag of cool features together.

MasterTaffer
30th Apr 2013, 01:46
DX's hacking made sense, in the context of its more classical RPG approach.

HR's hacking was logical and consequential to its fluid approach.

I'm not prepared to say neither is better. They were contextual, and fit with a specific experience. Simply substituting HR's hacking approach and importing it into DX, without changing anything else, would've felt out of place. Engineering an experience is more complex than putting a mixed bag of cool features together.

Bingo, Frank wins the prize! :thumb:

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 01:54
All it did was artificially (and sometimes ludicrously) handicap my options, rather than provide new options.

That is the whole point though; To enforce choice and consequence and so you cannot have everything in one playthrough.
And they did provide new options, every single one of em. Environ Skill you can run around longer in dangerous environments and explore them, Lockpick and Tech skill you can open more/hack more stuff, weapons skills made shooting playstyle more skill based once you had 100% accuracy, Hacking allowed you to hack, and so on. Sure, it is a flawed system, but it was far better than the merged system, especially when you consider the other reasons I mentioned in the podcast thread.



oh, and also have all the enemies wait patiently while you hack that turret behind them to shoot them while they wait politely for you to log out" (incidentally, I always though it funny that turrets in DX never had such preferences--you'd keep taking damage as you hacked untill it killed you). In that respect, it was a HUGE improvement.

I'm pretty sure you do get shot by NPC's whilst hacking if their stimuli is set to Hacking=True, and depending on Max number of provocations...I should check that.
Well, and if they are already just pissed off at you.


But to dismiss the whole concept as a negative is painting too broad a stroke, imho.

I didn't. I loved the concept, but not the execution overall. The mini-game itself was excellent, but related systems were completely screwed by it by choice of the devs, most likely unintentional.

Jerion
30th Apr 2013, 02:30
That is the whole point though; To enforce choice and consequence and so you cannot have everything in one playthrough.
And they did provide new options, every single one of em. Environ Skill you can run around longer in dangerous environments and explore them, Lockpick and Tech skill you can open more/hack more stuff, weapons skills made shooting playstyle more skill based once you had 100% accuracy, Hacking allowed you to hack, and so on. Sure, it is a flawed system, but it was far better than the merged system, especially when you consider the other reasons I mentioned in the podcast thread.


By and large: Options, yes, Capabilities, no. Systems such as the DX Skills provide you with massive handicaps on available capabilities (lock picking, pistol shooting, armor use etc), then over time allow you to choose how you want to reduce those handicaps, potentially opening up options as the game progresses. Nothing fundamentally new appears over time; certain things are simply made easier and thus more practical as you develop. The distinction here is between, "Can I do this in a massively limited form already?" versus "Can I do this at all?" That's the distinction between proficiency and capability. Both of these approaches are reasonable routes to character customization, but get there in very different ways. If you felt that choice and consequence were not a terribly valid part of the DX:HR implementation, that has to do with the relatively low number of diverse aug options and prevalence of praxis kits/points, rather than the concept itself. IIRC, they shipped the game with an aug that was almost completely useless (like DX's swimming skill). Take from that what you will.

In DX 1, it is very much the distinction between skills (proficiencies) and augs (capabilities). DX:HR has both approaches wrapped up in it's merged system: You can reduce accuracy penalties and recoil for weapons (proficiency), but you can also open up new combat options completely, such as the Icarus stun landing, the Typhoon, and two-target takedowns (capability). Those three options don't exist in any manner until you specifically activate and upgrade them. In DX1, hacking is the only place in the skills sheet where this is also the case: You don't start with hacking capabilities, and upgrading that allows you to unlock new, previously impossible capabilities. Both are valid routes to character customization. The computers skill would have been more at home as an augmentation; it was classified as such in DX:HR.

-Neon-
30th Apr 2013, 04:45
Did Eidos ever do a survey in regards to if people had played the original DX? Perhaps HR deviated from the original so that the game wasn't so intimidating to people new to the franchise (such as myself, who found the first DX really hard for the first few hours)?

Jerion
30th Apr 2013, 05:11
Did Eidos ever do a survey in regards to if people had played the original DX? Perhaps HR deviated from the original so that the game wasn't so intimidating to people new to the franchise (such as myself, who found the first DX really hard for the first few hours)?

I'm not sure to what extent I'm allowed to talk about playtesting practices (it's been a while since I've seen the agreement for that), but they tend to look for certain, different kinds of players to see how different people with different gaming background and preferences react to what they're working on. Long-time DX fans would have been part of that, you can be sure.

68_pie
30th Apr 2013, 10:41
Conversations were much better.

How many conversation battles were there and how many conversations that actually meant something or had any impact? In terms of reactivity I don't recall it being stronger than DX and certainly not in the league of Alpha Protocol where every single conversation had an impact even though you might not realise it until way later in the game.


Hacking was an improvement.

The hacking minigame was an improvement over watching a bar move along the screen. The other aspects related to hacking were awful (XP, lack of mechanical locks, etc)


Gunplay was made better.

It was made simpler and easier. I'm not sure that equates to better. Especially not in a DX game. I always enjoyed the RPG, stat-dependent aspects of combat.

In many ways, I feel that Alpha Protocol was more of a DX game than DXHR was.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 10:44
Nothing fundamentally new appears over time; certain things are simply made easier and thus more practical as you develop. .

To some extent, yes, but brand new functionality is given through the augs in DX anyway (which you have already mentioned).

HR's aug system is pretty good in that they all are aids that are arguably possible in the future and the descriptions of most augs were clever also....I wouldn't have been so bothered about the merge if it had more depth, balance, and restrictions (cannot have them all).

There could have been two types of augs, still merged, but split up in the aug menu as proficiency and and abilities. Can only have half of each category, and the proficiencies had a four tier upgrade system like DX.


Both of these approaches are reasonable routes to character customization, but get there in very different ways. If you felt that choice and consequence were not a terribly valid part of the DX:HR implementation, that has to do with the relatively low number of diverse aug options and prevalence of praxis kits/points, rather than the concept itself. IIRC, they shipped the game with an aug that was almost completely useless (like DX's swimming skill). Take from that what you will.

