PDA

View Full Version : List of things people did not like/liked in DXHR - Thoughts & Suggestions



MalikNL
10th Apr 2015, 00:30
Let's get them all in one thread just to remind Eidos Montreal.
I'm pretty sure they know about most of them but a little reminder won't hurt.

DXHR was still the best game of the last generation in my opinion which is why feedback will only make Mankind Divided even better.

1. Third person take-downs

reallybigjohnson
10th Apr 2015, 02:57
1) Not only was playing non-lethal easier than lethal, you got more points for doing it.

2) Annoying third person takedowns. THe most annoying thing was that loud crunching, punching and tossing around and yet simply because it was non-lethal it was considered silent even if done right behind another NPC. I don't need to say your flashy animations umpteen million times. At least have the option to disable it. I don't care how awesome you think they are, any animation gets repetitive after awhile. I also don't need to see my guy climbing a ladder. Seriously, even the first Half Life game let you climb ladders without switching views just fine.

3) 10mm was the best sniper weapon in the game

4) I will reiterated, **** the non-lethal stuff. The entire point of the game is to play how you want to and not everyone in that game is worthy of leaving alive. The developers basically forced you to play that way with the extra points and by making non-lethal the most effective way to play.

5) Bigger levels. This isn't so much of a complaint since the last game was based on the old ****ty consoles but we have new consoles now with more horsepower. Utilize that and make bigger levels with more interactive stuff in the background. I want to just wander off and get lost sometimes.

JanusDominus
10th Apr 2015, 03:50
1) Third-person takedowns, hands down. Why is it less natural than a game that came out in bloody 2000? Really, I'd even say everything that switched action to third person except for the dialog.
2) Said takedowns taking away your energy. Sorry, if I'm just hitting a dude, why the heck does it lose the same amount of energy as does being invisible for 7 secs?
3) Adam ditching his coat during misssions. His coat is awesome. His armor is lame as all hell. Keep the coat.
4) Non-lethal being way more useful and actually easier than lethal. Sure, enemies could awake them, but how many times did that happen? And you could just bust a cap in their skull and keep the XP. More than that, non-lethal was actually more silent than lethal as well. They need to be on the same page, one should not be easier than the other.
5) Linear augmentations - you didn't have to choose one or the other, you could just have your cake and eat it. Even Invisible War, as dumbed down as it was, forced you to choose between one of the good things.

nexusdx
10th Apr 2015, 18:07
1. Third person take-downs
2. Black and gold cyber-renaissance palette
3. Poor interaction with the environment
4. Too little references to the first game

DX1musicROCKS
10th Apr 2015, 21:42
1. The game was not challenging enough: Give us tougher choices to make. For example, it was way too easy to get more augmentations. It needs to be tougher and you should never be able to max out everything in one playthrough. You should have to really think into what and where to invest. This doesn't mean having enemies with more health. It's about giving more weight to your choices, those that effect the story and those that effect the gameplay. Any reward you get should feel rewarding, by making it much rarer and getting less of it.

2. The game "promised" a larger scope: I felt that the second act of the game was too short. I really want to travel to more places around the world. I think the original Deus Ex did this really well.

3. Not enough exploration and "world-building" interactions: I wanted to find more secrets in the game, not just by reading through e-mails, but by actually talking to odd people, finding secret rooms with interesting events - things that make the game's world feel larger than just the quest system.

4. As everyone here is saying: Non-lethal being more rewarding. Perhaps having a non-lethal takedown be the noisy one and the lethal being the silent one would have made a big change.

5. Technical: The character animation in DX:HR is all over the place. In conversations it's just bad, while in takedowns it's great.

FarawayMusic
11th Apr 2015, 00:13
I actually loved the 3rd person takedowns! They got you a bit more face time with Adam, which was pretty cool. But it was pretty funny that you can break a guys arm, smack him in the face, have him tumbling to the ground and everyone else around is completely oblivious like no sound happened at all.. More actions like the sleeper hold would have been better I think, at least for the stealth takedowns.

I also found it funny that punching a guy straight in the face costs one entire battery, while jumping from a 6 story building and landing safely on your feet emitting crap-tons of electricity doesn't even use any batteries! LOL A little more realism would have helped there.

That game was so damn good it's hard to nit-pick it..

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 00:45
I actually loved the 3rd person takedowns! They got you a bit more face time with Adam, which was pretty cool. .

Sigh. Use a browser search engine and type "Adam Jensen images" if face time is what you desire.


I also found it funny that punching a guy straight in the face costs one entire battery, while jumping from a 6 story building and landing safely on your feet emitting crap-tons of electricity doesn't even use any batteries! LOL A little more realism would have helped there.

Why desire realism here but not during takedown sequences? when it comes to DX, the only excuse I accept is gameplay reasons (most commonly balancing reasons) or technical limitations, but it seems you just want "cool face time".

dlux99
11th Apr 2015, 03:21
- Maps were quite small.
- Dumbed down RPG mechanics. It wasn't bad, just not as good as in previous installments.
- Lackluster red-green-blue ending.
- Getting exploration XP for e.g. simply crawling through an air duct feels awkward.
- You get XP for hacking terminals but not for using keycodes that you found.


1. Third person take-downs
They were awesome. I loved watching Jensen give some suckers the smack down.


2. Black and gold cyber-renaissance palette
Loved it. Loved it. Loved it. The art direction in DX:HR is excellent!


4. Too little references to the first game
Human Revolution is a prequel... xD

Dvaythavvar
11th Apr 2015, 07:10
I as well actually loved 3rd person take downs. As well I loved the cyber-renaissance feel. It was the 1st thing that caught my eye on HR trailer and I absolutely loved it. As well i actually love dhim not having the coat in missions as his shoulders and body gesture was badly designed for the coated version in game - making shoulders too wide and it annoyed me. Anyway much mentioned 3rd person portions gave a lot to my immersion and added the RPG element. But to the problems I felt being there.