Yeah, this.
There were plenty that were pretty useless. Shame the stealth was so easy, because some of those stealth augs would have actually been fun to use if not.
The 3rd person camera and radar by default removed plenty of the augs worth. See through walls? How about seeing around walls aug without exposing yourself, which is almost the same thing, which you have by default (cover system).
HR could have been a phenomenal game, instead it was just good....


In many ways, I feel that Alpha Protocol was more of a DX game than DXHR was.

:eek: :thud:

Agreed on the rest of your post though.

Well actually:


It was made simpler and easier. I'm not sure that equates to better. Especially not in a DX game. I always enjoyed the RPG, stat-dependent aspects of combat.

I like both. However I'd have preferred a merge, both the smooth, visceral skill-based gunplay of HR with the stats that determine aspects of performance of DX, and this could have been achieved through my system I mentioned up top. This system remains player skill-based (accuracy) whilst having depth, and it's ALL realistic. Weapon sway, ADS speed etc, this is all human skills that can be improved in real life.

SageSavage
30th Apr 2013, 11:40
Somehow the game didn't leave a strong impression on me. One of the reasons surely was my (mild) aversion to some of the graphic design. The story and the characters, while not actually bad and well fleshed out, weren't able to hold my attention consistently through the game and left me emotionally detached too often. The extreme focus on "augmented vs unaugmented" felt very artificial and tacked on. I prefer "skills + augs" over "augs only" but the real bummer is the fact that you can use and even maximise everthing in the same playthrough. And yes, too few usable things made the world feel static. Another thing I feel could have been better were the controls / feel of the movement - although I can't put my finger on what exactly. Boss battles, obviously. Oh and the removal of melee weapons and lockpicking.

With all that said, DXHR was nice and TML even very good. So much that could be improved though - and so much DX1 did better.

Tverdyj
30th Apr 2013, 15:55
How many conversation battles were there and how many conversations that actually meant something or had any impact? In terms of reactivity I don't recall it being stronger than DX and certainly not in the league of Alpha Protocol where every single conversation had an impact even though you might not realise it until way later in the game.



The hacking minigame was an improvement over watching a bar move along the screen. The other aspects related to hacking were awful (XP, lack of mechanical locks, etc)



It was made simpler and easier. I'm not sure that equates to better. Especially not in a DX game. I always enjoyed the RPG, stat-dependent aspects of combat.

In many ways, I feel that Alpha Protocol was more of a DX game than DXHR was.

We are mixing apples and oranges here.
AP was a great game. I've replayed it 4 consecutive times upon buying. But it is not DX, nor was it aiming to be DX.

AP was an RPG from top to bottom. I wouldn't ever try to pigeonhole DX into a single category (immersive sims asside). and while APdid some absolutely amazing things with story, reactivity, and it was possible to get incredible replayability mileage out of that alone, its gameplay was largely incredibly linear. It also didn't offer you much of an actual freedom of exploration, the way HR did. I'm willing to forgive a lot of HR's flaws, because of Yuzhao district og Hengsha+ILS. Exploring those rooftops FELT like DX. And having Icarus there to prevent stupid deaths from mistimed jumps just made it even better.

Look, I'll be the last to say HR was perfect. But in some few aspects, it was a genuine improvement over the original, and I'm willing to recognise those areas fro what they are. This doesn't mean I don't have a ton of other criticisms towards it (physics... why did they have to get rid of one of the ONLY things IW did well?)

68_pie
30th Apr 2013, 16:34
We are mixing apples and oranges here.

Not really. Both AP and DXHR were APRGs that did some things similar to DX


But it is not DX, nor was it aiming to be DX.

No, it wasn't aiming to be DX. I didn't say that. But what I am saying is that, for me, AP did a better job of replicating the feel of DX than DXHR did in multiple areas.


AP did some absolutely amazing things with story, reactivity, and it was possible to get incredible replayability mileage out of that alone, its gameplay was largely incredibly linear.

And these are some of the reasons that I feel it is reminiscent of DX. I'm not sure I'd agree with the gameplay being linear (or maybe I'm misreading what you mean by it), considering the number of different builds there are and the choice of in what order to complete missions which would affect how other missions played out.


It also didn't offer you much of an actual freedom of exploration, the way HR did. I'm willing to forgive a lot of HR's flaws, because of Yuzhao district og Hengsha+ILS. Exploring those rooftops FELT like DX. And having Icarus there to prevent stupid deaths from mistimed jumps just made it even better.

DXHR had hubs, yes. But there were so many other things that made me think that I wasn't playing a DX game that it didn't balance out.

***As a side note, can you imagine how awesome it would have been if AP had had hubs? To go out and explore and try to dig for information before missions, squeeze sources, buy weapons and tools, find side-missions? If they had replaced The Clearinghouse with hubs, AP would probably be even higher in my list of favourite games.***

sonicsidewinder
30th Apr 2013, 17:21
Edit: He says here that some people that complained about the highlightning ended up using it. Is this true? Any of you decided that the highlightning was better on than off?

Yes, cus of this:



I personally used highlighting because the game was so full of static clutter and the interactive stuff was so few and far between (and more than a couple times I found static versions of objects the game had previously "taught" me were interactive) that I had a hard time discerning between the two, especially with things like doors. They did a poor job of making interactive objects stand out from the scenery, which was a problem DX1 definitely did not have, as pretty much everything in the scenery WAS interactive.

ColBashar
30th Apr 2013, 17:28
There's really nothing wrong with the skill-augmentation merge. I know that might seem like heresy coming from a DX1 fan, but essentially they're both experience point systems. They both achieve the same function of enabling the user to improve their character as a reward for progression or achievement.

What makes DX1 unique is that it had -two- such systems. I don't agree that the distinguishing factor between the two is one of capability versus proficiency, which while a valid observation I find to be incidental. The real difference between the two systems is granularity. To max out a skill costs, what, about 8,000 points? Contrast that to four points/canisters it requires to max out an augmentation from levels 0 to 4.