1. 10 mm being only useful weapon. In later play troughs I've forced myself to use something else. Like crossbow, combat riffle, sniper riffle, but all-in-all, 1 weapon being too powerful and being also so tiny. Perfect weapon, when upgraded. Combine this with stealth take downs - game difficulty was not there.

2. really playing non-lethal being that more rewarding ? So to be play a bit more out in open I have to finish DC to end, and take new game with full augs, so i could not care of exp and play truly freely. I played original vanilla with lethal way because I didn't grasp that tap vs hold immediately. And after 2nd play, when I was skilled already, the amount of augs I had at end of game vs 1st game was amusing. Killing should have penalties, true, but the gap was too big, i think.

3. Enemies gave up too quickly looking for me as well their patrol/seeking paths were too short. I did not feel much in danger even in DX difficulty as after all stealth was THIS powerful. I could say even too powerful. And mine template vs. gas/emp grenades combo doesn't even make enemies hostile. *eyebeams*

Other than this i think HR was one of the most perfect games made at time. I do not have the DX1 nostalgia, so I do not want nor need anyone to remake the game in modern graphics. I want new and better modern games instead.

nexusdx
11th Apr 2015, 07:19
They were awesome. I loved watching Jensen give some suckers the smack down.
It's the game not the movie.



Loved it. Loved it. Loved it. The art direction in DX:HR is excellent!
No. No. No.



Human Revolution is a prequel... xD
So what?

dlux99
11th Apr 2015, 07:33
It's the game not the movie.
So I guess that means you want 1st person cutscenes too because Deus Ex is a game and not a movie? Amirite?


No. No. No.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Best art direction ever and I am happy that it is back for Mankind Divided! Love that trailer. More black and gold goodness. :)


So what?
How can something from the future in Deus Ex (year 2052) that hasn't even happened yet in be referenced in DX:HR (year 2027)? xD

Dude. Seriously.

Dvaythavvar
11th Apr 2015, 07:42
Yes. Yes. Yes. Best art direction ever and I am happy that it is back for Mankind Divided! Love that trailer. More black and gold goodness. :)


How can something from the future in Deus Ex (year 2052) that hasn't even happened yet in be referenced in DX:HR (year 2027)? xD

It is pointless to argue, when people have made their mind about something. #cantkillprogress is what I would say during such moments and move along.

dlux99
11th Apr 2015, 07:52
#cantkillprogress

:)

68_pie
11th Apr 2015, 09:37
If i were you, i would not argue with him. Be it games, films or books, anything - for certain fans sequels or prequels are no go and if they accept one, then only as fancier remake in better wrap rather than another story. Evolution of a story or universe is a taboo. #cantkillprogress is what I would say and move along :)

Classic "you only want the old game with better graphics" copypasta. That is a facile argument.

nexusdx
11th Apr 2015, 09:56
So I guess that means you want 1st person cutscenes too because Deus Ex is a game and not a movie? Amirite?
I don't want any cutscenes. It's a game not movie. You should play not watching cool cutscenes.


How can something from the future in Deus Ex (year 2052) that hasn't even happened yet in be referenced in DX:HR (year 2027)? xD

Dude. Seriously.
Paul Denton and his parents, Morgan Everett, Lucius DeBeers, Beth DuClare, Philip Riley Mead, Joseph Manderley, Juan Lebedev, Gunther Hermann, Tracer Tong and many more. You have tons of characters u can put on DXHR. And where they are?

MortalSaw
11th Apr 2015, 10:27
i just hope the developers don't read anything in here .
on one side we have nostalgia-boner people which they hate everything that made DX:HR Stand-out because it isnt like a 2000 game and on the other side we have people that didn't play the old games and only played DX:HR and they want it to look like other games they've played .

can't we just Enjoy this game for what it actually is ?:friends:

Dvaythavvar
11th Apr 2015, 11:27
i just hope the developers don't read anything in here .
on one side we have nostalgia-boner people which they hate everything that made DX:HR Stand-out because it isnt like a 2000 game and on the other side we have people that didn't play the old games and only played DX:HR and they want it to look like other games they've played .

can't we just Enjoy this game for what it actually is ?:friends:

And then there are "morons" like me who have played all games, and are likely hated by both camps - the hardcore original fans and HR fans. I like to see good in all 3 (and there was good in all 3 for me), and I just want that with each coming game developers bring the story and game-play to whole new levels without staying in loop of repeating themselves just for the sake of fancier graphics an cash in. I want entertainment in its purest form.

68_pie
11th Apr 2015, 12:22
This can be said about your own reply as well. You disagree, so rely on some random "copy-pasta" expression. No, it's not facile argument if people go around places and keep saying "we want things exactly like place X, none different at all".

No one on these forums has ever said "we want things exactly like place X, none different at all" which is why it's a stupid argument. In fact, even those of us who routinely criticise DXHR have leveled criticism at the original game and pointed out areas in which that formula could be expanded upon or improved.

Read this and then get back to me: http://forums.eu.square-enix.com/showthread.php?t=154588


Edit : Very few actually explain why and what they liked on original. Most (see mainly FB DX pages) actually do say they want DX remake and say they dislike later games just because they are not about Danton.

Again, something that has never been said here. I wouldn't really use Facebook as a bastion of informed opinion.

As for me, I don't really see where DXHR improved upon DX. I expect DXMD to be very similar to HR. I hope they improve upon it and recapture some of what made DX great but my expectations are incredibly low.

Dvaythavvar
11th Apr 2015, 12:52
As for me, I don't really see where DXHR improved upon DX. I expect DXMD to be very similar to HR. I hope they improve upon it and recapture some of what made DX great but my expectations are incredibly low.

And I respect that opinion. For me Each game has added something to the story, but of course it is a bit harder to connect dots, when it's a prequel that does not yet connect links. I like to see it as one full story about dilemmas and control, not just singular fragments. However what everyone finds 'great' is different from person to person.

FrankCSIS
11th Apr 2015, 15:32
Oh **** me. Please tell me we're not going to suffer through yet another wave of people saying all we want is DX with better graphics. 3000 posts and seven years of punctual discussions and design debate, reduced to "whaa whaa you're nostalgic". How ******* condescending can you get?

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 15:54
These people are even making Frank lose his rag, no easy feat.
You are aware you vets are looking in the wrong place for "advancement" of the ImSim-iteration of DX though right? All official DX's from now on are in EM/SE's vision, and their minds cannot be completely swayed it seems. Get back to me when you are ready for the majority of what you have beenfighting for the past 4+ years. Many years of feedback would also have been duly noted, feedback is very valuable to me.

EternalAmbiguity
11th Apr 2015, 15:56
Oh **** me. Please tell me we're not going to suffer through yet another wave of people saying all we want is DX with better graphics. 3000 posts and seven years of punctual discussions and design debate, reduced to "whaa whaa you're nostalgic". How ******* condescending can you get?

This entire topic is doomed from the start because there is no universal "things people did not like about HR." Literally every point, from the third person takedowns to the complaints about the superiority of non-lethal, can be debated.

This topic serves very little value to Eidos. They're really better off ignoring it. At the very worst, we need some explanations as to why people didn't like whatever, before it is even considered.

Specom
11th Apr 2015, 16:10
These people are even making Frank lose his rag, no easy feat.
You are aware you vets are looking in the wrong place for "advancement" of the ImSim-iteration of DX though right? All official DX's from now on are in EM/SE's vision, and their minds cannot be completely swayed it seems. Get back to me when you are ready for the majority of what you have beenfighting for the past 4+ years. Many years of feedback would also have been duly noted, feedback is very valuable to me.

Maybe EM should play your gameplay mod (GMDX) and take notes so they can understand the concept and design of immersive sim. :D

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 16:12
Literally every point can be debated.

False. Games are made up of variables, data, values. Values can be greater than, or less than another value, objectively. Non-lethal/stealth was beyond superior (in terms of xp reward and piss-easiness of the playstyle) than lethal.

EternalAmbiguity
11th Apr 2015, 16:17
False. Games are made up of variables, data, values. Values can be greater than, or less than another value, objectively. Non-lethal/stealth was beyond superior (in terms of xp reward and piss-easiness of the playstyle) than lethal.

You're incorrect.

Whether non-lethal was superior to lethal is not the "point" being raised (although, again, you're still incorrect, because it IS debatable, considering that this is a GAME and not an accounting spreadsheet where higher numbers=better--the fact that something has less power does not mean it doesn't have other advantages. There are other reasons why lethal is better than non-lethal).

The point being raised is whether non-lethal being superior to lethal is a bad thing or not. Which is quite debatable.

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 16:42
Believe what you will. I don't think stealth/non-lethal was superior (enjoyable) as a playstyle because of how piss-easy and awesome button-laden it was, but my point on objectivity ("superior (in terms of xp rewarded and...)") is not debatable. It factually is easier to your gamer of average competence at both stealth and combat, it does factually reward more xp and therefore more power, it does grant you regenerating invisibility should you invest in it. The latter point being notable to stealth & not combat as firing a gun negates the invisibility effect.

And for the record, spreadsheets are commonly used in the design process of game systems.

EternalAmbiguity
11th Apr 2015, 18:06
Believe what you will. I don't think stealth/non-lethal was superior (enjoyable) as a playstyle because of how piss-easy and awesome button-laden it was, but my point on objectivity ("superior (in terms of xp rewarded and...)") is not debatable. It factually is easier to your gamer of average competence at both stealth and combat, it does factually reward more xp and therefore more power, it does grant you regenerating invisibility should you invest in it. The latter point being notable to stealth & not combat as firing a gun negates the invisibility effect.

And for the record, spreadsheets are commonly used in the design process of game systems.

You're conflating "non-lethal" with "stealth." They're two different things (and HR goes out of its way to show them as two different things, giving you combat-based non-lethal weapons like the PAPS or Tranq Rifle).


The "problem" is that your average gamer does not actually have "average competence at both stealth and combat." Stealth is a niche segment of gaming, while combat is anything but. Your average gamer has tons of combat experience, but much less stealth experience. Hence, the stealth is more difficult for them, and the combat more straightforward.


I understand the value of spreadsheets and formulaic approach. But they do not make a game "good" or "bad."

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 18:19
You're conflating "non-lethal" with "stealth." They're two different things

I am aware they are two different (but very closely related) things. Perhaps my use of a forward slash was not ideal, yet I always focus more on non-lethal stealth in my criticism as it is the optimal, most silent, most xp-rewarding and most easiest form of stealth. Though lethal stealth is still easy, non-lethal takes the cake and is encouraged in just about every way through terribly-balanced gameplay systems.


The "problem" is that your average gamer does not actually have "average competence at both stealth and combat."