What's significant about this is how the progression slopes. The cost to upgrade an augmentation is linear. It requires the same investment to go from level 1 to level 2 as it does to go from level 3 to level 4. By contrast, the high granularity of the skill system allows a gradual slope where the lower levels can be achieved at a much smaller investment than the higher ones.

As a result, the mechanics tend to favour a specialized approach to augs and a generalized approach to skills. In order to get the most benefit out of an aug, you'll probably want to max it out. This is not true in every case since some augs have diminishing returns to counter-balance the linear cost (regeneration for instance) but other augs, important ones like cloak, speed enhancement, and ballistic protection offer linear or progressively improving enhancements per level. Regardless, the cost of upgrading one aug is the same as the cost of upgrading any other aug regardless of their respective levels.

Contrast this to skills where upgrades become progressively more expensive. In most cases you can get two Trained Skills for about the same price as one Advanced skill. Often it's beneficial to do so. When Master skills cost upwards of 5,000 points, the 675 points needed to get one rank of swimming offers quite a bit of bang for its buck. The reason to specialize a skill is as a matter of preference, not overall efficiency.

But that's the real difference between augs and skills, one tends to promotes specialization while the other tends to encourage generalization. You might argue bio-energy but that's just a form of consumable resource and skills have their own such; namely ammo, medkits, LAMs, armour,lockpicks, and multitools.

In the case of Invisible War, I don't think the problem was so much the lack of the skill system but the lack of so many mechanics that would have warranted a more substantial character development system. With the loss of intrinsic accuracy modifiers and the merge of lockpicks with multitools, there weren't as many characteristics to modify. Even then, though, the game could have been made more robust with an additional tier of augmentations and a reduction in the availability of upgrade canisters. But the merge of augs with skills isn't central to that. A contributing factor, possibly, but not a core one.

I think Human Revolution did fine. If I were going to make a change to the experience system, it would be in how many points are awarded and for what feats. But I don't think the merge of skills with augmentations inherently diminishes or "dumbs down" the system. It's just another way of achieving the same thing. While it's much less granular than the skills in DX1, it's more granular than the augs. That can be demonstrated in the sheer number of praxis points needed to max out hacking. If there's a problem, what it comes down more to balance rather than the mechanics.
_ _ _

Honestly, getting to the point of difficulty, I don't see how Human Revolution can be at all called difficult. The cover system is -so- powerful that the only real challenge I experienced was the learning curve of figuring out how to take advantage of it. That didn't occur until I got to the FEMA camp. Theretofore I had been trying to play it like DX1 and that, I admit, was tough. Otherwise, I've played the game on maximum difficulty with no praxis upgrades and I never felt challenged. And I really don't consider myself one of those "hard core" players who needs things to be super difficult. Witcher II, for instance, was a game I thought strayed to the side of too hard.

The fact that I was able to complete the game without any character upgrades, though, really highlights for me the criticism of have of Human Revolution. It doesn't really matter what kind of character development system they have if it's entirely optional, even preferable if aiming for a challenge. In DX1 I felt like my choices really made a difference. In picking my augs and my skills I was committing myself to a particular playstyle. I liked that feeling in the original game and Human Revolution didn't provide it.

With regard to hacking, I liked Human Revolution's mini-game; however, I'm not sure how appropriate mini-games are in the context of an RPG because they deviate from the core gameplay. I think that was the reason for the shift in hacking minigames between Bioshock 1 and 2. The first game had a puzzle based minigame while the sequel had a reflex-based one. Since Bioshock is at its core an action game, the reflex minigame of the sequel was more in line with game's main mechanics.

That said, I find the interactivity of Human Revolutions hacking minigame to be preferable to DX1's timer. Plus, DXHR provides opportunities to reduce the difficulty of hacking through augs and consumables, if someone finds it too difficult. What frustrated me about DX1 was in how it offered me these interesting tidbits of story in the e-mail but then closed the window shut if I didn't read quickly enough. All in all I think I would have preferred a more straight forward solution similar to what Human Revolution was moving toward and Fallout New Vegas actually implemented in that you either could or couldn't hack a computer based on your character stats. No timer, no mini-game, either I can hack it or I can't.

But I would have also brought back lockpicks and multi-tools, so there you have it.

On the point of highlighting, I think Eidos Montreal made the right call. My first play through I kept it on because there is just so much more clutter in this game than in DX1. I didn't know what objects I could pick up and interact with and which ones I couldn't. After that, though, I've since always played with highlighting off. Now that I've learned to identify static from moveable objects, I don't need it and it's just a distraction. I occasionally miss things or I'll try to pick up a pill bottle that doesn't actually boost my health but that's just part of the charm.
_ _ _

I just played Alpha Protocol for the first time earlier this month. I enjoyed it more than I expected to (except for the hacking minigame). While the individual missions are more straight forward I found that it still offered me the opportunity to try different strategies and tactics. On a whole I think the level design was superior to VTMB which most people call the closest game to Deus Ex that isn't Deus Ex. Also, while Alpha Protocol doesn't have hubs, it is interesting how the order in which you choose your missions can affect other missions down the road. That was a nice touch and offered a sense of freedom that was otherwise lacking.

The real problem I have with Alpha Protocol is how it likes to force challenges on you. There are occasions where you -have- to fight, where you -have- to hack, where you -have- to lockpick, where you -have- to do things that aren't in line with the character build that I'm developing. I didn't appreciate that. What I love about Deus Ex is that it makes my choices feel valid no matter what they may be. Whatever works -is- the right answer.

nomotog
30th Apr 2013, 17:29
My biggest complaint about HR is that doors don't display their HP and that some doors are much too hardy for how they look.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 17:33
My biggest complaint about HR is that doors don't display their HP and that some doors are much too hardy for how they look.

The doors do display HP? I'm sure there is an orange bar that appears. Hmm. Even so, that's your biggest complaint? :scratch:

As for the hit points of the doors vs the look, this is a problem in DX1 also.


or I'll try to pick up a pill bottle that doesn't actually boost my health but that's just part of the charm.

:scratch:

Liked what you had to say about the skill system though.