No, the problem is DX:HR's stealth is garbage.

dlux99
11th Apr 2015, 18:59
No, the problem is DX:HR's stealth is garbage.
:rolleyes:

EternalAmbiguity
11th Apr 2015, 19:16
I am aware they are two different (but very closely related) things. Perhaps my use of a forward slash was not ideal, yet I always focus more on non-lethal stealth in my criticism as it is the optimal, most silent, most xp-rewarding and most easiest form of stealth. Though lethal stealth is still easy, non-lethal takes the cake and is encouraged in just about every way through terribly-balanced gameplay systems.

No, the problem is DX:HR's stealth is garbage.

But non-lethal stealth being optimal is a strength of the game, not the drawback you think it is. In a COD world, games that encourage more thoughtful and nuanced play are simply better.

^^^ That's why it's debatable.

How is the stealth garbage?

Dvaythavvar
11th Apr 2015, 19:31
But non-lethal stealth being optimal is a strength of the game, not the drawback you think it is. In a COD world, games that encourage more thoughtful and nuanced play are simply better.

^^^ That's why it's debatable.

How is the stealth garbage?

Stealth itself is not garbage concept, but the way it is implemented in HR - makes stealth game-play borderline overpowered even for casual gamer in DX difficulty. You can skip all set of enemies with least amount of effort, or kill whole room if you bored and they do not even understand where you are. And game rewards you too well for it. True challenge of HR is, when you throw grenade to announce you are there and do full blown stand off - never-mind just throw gas grenade [or better yet - leave gas mine, they do not even turn hostile]. Also cover to cover-auto-roll-between-objects make you next to invisible to anything.

I do not mean it was 'as terrible'. I just feel they could have made whole lurking around a bit more dangerous. I liked the spiders on vents on an old game for example. Small things like that which could give you away.

Irate_Iguana
11th Apr 2015, 19:51
One thing I didn't like was the lack of character development for a lot of the characters. The end-bosses in particular never really got any meaningful development or even a proper introduction really. Maybe that stuff was present in the support material, but you can't put most of your plot in the support material. The game itself should tell you all you need to know. I don't want to have to buy comics and books and figurines and water paintings in order to get the full story of the game I'm playing.

Combat was terrible. Movement was awkward and not fluent in the least. For popamole combat the shooting from cover with iron sights also felt really clunky. Popping out, getting a sight picture, squeezing off a few rounds and getting back in cover was not a smooth operation. Enemy squad tactics were pretty laughable. I'd even dare say absent.

Stealth wasn't as bad as the combat, but by no means was it fantastic. There was no light/dark mechanic. Ideally the stealth would be composed of Line of Sight, Sound and Light/Dark. While LoS made it in the sound was half-assed and light/dark mechanic was completely absent. The pretty poor AI made stealth too easy. I'd like to see better coordinated searches and a reaction when a guard suddenly goes missing. Have he AI react better to sound clues as well. Now it barely mattered if you were quiet or threw a grenade down the opposite corridor. Try to get them to deal with vents in a reasonable way. They should be handy means of staying out of sight. Not impenetrable bunkers that the guards can't deal with. Also give the player better tools. You were pretty dependent on the 3rd person cover mechanic and all the acrobatic rolling. The rolling also apparently turned you invisible. Movement in 1st person wasn't that great.

The XP mechanic was terrible. Giving the most points for tranqing everybody and hacking everything even when you have the code was not the way to go forward. It encouraged one single playstyle and mode all other modes of play just a means of handicapping yourself. Keep the XP for completing objectives and some exploration.

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 19:53
But non-lethal stealth being optimal is a strength of the game, not the drawback you think it is.

Yes it very much is a drawback.


In a COD world, games that encourage more thoughtful and nuanced play are simply better.

Somewhat agreeable (arcade-y games can be great fun if well-designed) yet irrelevant to the argument you are making.


How is the stealth garbage?

It's a landfill full of it.

Johnny_Thunder
11th Apr 2015, 20:04
The thing I hated most about DX:HR that really ruined the experience more then anything else was the ending. Everything went off the rails at the end and it was obvious the ending was truncated because of budgets and deadlines.

EternalAmbiguity
11th Apr 2015, 21:03
Stealth itself is not garbage concept, but the way it is implemented in HR - makes stealth game-play borderline overpowered even for casual gamer in DX difficulty. You can skip all set of enemies with least amount of effort, or kill whole room if you bored and they do not even understand where you are. And game rewards you too well for it. True challenge of HR is, when you throw grenade to announce you are there and do full blown stand off - never-mind just throw gas grenade [or better yet - leave gas mine, they do not even turn hostile]. Also cover to cover-auto-roll-between-objects make you next to invisible to anything.

I do not mean it was 'as terrible'. I just feel they could have made whole lurking around a bit more dangerous. I liked the spiders on vents on an old game for example. Small things like that which could give you away.

It's a single-player game. There's nothing wrong with an "over-powered" playstyle. This isn't DMC or Ninja Gaiden--the purpose of the game isn't simply being difficult. And I thought stealth was plenty difficult a few times (the time when you go to Zhao's room and she tricks you then sends a squad after being one of them).

That said, I do understand stealth being less realistic than it should have been (the bad line-of-sights for one).


Yes it very much is a drawback.

Somewhat agreeable (arcade-y games can be great fun if well-designed) yet irrelevant to the argument you are making.

It's a landfill full of it.

And I say it's not a drawback.

We can go back and forth on a "nuh uh!" and "yes huh!" forever, or you could explain what is bad about optimal play-styles.

My statement isn't irrelevant at all: I'm saying that a gameplay type that is "more thoughtful and nuanced" (sneaking around avoiding lines-of-sight as opposed to going loud with every enemy you see) is superior simply by its very nature, and reflecting that in the XP system is only good design. There is no necessity, especially in a single-player game, to give all playstyles the same reward.

That isn't quite my viewpoint, but it's easily debatable.

How is the stealth garbage? The fact that you're not going into specifics makes me wonder if you actually have a point here.

Dvaythavvar
11th Apr 2015, 21:20
It's a single-player game. There's nothing wrong with an "over-powered" playstyle. This isn't DMC or Ninja Gaiden--the purpose of the game isn't simply being difficult. And I thought stealth was plenty difficult a few times (the time when you go to Zhao's room and she tricks you then sends a squad after being one of them).

That said, I do understand stealth being less realistic than it should have been (the bad line-of-sights for one).

I think the problem here is two sided. 1st there are now many games that utilize sound and light much better and, when a game focuses on stealth so much as HR - stealth must be designed to be more advanced than in games, where it is secondary feature.

And other is that overpower feeling in single players games is likely a must have feature and important feature, but in my eyes it should be left for 'normal' difficulties. And I love being overpowered too in some games or least by the last 1/4 of the game. But here we have hardest difficulty which really does not differ from previous difficulty. I did not even know bosses had more HP because, when you play in DC version of HR you have so much EXP coming from your nose that you can have hacking pimped up early on and still get your typhoon sorted. And this way there's no difference between normal and hard in HR.

Even single player games should have the option to challenge yourself. Perhaps have more ground lasers [there are those pillars in missing link] ? Spiderbots ? Flying drones? Enemies or stealth generators that drain your energy while cloaked? Take town having chance to fail or not kill ? There are many difficulty boosters they could add. For example playing Hitman on hardest difficulty made me crawl back to my hole. HR DX difficulty ? *shrugs*

To sum up : Overpowered feel is good and even needed in single player games, but there should always be the option for challenge mode for people who seek doing things on equal level or even perhaps under powered level. Like I said somewhere already. For all the love I have for HR, the difference between middle and highest difficulty was eating few more candy-bars. And in my case mainly for double typhoon. Admitted 1st boss took 3 typhoons so i had to run a bit. But just a bit for regen. And so I feel that stealth in HR was either too good, or enemy AI was too bad.

EternalAmbiguity
11th Apr 2015, 22:00
I think the problem here is two sided. 1st there are now many games that utilize sound and light much better and, when a game focuses on stealth so much as HR - stealth must be designed to be more advanced than in games, where it is secondary feature.

And other is that overpower feeling in single players games is likely a must have feature and important feature, but in my eyes it should be left for 'normal' difficulties. And I love being overpowered too in some games or least by the last 1/4 of the game. But here we have hardest difficulty which really does not differ from previous difficulty. I did not even know bosses had more HP because, when you play in DC version of HR you have so much EXP coming from your nose that you can have hacking pimped up early on and still get your typhoon sorted. And this way there's no difference between normal and hard in HR.

Even single player games should have the option to challenge yourself. Perhaps have more ground lasers [there are those pillars in missing link] ? Spiderbots ? Flying drones? Enemies or stealth generators that drain your energy while cloaked? Take town having chance to fail or not kill ? There are many difficulty boosters they could add. For example playing Hitman on hardest difficulty made me crawl back to my hole. HR DX difficulty ? *shrugs*

To sum up : Overpowered feel is good and even needed in single player games, but there should always be the option for challenge mode for people who seek doing things on equal level or even perhaps under powered level. Like I said somewhere already. For all the love I have for HR, the difference between middle and highest difficulty was eating few more candy-bars. And in my case mainly for double typhoon. Admitted 1st boss took 3 typhoons so i had to run a bit. But just a bit for regen. And so I feel that stealth in HR was either too good, or enemy AI was too bad.

I agree that the hardest difficulty should definitely be hard. I don't know about the Typhoon though--that thing should be super powerful. Perhaps it would have been better to have like no ammo for it, maybe a single ammo at each hub and no drops.

CyberP
11th Apr 2015, 22:45
There's nothing wrong with an "over-powered" playstyle.

"Key components of games are [B]goals, rules, challenge, and interaction. Games generally involve mental or physical stimulation, and often both. Many games help develop practical skills, serve as a form of exercise, or otherwise perform an educational, simulational, or psychological role."

I expect all games to provide at least a moderate challenge otherwise a key component is lost, as can the mental stimulation aspect be, and as a result it can be difficult to even consider such a product a game. Would you get a kick out of a game of football, your team consisting of professional players bringing their A game, the opposing team a bunch of 5 year olds?


t's a single-player game.

It being singleplayer or not is irrelevant. Rules and challenge remain key components.


The fact that you're not going into specifics makes me wonder if you actually have a point here.

I've gone over it enough times on this board. Enjoy your mindless mechanics & systems that you fail to recognize as such.

Spyhopping
11th Apr 2015, 22:55
I'd like more tactility with the world this time. I was saddened that you couldn't walk around holding a plant pot in HR.

Wouldn't mind staying first person if I like: cover, and being able to look around at things whilst climbing ladders. They are great vantage points.

More books/papers to read this time, more consumables, less single-minded NPC chatter on the streets about augmentations.

Perhaps wider, open environments. If my memory serves me right, most of the areas within HR are quite cramped. Sometimes it's fantastic, like in Hengsha where being packed in is half the point, but there's something great about a wide open area to run around in.

EternalAmbiguity
12th Apr 2015, 02:29
"Key components of games are [B]goals, rules, challenge, and interaction. Games generally involve mental or physical stimulation, and often both. Many games help develop practical skills, serve as a form of exercise, or otherwise perform an educational, simulational, or psychological role."

I expect all games to provide at least a moderate challenge otherwise a key component is lost, as can the mental stimulation aspect be, and as a result it can be difficult to even consider such a product a game. Would you get a kick out of a game of football, your team consisting of professional players bringing their A game, the opposing team a bunch of 5 year olds?