To add: With these seperate systems comes more choices. HR you spend a praxis every now and then and you are done, DX you got the skill system and Aug systems which presents more choices in the character you want to build. Since some of the upgrades are conflicting you can combine them also or not and spend the upgrade currency on something different. More specialization.

nomotog
30th Apr 2013, 17:48
The doors do display HP? I'm sure there is an orange bar that appears. Hmm. Even so, that's your biggest complaint? :scratch:

As for the hit points of the doors vs the look, this is a problem in DX1 also.

Did they patch that in? I don't recall any orange bars in any of my plays. Yes it is my biggest complaint because it makes doors look invincible and they aren't. The fact you can shotgun open doors was the thing that made me really love DX. Doors are also a very important measuring stick of how DX a game is. If you can't use your grenade as a lock pick, it's not DX. (This is why dishonored isn't DX to me.) Other aspect I could complain about, but they didn't really affect my play time as much as the door thing.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 18:07
Here you go, go to 1:05, look when his cursor goes over the door and you'll see an orange bar. Pretty sure it's been there since release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9sXM11zAvU

Tverdyj
30th Apr 2013, 18:07
Not really. Both AP and DXHR were APRGs that did some things similar to DX



No, it wasn't aiming to be DX. I didn't say that. But what I am saying is that, for me, AP did a better job of replicating the feel of DX than DXHR did in multiple areas.



And these are some of the reasons that I feel it is reminiscent of DX. I'm not sure I'd agree with the gameplay being linear (or maybe I'm misreading what you mean by it), considering the number of different builds there are and the choice of in what order to complete missions which would affect how other missions played out.



DXHR had hubs, yes. But there were so many other things that made me think that I wasn't playing a DX game that it didn't balance out.

***As a side note, can you imagine how awesome it would have been if AP had had hubs? To go out and explore and try to dig for information before missions, squeeze sources, buy weapons and tools, find side-missions? If they had replaced The Clearinghouse with hubs, AP would probably be even higher in my list of favourite games.***

Obsidian needs to do this. That game would rock so hard.

By "linearity" I meant once you've actually got down to the levels themselves... they were largely corridors, with few real options. The stuff you talk about--choosing which order to do stuff in, I would categorize as story progression--and in that regard, I'm pretty sure AP is unparalleled wrt how many options it gives you.

But for me DX was always more about gameplay and exploration. I love that it gives us so many options of how to play, but i'd usually find myself falling into the same playstyle over and over--and exploring every nook and cranny was the key part of that, which is probably why I stress that so highly. In that regard, all AP had to offer me--the only things I could "explore"--were the various story permutations, based on the choices I've made. I adored AP's perk system, btw--it was essentially an achievement system, but with tangible in-game benefits.

But while it was all those good things, AP didn't really "feel" like DX to me. HR, in certain places, did. Everywhere else, I could see the carcass of what DX was supposed to be, but it was mostly hamstrung by design decisions that limited the scope of what I could do with the game.

ColBashar
30th Apr 2013, 18:21
CyberP:

What I mean is that I still have a tendency to try picking up medical paraphernalia in Human Revolution that looks like it's something useful but is just a static decoration. The painkillers and syringe look similar to some of the static objects whereas other items are more distinctive int he game world. Other than that, I don't have a need for highlighting. And while I'm prone to agree with Wildcat, I'm not sure it should necessarily be included as an aug since to me it seems more of a learning tool, something to help the player acclimate to the world. As for the item "flashing", that I could get on board with as an aug/skill/character stat.

Invisible War also had mutually exclusive aug choices which is why it's really a separate issue from that of merging skills with augs. But I agree with you in that I enjoyed being forced to make a choice even if it was in some ways artificial. I don't think the loss of that in Human Revolution would be as noticeable if the game offered fewer Praxis points to spend and augmentations were more critical/necessary toward completing objectives.

I think Eidos Montreal put so much effort into ensuring that the game was accessible that they overshot the mark. In ensuring that all playstyles were valid, the need to develop a unique character build to overcome obstacles was diminished. There were a couple of times in DX1 and IW where I thought I was stuck and was afraid I would have reload an old save to do something differently. In each of those cases I took the time to think through my situation, assess the environment, and examine the resources at my disposal until eventually I found a solution to my problem. I never felt that challenge in Human Revolution, even at hardest difficulty and doing a no-aug run.

nomotog
30th Apr 2013, 18:22
Here you go, go to 1:05, look when his cursor goes over the door and you'll see an orange bar. Pretty sure it's been there since release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9sXM11zAvU

Oh I remember now. The problem is that it doesn't show that when the door is locked. It just highlights the keypad and not the door. That makes it look like the only way in is through the keypad, but it's not you can blow the door.

Doors, are really important. I know it seems like such a small thing, but the entire idea behind DX can be explained by the way it handles doors.

68_pie
30th Apr 2013, 18:47
Obsidian needs to do this. That game would rock so hard.

Right? I wish Sega would give them the chance to make Alpha Protocol 2.


By "linearity" I meant once you've actually got down to the levels themselves... they were largely corridors, with few real options. The stuff you talk about--choosing which order to do stuff in, I would categorize as story progression--and in that regard, I'm pretty sure AP is unparalleled wrt how many options it gives you.

Ah, okay, I see what you mean. I'd say there are opportunities for different play-styles within the missions, but the missions themselves are somewhat linear.


But for me DX was always more about gameplay and exploration. I love that it gives us so many options of how to play, but i'd usually find myself falling into the same playstyle over and over--and exploring every nook and cranny was the key part of that, which is probably why I stress that so highly. In that regard, all AP had to offer me--the only things I could "explore"--were the various story permutations, based on the choices I've made. I adored AP's perk system, btw--it was essentially an achievement system, but with tangible in-game benefits.

Yeah, I guess there are items and cash that you might miss if you don't look around but we're not talking DX levels of exploration.


But while it was all those good things, AP didn't really "feel" like DX to me. HR, in certain places, did. Everywhere else, I could see the carcass of what DX was supposed to be, but it was mostly hamstrung by design decisions that limited the scope of what I could do with the game.

Fair enough.

Tverdyj
30th Apr 2013, 18:50
_ _ _

I just played Alpha Protocol for the first time earlier this month. I enjoyed it more than I expected to (except for the hacking minigame). While the individual missions are more straight forward I found that it still offered me the opportunity to try different strategies and tactics. On a whole I think the level design was superior to VTMB which most people call the closest game to Deus Ex that isn't Deus Ex. Also, while Alpha Protocol doesn't have hubs, it is interesting how the order in which you choose your missions can affect other missions down the road. That was a nice touch and offered a sense of freedom that was otherwise lacking.

The real problem I have with Alpha Protocol is how it likes to force challenges on you. There are occasions where you -have- to fight, where you -have- to hack, where you -have- to lockpick, where you -have- to do things that aren't in line with the character build that I'm developing. I didn't appreciate that. What I love about Deus Ex is that it makes my choices feel valid no matter what they may be. Whatever works -is- the right answer.

I've read this and my first reaction was: "That's impossible!" but then I tried to think of when did Bloodlines actually offer the player multiple approaches, the way DX did for, say, the NSF generator (one of the most iconic examples of multi-pathing).

The best I can think of right now is the Santa Monica warehouse. earlier than that, you could stealth your way to the beachhouse, but that map's too tiny to be considered a proper piece of sandbox. (oh, wait, the Boris mission--that had some fun moments as well, dodging the guards and trying to get by in vents)

there were places in Bloodlines where stealth was mandatory (and hence it really paid off to be a Malk-Obfuscation ftw!), but really, the game was almost entirely the sum of its parts. I guess it's simply due to the whole "vampires as predators of the night" aesthetic that stealth felt as an organic component of the game--the game didn't feel like a straight-up shooter at its core (except for the zombie parts. my god, the zombie parts!)

As for AP, yeah, it was often imbalanced, but having done a number of playthroughs I can say--there ARE tools for everything, and every build is valid. I played the game with a CQC build, on Hard. Even the dreaded "Turn up the radio" bossfight is doable. Mike's ultimate interrupts the Knife of Doom. And if you stock up on EMPs, you CAN, in fact, avoid all the super-high level lockpicking/bypassing/hacking minigames on most, if not all levels. but it DOES take preparation.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 19:12
CyberP:

What I mean is that I still have a tendency to try picking up medical paraphernalia in Human Revolution that looks like it's something useful but is just a static decoration.

I know. I was confused as to why you thought it was part of the charm.



Doors, are really important. I know it seems like such a small thing, but the entire idea behind DX can be explained by the way it handles doors.

I agree. All the little things are important.

nomotog
30th Apr 2013, 19:39
No no no, Doors aren't a little thing. They are a big big thing. It's just that they seem little well actually being a big component of gameplay.

If you want to know anything you about a game just look at the way it handle doors and you will know.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 22:45
No no no, Doors aren't a little thing. They are a big big thing. It's just that they seem little well actually being a big component of gameplay.

If you want to know anything you about a game just look at the way it handle doors and you will know.

:lol:

You're most certainly pulling my leg.

68_pie
30th Apr 2013, 23:03
:lol:

You're most certainly pulling my leg.

I can see where nomotog is coming from. The doors can be indicative of the overall design philosophy.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 23:10
I can see where nomotog is coming from. The doors can be indicative of the overall design philosophy.

Not really. Deus Ex had breakable doors. Resident Evil 4 had breakable doors. Completely different games.....then again, Resident Evil 4 also had a grid-based inventory & weapon upgrade system similar to Deus Ex.

But seriously, i'm not sure why you'd need to have the doors as indication of anything, just examine the game as a whole. It would be a unfair, ridiculous even to judge a game by the way it handles doors alone as nomotog suggested.

SageSavage
30th Apr 2013, 23:17
“These are the sort of things people ought to look at. Things without pretensions, satisfied to be merely themselves.”
― Aldous Huxley, The Doors of Perception/Heaven and Hell

Questions?

WildcatPhoenix
30th Apr 2013, 23:20
Not really. Deus Ex had breakable doors. Resident Evil 4 had breakable doors. Completely different games.....then again, Resident Evil 4 also had a grid-based inventory & weapon upgrade system similar to Deus Ex.

But seriously, i'm not sure why you'd need to have the doors as indication of anything, just examine the game as a whole.

The doors in Deus Ex are indicative of the game's entire design philosophy.

The player is faced with an obstacle.
To overcome that obstacle (a locked door), he/she can:

1. Use a multitool to hack the keypad
2. Find the keycode in a locker or desk nearby
3. Blow the door up with explosives
4. Use a security terminal in another room to open the door
5. Find an airvent or other passage around it

etc.

CyberP
30th Apr 2013, 23:23
The doors in Deus Ex are indicative of the game's entire design philosophy.

The player is faced with an obstacle.
To overcome that obstacle (a locked door), he/she can:

1. Use a multitool to hack the keypad
2. Find the keycode in a locker or desk nearby
3. Blow the door up with explosives
4. Use a security terminal in another room to open the door
5. Find an airvent or other passage around it

etc.

No, not entire. Indicative of a major part, but far from "entire". The designers didn't just go "right, lets make a game, freedom to the player, simulation and C & C is our entire focus".
And Deus Ex is one of very few that stands out, but yes, these things do give away a lot about it. Most other games it's either locked or not locked. Find a key of sorts or a scripted event blows it open for you.

nomotog
1st May 2013, 00:59
No, not entire. Indicative of a major part, but far from "entire". The designers didn't just go "right, lets make a game, freedom to the player, simulation and C & C is our entire focus".
And Deus Ex is one of very few that stands out, but yes, these things do give away a lot about it. Most other games it's either locked or not locked. Find a key of sorts or a scripted event blows it open for you.

DX isn't about C&C (Choices and consequences). It's about the subverting of C&C. It's a game that lets you have your cake and eat it too. A game like fallout3 is about C&C and I can give you a good comparison by comparing the way the two games handle doors.