It being singleplayer or not is irrelevant. Rules and challenge remain key components.

I've gone over it enough times on this board. Enjoy your mindless mechanics & systems that you fail to recognize as such.

I don't deny the validity of challenge. Heck, I just finished a "Son of Sparda" playthrough of DMC4 a few weeks ago. I deny the necessity of challenge. There are many games out there that break various elements of your so-called "key components."

And further, the idea of "moderate challenge" is hilariously subjective, it is anything but objective. When I first played Dragon Age Origins on my computer on Normal, I had to use the console command "killallhostiles" many, many times, because the challenge was too high for me. Now, with a mod where I literally don't even have to control the combat, I play on Hard and it's very easy.

Similarly, I grew up on RTSes, and one of those was Age of Empires II. I found the game challenging enough on Normal with multiple enemies fighting each other, but I know a man (who, granted, had all day to play pretty much every day) would take on the maximum amount of enemies at the maximum difficulty level and beat them all.

So to recap, I deny that challenge is a necessity, and that the concept of "normal" or "moderate challenge" is in any way objective. I certainly understand the value of a challenge in challenge-specific environments, such as a higher difficulty level, but again dispute its necessity on any "normal" level.

To return to the idea of necessity, your "key components" are not necessary outside of the final one, interaction (I would say rules are intrinsic but not necessary).

Your example isn't relevant. You're comparing an intrinsically competitive sport to something that is not intrinsically competitive, games, at all. When I play The Sims I don't have to do "better" than anyone. When I play Civilization I don't have to do "better" than anyone (until that inexplicable moment that the AI randomly decides to declare war). When I play Dear Esther I don't have to do "better" than anyone. When I play Life is Strange I don't have to do "better" than anyone. When I play Euro Truck Simulator, Mount & Blade, X3: Reunion, Microsoft Flight Simulator...I don't have to do "better" than anyone else. I could go on but I'm sure you get my point.

My point is that the very goal of football is to "beat" someone. That is the entire purpose. But there is no universal "goal" of games outside of maybe interaction. So your example is flawed.

It being a single-player game is entirely relevant. Being single-player, it is irrelevant for one playstyle to be superior to another--because videogames don't (and Deus Ex in particular doesn't) have a universal "it must be challenging" criteria.

"I've said it so many times I won't bother saying it again" is a statement that means that one has nothing to say. Are you really expecting people who want to hear your reasoning to sift through random old threads to find them? No one will do that.

Dvaythavvar
12th Apr 2015, 07:06
I agree that the hardest difficulty should definitely be hard. I don't know about the Typhoon though--that thing should be super powerful. Perhaps it would have been better to have like no ammo for it, maybe a single ammo at each hub and no drops.

Maybe Typhoon should have been unlocked with a quest later in the game rather than praxis . Ability to take down anything and everything so soon in a game with just pressing F2 perhaps is maybe a small deal, but strong enough emotion to feel that whole balance is tipped off. I, know, typhoon is supposed to be "wtf I just did !" weapon, but maybe they should have restricted its use more. Powerful ability should have equally strong penalty. Sure there was billions of dollars put into jensen and he should be one bad mofo, but he is not one of a kind - his enemies should be bad mofos too.

Anyway for me here is/should be difference on story mode-normal-hard difficulties in game. Normal should be challenging, but not complex and allow player gain power in swifter way and AI should eventually perhaps fall slightly behind. however Hardest difficulty of a game should be "oh drat" and by the way try playing Skyrim (known easy game)legendary difficulty. Bethesda f***ed that up so badly that you can be fully geared know most dragonshouts and still the dragon CAN 1 shot you at your level 60+ (level most payers don't even get to or do not even know there are as many levels in Skyrim) and I didnt even mod my skyrims combat /because I dont believe in player combat systems being balanced/. Oh and still at L65 or so I didn't want to argue with guards as they did follow me across the town and hurt if I mistakenly hit one.

EvilWolf
12th Apr 2015, 12:39
"I've said it so many times I won't bother saying it again" is a statement that means that one has nothing to say. Are you really expecting people who want to hear your reasoning to sift through random old threads to find them? No one will do that.

You're free to click his name, look at his activity, and search stealth... But I'll do it for you...


Yeah HR was definitely a Stealth/Action RPG-lite. And indeed DX1 was an Stealth/Action RPG Immersive Sim.


Eidos noted fans who played stealthily enjoyed the game more
Said fans are completely blind. A focus on combat when it was the stealth that was in desperate need of redesign was misguided. ...

And the gem of a post I'm sure he was referring to in particular...


C'mon people, be realistic here. Regenerating invisibility. Regenerating. That is worse than regenerating health.
Multiple stealth tools that give you such an advantage over the environment and your enemies that it really is not engaging at all, and throwing third person cover on top just to be sure.
The primary means of taking out your enemies non-lethally is a damn time-stopping win button.
I feel it features the worst design of stealth gameplay I've ever seen in a game. Metal Gear Solid had a radar and third person cover, but it also had a limited overview perspective as the primary perspective. Thief had sound and light levels as the primary tools of outsmarting your enemies. Tenchu had "Ninja senses" and little else. Splinter Cell too had very few such tools. Syphon filter is another with just third person and a radar. Deus Ex 1 had the same as Thief, and limited cloaking that only protected you against one of the two primary enemy types. Manhunt had light levels and sound. Human Revolution however had EVERYTHING, with regenerating invisibility thrown on top for good measure. Well, everything except the logical light levels and decent sound systems that are typical to first person stealth.

The gunplay in HR too was far from ideal, but at least the augmented gun battles could be intense at times.