In fallout, you make the choice to be good at lock picking or to be good at grenades. Picking to be good with grenades means there will be doors you can't open. It's a choice you made and then you have to live with the consequences. DX sets up a similar choice, but lets you pluck out the consequences. In DX you can also make the choice between grenades and lock pick, but you then can use that grenade as your lockpick.

It's a very important distinction that not everyone gets. DX is a game about making choices then avoiding the consequences.

Jerion
1st May 2013, 01:02
DX isn't about C&C (Choices and consequences). It's about the subverting of C&C. It's a game that lets you have your cake and eat it too. A game like fallout3 is about C&C and I can give you a good comparison by comparing the way the two games handle doors.

In fallout, you make the choice to be good at lock picking or to be good at grenades. Picking to be good with grenades means there will be doors you can't open. It's a choice you made and then you have to live with the consequences. DX sets up a similar choice, but lets you pluck out the consequences. In DX you can also make the choice between grenades and lock pick, but you then can use that grenade as your lockpick.

It's a very important distinction that not everyone gets. DX is a game about making choices then avoiding the consequences.

Or at the very least, making choices to subvert the consequences.

CyberP
1st May 2013, 02:54
DX isn't about C&C (Choices and consequences). It's about the subverting of C&C. It's a game that lets you have your cake and eat it too. A game like fallout3 is about C&C and I can give you a good comparison by comparing the way the two games handle doors.


It's true that there are often multiple solutions to any problem and not very often notable (negative) consequences for them, but this is only in the level design and the imbalance of the skill system. There is still a strong C & C design overall, good examples being the Aug system, storyline & side quest options (e.g save paul or not).
But yes, there is a bit too much cake eating going on, but not in my mod. Mentioning it too often now, but it is relevant:
Alongside challenge one of my primary goals was to strengthen the C & C design, ironically. This is easily achieved by just re-balancing the gameplay systems and increasing the difficulty a touch....well, it wasn't easy, but easier than I thought it'd be. Anyway, multitool and lockpick skill for example were completely pointless vanilla. Now these skills actually matter, so do your choices a little more. If you do not specialize in Pick/Tech skill at all I guarantee there will be consequences: you will have to walk away from a locked mover/Keypad at least a couple of times, and would use many explosives breaching as an alternative....if you have the demolition skill to carry a decent amount that is, which is another thing added. Hacking a.k.a easy mode is very expensive also, but the cost descends after trained since it's benefits do too.

nomotog
1st May 2013, 04:35
The cake eating is a good thing. I just want to point that out.

CyberP
1st May 2013, 07:38
The cake eating is a good thing. I just want to point that out.

In your opinion.

I don't think it's a good thing when a game's gameplay systems are unbalanced in such a way.

Tverdyj
1st May 2013, 07:41
I don't agree that lockpicking and electronics were "useless" in vanilla DX. Sure, if you took the time to look in every office and interact with every little thing, you COULD be swimming in disposable tools by the time you go to La Guardia, if not earlier.

But if you didn't pay attention, didn't use the walkthrough and weren't playing the game for the 5th time, you'd miss fully half of those tools. and then, if you invested all your precious skill points in medicine and melee combat, you'd certainly be skulking around and killing/disabling every guard you saw, hoping for a nano-key, because spending 3 lockipicks out of 7 to open the door, and needing TWO lockpicks for each locked cabinet would quickly prove to be too much.

Same way you's be smoking your way past all the laser tripwires, rather than spending 3 multitools out of the 5 you've stumbled upon to disable a panel, leaving you unable to open that augmentation canister-holding chamber that was right there.... and sending you to frantiacally dig through every single computer, hoping to find an email containing the code you'd need.

Not to mention that unlike hacking, lockpicing or multi-tooling was done in real time. If you were unskilled, no only would it take more resoaurces, it would take TIME. Try spending 4 lockpicks on a 80% lock strength door, when you have a 35 second window between guards patrolling by the door. Oh, and if you step away, the progress is interrupted, and the lockpick is gone, having done maybe as little as 2% of damage. And what if that was your last one?

Yes, sure, it's easy for us to reminisce about how easy the game is... since we've replayed it multiple times, and we know locations of nearly every lockpick and multitool on Liberty Island (and where every Unatco key is, reducing the need to actually pick any locks there. But do you know that on untrained lockpick it takes THREE lockpicks to get that chest in the little alcove where the NSF security bot was patrolling? And even with lockpicking on level 1, you need 2 lockpicks to open the sunken barge to get the sawed-off (and it's REALLY easy to mess up there, because you're fighting your own buoyancy that's trying to push you up and out of the water)

So yeah, for veterans, sure, challenge is nice, once you know everything, the challenge is imbalanced. But if you don't, trust me, it's all there. And resource management is still a major part of the game.

CyberP
1st May 2013, 08:06
I don't agree that lockpicking and electronics were "useless" in vanilla DX. Sure, if you took the time to look in every office and interact with every little thing, you COULD be swimming in disposable tools by the time you go to La Guardia, if not earlier.

But if you didn't pay attention, didn't use the walkthrough and weren't playing the game for the 5th time, you'd miss fully half of those tools. and then, if you invested all your precious skill points in medicine and melee combat, you'd certainly be skulking around and killing/disabling every guard you saw, hoping for a nano-key, because spending 3 lockipicks out of 7 to open the door, and needing TWO lockpicks for each locked cabinet would quickly prove to be too much.

Same way you's be smoking your way past all the laser tripwires, rather than spending 3 multitools out of the 5 you've stumbled upon to disable a panel, leaving you unable to open that augmentation canister-holding chamber that was right there.... and sending you to frantiacally dig through every single computer, hoping to find an email containing the code you'd need.

Not to mention that unlike hacking, lockpicing or multi-tooling was done in real time. If you were unskilled, no only would it take more resoaurces, it would take TIME. Try spending 4 lockpicks on a 80% lock strength door, when you have a 35 second window between guards patrolling by the door. Oh, and if you step away, the progress is interrupted, and the lockpick is gone, having done maybe as little as 2% of damage. And what if that was your last one?

Yes, sure, it's easy for us to reminisce about how easy the game is... since we've replayed it multiple times, and we know locations of nearly every lockpick and multitool on Liberty Island (and where every Unatco key is, reducing the need to actually pick any locks there. But do you know that on untrained lockpick it takes THREE lockpicks to get that chest in the little alcove where the NSF security bot was patrolling? And even with lockpicking on level 1, you need 2 lockpicks to open the sunken barge to get the sawed-off (and it's REALLY easy to mess up there, because you're fighting your own buoyancy that's trying to push you up and out of the water)

So yeah, for veterans, sure, challenge is nice, once you know everything, the challenge is imbalanced. But if you don't, trust me, it's all there. And resource management is still a major part of the game.

No, you're right. Not useless, but are for vets. Good thing I've designed it for vets only :)
I don't remember my first playthrough all too well, but I do remember putting some points into tech. Years ago now.

The other offenders were always imbalanced though, Swimming, Environ and Demolition.

Tverdyj
1st May 2013, 08:14
No, you're right. Not useless, but are for vets. Good thing I've designed it for vets only :)
I don't remember my first playthrough all too well, but I do remember putting some points into tech. Years ago now.

The other offenders were always imbalanced though, Swimming, Environ and Demolition.

I have posted on this forum a list of at least 9-10 instances where stacking Aqua Lung and swimming bonus was actually useful (though it can also be covered by re-breathers. I know this, but then there are inventory considerations). I do not recall much of it now, so I won't try to replicate it, but there are SOME locations where it helps. Swimming's not always useless. just most of the time.

Enviro I will agree on--I've never ever put any points into that. Not sure about Demo, but I've never been a big GEP person, though I've met people on the Internet that swear by it, and i'm sure for them the added damage was important.

CyberP
1st May 2013, 09:39
I have posted on this forum a list of at least 9-10 instances where stacking Aqua Lung and swimming bonus was actually useful (though it can also be covered by re-breathers. I know this, but then there are inventory considerations). I do not recall much of it now, so I won't try to replicate it, but there are SOME locations where it helps. Swimming's not always useless. just most of the time.

Enviro I will agree on--I've never ever put any points into that. Not sure about Demo, but I've never been a big GEP person, though I've met people on the Internet that swear by it, and i'm sure for them the added damage was important.

Heavy Weapons Skill governs GEP damage, not Demolitions.
Demolitions only effects 'nades, vanilla it barely has any worth since it's stat modifications are either ineffective or near pointless.

Environ grants you temporary god mode vs bullets & melee at max level with ballistic vests, other than that not a whole lot of worth.

Swimming is completely negated by Regeneration of all things, just activate it and swim, even at aug Lvl 1 you cannot drown.

All fixed/rebalanced in my mod :D

Anyway, far off topic. Strangers are advised to stay near the market.

xaduha2
1st May 2013, 11:42
GEP gun is the best lockpick there is.

nomotog
1st May 2013, 15:12
At the start, but it's big, so by late game I suggest you switch to sold core shotgun rounds, or explosive SMG bullets. In HR I suggest the shotgun to start with, but the explosive revolver for late game. If your in a pinch, you can get the enemy to open the door for you. The number of ways to get through a door is just staggering.

In DX
The demo skill helped you disable landmines. I had a hard time doing that unless I had at least 1 rank in it. Swim could be bypassed a lot, but at the same time it could be useful if you used it. Mostly for it making you faster when you swim. You never needed more then one rank though. Environment, was dead useless. Heavy weapons made you run faster with the heavy weapons. If you upgraded to master you could buzz around at high speed well hulling a GEP gun. Useful if you where intending to fight everything.

Pinky_Powers
1st May 2013, 17:10
I agree with nonsense name. The GEP is something I always try to keep on hand. Even for my most stealthy plays. It's very handy for locked things, turrets, and bots--and those rare moments when you really just need to take out three dudes at once.

68_pie
1st May 2013, 18:51
I agree with nonsense name. The GEP is something I always try to keep on hand. Even for my most stealthy plays. It's very handy for locked things, turrets, and bots--and those rare moments when you really just need to take out three dudes at once.

I don't recall exactly how much inventory space the GEP took up but I'm pretty sure I could carry the Assault Rifle (with its attached grenade launcher), a stack of LAMs, a stack of scramblers, and a stack of EMPs and still have space leftover compared to the GEP.

xaduha2
1st May 2013, 19:18
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21787303/images/deus_ex_002.jpg

CyberP
1st May 2013, 19:26
I don't recall exactly how much inventory space the GEP took up but I'm pretty sure I could carry the Assault Rifle (with its attached grenade launcher), a stack of LAMs, a stack of scramblers, and a stack of EMPs and still have space leftover compared to the GEP.

If you really want to you can carry about 10 weapons. If I go lethal I usually have about 7 much like in the shot above, then a little space left over for tools, select grenades and consumables.
Where is the guy's biocells :confused:

Bout time for a replay, your memory of DX should never fade :D

Jerion
1st May 2013, 19:51
In my most recent play-through of DX:HR I decided to limit myself to two weapons, one for close/mid range and one for mid/what-passes-for-long-range. That ended up being the Revolver and at varying times either the tranq rifle or crossbow. Limiting weaponry options and leaving more space for grenades and consumables made me get more creative. I might try a DX1 play-through with a similarly restricted arsenal.

Ashpolt
1st May 2013, 20:56
In my most recent play-through of DX:HR I decided to limit myself to two weapons, one for close/mid range and one for mid/what-passes-for-long-range. That ended up being the Revolver and at varying times either the tranq rifle or crossbow. Limiting weaponry options and leaving more space for grenades and consumables made me get more creative. I might try a DX1 play-through with a similarly restricted arsenal.

I do this pretty naturally tbh. In my first playthrough of DXHR it was the silenced tranq rifle and mini stun gun thing that I forget the name of (not the PEPS, too noisy, the smaller one.) In original DX it's usually the stealth pistol (because duh) and...uhh...do I need other weapons? :P

Tverdyj
1st May 2013, 21:40
I do this pretty naturally tbh. In my first playthrough of DXHR it was the silenced tranq rifle and mini stun gun thing that I forget the name of (not the PEPS, too noisy, the smaller one.) In original DX it's usually the stealth pistol (because duh) and...uhh...do I need other weapons? :P

you need the baton, to break open crates.