Terenty
12th Apr 2015, 12:41
For me the worst things were conversations between random npcs(transhumanism is the ONLY thing they discuss), inability to talk to npcs except for questgivers, there was nothing interesting happening in city hubs, no motivation to explore them outside of reading some emails. And another thing is an awful implementation of player's movement in the game world i.e. no sense of weight, jumping, walking and running all felt clunky and unnatural.

Dvaythavvar
12th Apr 2015, 13:33
For me the worst things were conversations between random npcs(transhumanism is the ONLY thing they discuss), inability to talk to npcs except for questgivers, there was nothing interesting happening in city hubs, no motivation to explore them outside of reading some emails. And another thing is an awful implementation of player's movement in the game world i.e. no sense of weight, jumping, walking and running all felt clunky and unnatural.

On this light I liked breaking windows with sword on Invisible War for example. I missed breaking into random places or shop windows :( So i at times just shot TVs with my weapons, but it didnt feel same.

IvanaKC
12th Apr 2015, 14:52
Perhaps wider, open environments. If my memory serves me right, most of the areas within HR are quite cramped. Sometimes it's fantastic, like in Hengsha where being packed in is half the point, but there's something great about a wide open area to run around in.

Add more side missions, which might be important for the rest of the game, to these wide areas and we have a game.

It would also be nice to be able to just stand and admire design of the environment from time to time. Though I think HR's wasn't bad, I didn't often feel like looking around to notice how creative the design of environment was. Belltower dock did make me stop for a minute, but I felt depressed in Detroit.



For me the worst things were conversations between random npcs(transhumanism is the ONLY thing they discuss), inability to talk to npcs except for questgivers, there was nothing interesting happening in city hubs, no motivation to explore them outside of reading some emails.

It wasn't enjoyable to read about augmentation only, I had to make myself do that and eventually I gave up bored to death. Exploring, on the other hand, wasn't as bad for me. Finding some new paths, occasional side missions and picking up stuff like vodka was fun. :D

bluffit
12th Apr 2015, 20:39
1.I want bigger environments to explore.It simply felt closed in with DXHR.

zwanzig_zwoelf
12th Apr 2015, 20:55
I hated the music in some parts, it felt like McCann threw in a few loops together to get his paycheck.
I'd love to hear something closer to Skrillex, because dubstep is my favorite genre in music, and add a few rap lyrics like in Persona games to make it even sweeter. Persona sells well, so adding some elements from there will definitely boost sales. :)

I also disliked long conversations. No point in debating so much when you can simply say "drop the gun, asswipe", blood is pumping, music wubwubwub and you feel rewarded for taking down an enemy in a cool, gangsta way. Listen to some bands/artists from my homeland, like Kartellen or Ken Ring to get the feeling that really matches Deus Ex.

JCpies
12th Apr 2015, 22:21
1.I want bigger environments to explore.It simply felt closed in with DXHR.

I thought it hit a good balance, about as open as Deus Ex, and not as claustrophobic as Invisible War.

Terenty
13th Apr 2015, 18:38
And for some reason EM think that augmentation and transhumanism is the main theme of Deus ex:

"For 15 years, Deus Ex has been a point of conversation across the games industry and beyond, whether the topic is the franchise’s unique gameplay or topical narrative focused on advanced biotechnology and human augmentation..." - David Anfossi

AdrianShephard
13th Apr 2015, 20:28
And for some reason EM think that augmentation and transhumanism is the main theme of Deus ex:

"For 15 years, Deus Ex has been a point of conversation across the games industry and beyond, whether the topic is the franchise’s unique gameplay or topical narrative focused on advanced biotechnology and human augmentation..." - David Anfossi

Anfossi either has no clue what DX1 is about, or he wants to defend using the same theme for two games (and likely more). DX1 is a socio/political critique established through the various government conspiracies presented in the game; trans-humanism (as a societal issue) was but one topic touched upon to add depth to a few characters and to capture the imbalance of power between augmented UNATCO agents and the common folk (NSF, etc). Looking back at the instances where nano augmentation has been brought up, it becomes apparent that its primary purpose in the story is to show how far corporations and the government are willing to go to achieve their goals. This is reverberated when the player speaks with Leo Gold, Lebedev, Everett, Tong, and many others. There is no "debate" about trans-humanism, it's just another tool that adds atmosphere.

What's really amazing is that if you completely take everything about human augmentation out of DX1, the story still manages to hold up reasonably well. The ending and some story elements may need some adjustments here and there, but the overall effectiveness of the story almost remains untouched.

No matter how many times EM brings up trans-humanism, it won't make a game intelligent or smart. I've already said this numerous times, but basing a game on such a tug-of-war moral topic is no better than making a game about abortion or gay marriage.

FrankCSIS
13th Apr 2015, 23:16
Anfossi either has no clue what DX1 is about, or he wants to defend using the same theme for two games (and likely more). DX1 is a socio/political critique established through the various government conspiracies presented in the game; trans-humanism (as a societal issue) was but one topic touched upon to add depth to a few characters and to capture the imbalance of power between augmented UNATCO agents and the common folk (NSF, etc). Looking back at the instances where nano augmentation has been brought up, it becomes apparent that its primary purpose in the story is to show how far corporations and the government are willing to go to achieve their goals. This is reverberated when the player speaks with Leo Gold, Lebedev, Everett, Tong, and many others. There is no "debate" about trans-humanism, it's just another tool that adds atmosphere

There is a rather interesting parallel to make here, between DX/HR/HD and Robocop (1987) / Robocop (2014). Verhoeven's Robo tackles the whole of society through 5 or 6 different socio-economical fronts and barely spends a whole minute on the transhumanist aspect of the question, while Padilha's remake is extremely verbal about "what it meeeeeeeeeans to be human", and timidly addresses other issues, besides some minor ethical aspects of war.