Also, the crossbow for when the pistol doesn't work underwater.

Pinky_Powers
2nd May 2013, 01:01
The Baton, and Dragontooth. Done and done. :D

nomotog
2nd May 2013, 01:25
you need the baton, to break open crates.

Also, the crossbow for when the pistol doesn't work underwater.

Can't you open crates by throwing them?

Jerion
2nd May 2013, 01:43
The Baton, and Dragontooth. Done and done. :D

Make that Mini Crossbow and Dragon's Tooth, and I think you're on to something. Range, my friend, is useful.

Pinky_Powers
2nd May 2013, 01:54
Make that Mini Crossbow and Dragon's Tooth, and I think you're on to something. Range, my friend, is useful.

Truth. My last playthrough was a melee build, but I began it with the crossbow. Then picked up a baton. Then switched that with Paul's Baton, which is godly. Then switched the baton for the Dragontooth later. But having a ranged weapon inventoried is indeed always helpful. :thumb:

CyberP
2nd May 2013, 02:33
Then switched that with Paul's Baton, which is godly.

Had to look that up:


Shifter

In Shifter, a unique Baton can be found. On the players final visits to Hell's Kitchen, A baton called Blackjack can be found on a desk in Gilbert Renton's office at the 'Ton Hotel. It is a regular baton filled with lead by Paul Denton, dealing more damage while still being nonlethal. The Blackjack can be found earlier (on first entering Paul's room in the 'Ton hotel) if the player has been largely non-lethal so far in the game: Paul leaves it with a note indicating his approval.

Very nice. It's a damn good idea as there are not enough rewards/reactions to non-lethal. I may have to steal the assets. What? It's an excellent idea and if it ain't broke don't fix it/try something else.

Pinky_Powers
2nd May 2013, 17:03
Wait, is the one in Paul's apartment also found only with the Shifter Mod? I thought it was in the original game as well.

HERESY
2nd May 2013, 17:38
With the exception of Halo 4 and Bioshock for PS3 (which has an extra difficulty exclusive to the PS3 version), I play all my games on the hardest difficulty unlocked from the start. HR was no different and I didn't find the game "difficult" in any way.

MasterTaffer
2nd May 2013, 18:52
With the exception of Halo 4 and Bioshock for PS3 (which has an extra difficulty exclusive to the PS3 version), I play all my games on the hardest difficulty unlocked from the start. HR was no different and I didn't find the game "difficult" in any way.

It could also be that you're also used to playing games at high difficulty. My first playthrough of anything is usually on the middle difficulty, with the exception of Halo which I play on Heroic on my first run.

What difficulty was added to the PS3 version of Bioshock, if I may ask?

Pinky_Powers
2nd May 2013, 19:41
When it comes to FPS I always start off on the hardest setting--and rarely ever have to downgrade. Whereas other types of games I often go straight for the middle of the road. Especially RPGs. Those things kick my ass, even though I love them the most.

68_pie
2nd May 2013, 20:14
When it comes to FPS I always start off on the hardest setting--and rarely ever have to downgrade. Whereas other types of games I often go straight for the middle of the road. Especially RPGs. Those things kick my ass, even though I love them the most.

******* beholders would get me every time.

HERESY
2nd May 2013, 23:13
It could also be that you're also used to playing games at high difficulty. My first playthrough of anything is usually on the middle difficulty, with the exception of Halo which I play on Heroic on my first run.

That and the fact that once I beat a game I usually don't return to it. I don't go back for trophies, achievements or any of that stuff, so I try to get as much out of it as possible in the first run. But for Halo 4, I started on Heroic. The enemies never really posed a thread to me and it was more about ammo management than anything else.


What difficulty was added to the PS3 version of Bioshock, if I may ask?

Survivor mode. It starts off unlocked and that's what I went for when I started my campaign, but the game became frustrating so I went to the difficulty set just below it (HARD.) And I didn't know it was exclusive to the PS3 until like 2 weeks later but I had already lowered the difficulty.

CyberP
3rd May 2013, 13:06
Survivor mode. It starts off unlocked and that's what I went for when I started my campaign, but the game became frustrating so I went to the difficulty set just below it (HARD.) And I didn't know it was exclusive to the PS3 until like 2 weeks later but I had already lowered the difficulty.

It's crap. It just forces you to remember to manual save every now & then. Less resources is good though but they done 1999 mode much better.

El_Bel
5th May 2013, 00:48
Very nice. It's a damn good idea as there are not enough rewards/reactions to non-lethal. I may have to steal the assets. What? It's an excellent idea and if it ain't broke don't fix it/try something else.

And yet you haven't yet played biomod, which is the coolest and hardest (it's augs make the game easier to manage, more dificult to win) mod for deus ex. Aaaaargh!

CyberP
5th May 2013, 02:19
And yet you haven't yet played biomod, which is the coolest and hardest (it's augs make the game easier to manage, more dificult to win) mod for deus ex. Aaaaargh!

And yet you haven't played my mod ;)

bat_brain
10th May 2013, 03:55
one of the things that made the original deus ex so cool (besides the whole health / condition interface, along with the more detailed augmentation screens) was the different options for window color(s) were totally customizable.

in HR, the standard gold & black theme is a bit too unrelenting, by comparison.

the whole 3rd / 1st person stealth hybrid mechanic is unique, the trade off of it being they would have to program animations, reflecting the aforementioned "locomotive damage" & its effects; both physically & visibly.

however, ultimately, I think what hurts HR the most is console games just aren't as cool as pc games.

while im glad they did release HR for consoles (cant bring myself to justify the cost of a dedicated gaming pc; just to play this game or others like it) i'd venture a guess that it just doesn't "look" or "feel" the same as it probably does, playing the pc version, kinda like other games.

the 2nd witcher comes to mind.

Dx1, I actually own a pc that can run that, so i imagine a console version of it wouldn't be as cool either.

... not that i wouldn't buy it on xbla ... for 800-1200 MS points...? ;)