Just on the war ethics part, Padilha spends entire scenes on it, while Verhoeven sums it up in one sentence in that fabulous executive bathroom scene. "You've insulted me and you've insulted this company with that bastard creation of yours. I had a guaranteed military sale with ED 209 - renovation program, spare parts for twenty-five years... Who cares if it worked or not?"

besyuziki
14th Apr 2015, 07:24
1. Rewarding different amounts of XP for different approaches. Instead, grant XP for mission progress (and MAYBE exploring areas) and leave it to us how we handle said mission. Hacking every station for XP even when we have the code, getting "bonus" XP for non lethal and/or headshots... It's counterproductive.

2. Melee system which consists of third person takedowns. I don't how many times it's been said but it's not enough. You were so hell bent on showcasing your awesome takedowns that you had to tie the takedown gimmick to the energy system to "balance" it, crippling the energy system AND the augmentations as a result. Just give us melee weapons we can swing with the attack button. Jayeff's tweet (https://i.imgur.com/zu446eW.png) is rather alarming, if it's not fake.

3. In general, too much fanservice, too many I win buttons, too much cool factor. Adam shouldn't be a superhero from the get go. Building him into a superhero will be more fun and satisfying. Let us earn our rewards.

Irate_Iguana
14th Apr 2015, 10:06
trans-humanism (as a societal issue) was but one topic touched upon to add depth to a few characters and to capture the imbalance of power between augmented UNATCO agents and the common folk (NSF, etc).

From what I can remember (and find on short notice) it's mostly Gunther Hermann and two NSF soldiers on Liberty Island who discuss transhumanism. Gunther is continually afraid that he's become nothing more than an obsolete tool. He loved the power the augs gave him, but now he sees the downside. He's no longer worth anything because there is a new model. The NSF soldiers even say so: "They'd've replaced his whole body if it would've improved performance. If that's how you judge a man - by performance - then eventually it's not about people but upgrades, versions, functionality...". That's the most that I can really find on the topic of transhumanism.

Even HR doesn't really go anywhere with the transhumanism. Sure, it mentions that it isn't right to play god a few times. It mentions that humans aren't meant for this, but it is pretty low on the philosophical and practical dangers of transhumanism. I thought the game would go somewhere with the shooting of the 15 year old aug that Jensen refused to shoot and Haas did, but it is relegated to a simple side-quest and pretty much glossed over. The augmentation rat-race mentioned in a Hengsha sidequest also deals half-assed with transhumanism and its more practical consequences. For a game whose major theme, at least according to the designers, is transhumanism it is not explored too much.

knox140
14th Apr 2015, 13:57
too much orange!!! at least throw a little blue in there...

also I think the speech system needs an overhaul. the whole alpha/beta/pheromones thing was always too easy, it should be more of a puzzle AND it should have more applications in game.

Auric180
15th Apr 2015, 00:14
Disappointments need improvements:

1. Takedowns

As Adam is an Aug I can understand the lack of melee weapons, for if there were, the next argument is why bother with hands that can punch through walls.

Also hard to image FPS view doing the actions Adam does now, most of time we won't even see the target behind us as when using rear blades. Not much a person can see with their own eyes looking forward.

Only alternative is just stab & slice, which will get old fast.
Hand takedowns are fine as shown in other FPS games.

TPS takedowns problems
If they're sticking to TPS takedowns, they need to learn a lot from Splinter Cell: Blacklist
Position
Alert status
Enemy class
Facial expression
Audio sync with motion
Noisy hand takedowns should be noticed

No FPS takedowns
Make it optional?
More work for them... but get to see different perspective.

Want to see what Adam sees when he stabs someone behind him.

2. Hacking / lock picking
Need more variety
Can't be the only way to hack or can't everyone have same security even overseas. (keypads, PCs & security consoles) 3 different items all same method...

Assassins Creed 4: have at least 3 alternative hacking and that's not even a Intel gathering game...

Splinter Cell: Show tinkering the laptops / PCs or activating armband device or WiFi connection

Animation
Show some FPS animation when entering hacking mode... Hands typing the keypad/board, open console, insert wires or WiFi device glowing on the hand like the trailer.

Lock picks
Simple doors, non electronic security needs some way to get in, they don't even have keys. Oo

3. Side missions
Freedom of choice?
Why show us the objective when we can't fulfil it. Doing the bad cop blackmail.

Connection to the story...
Some j can understand we won't see those people again but Megan's mom, would love him being able to tell her Megan is alive. I dun recall but do we see her again at the end?
In the apartment, even though we don't have anything new to say?

4. Shades ≠ HUD
Not a big peeve, but am disappointed its not optional.
Whenever get back to Cutscene, he can reshade for style. :)
5. Boss takedown
Not saying should be like Namir but if we manage to get close to them undetected, would be nice if we could hurt them but still living.

Each hit different animation till the finishing move.

6. Will think more later...

WildcatPhoenix
15th Apr 2015, 02:53
Alright, here it goes. One last gasp of protest...

(deep breath)

I'll break this into two main categories: Gameplay and Writing/Story.

Gameplay
1. Mid-mission cutscenes- Besides interrupting the action and momentarily reducing the player to a passive observer instead of an active participant, these scenes run counter to the idea of letting a player determine his/her own playstyle. It's extremely frustrating to cautiously sneak your way through a level, only to trigger a cutscene where Adam walks blindly in to a room and sets off an alarm or gets ambushed through his own stupidity. Video games are not movies. I do not want to sit idly by and watch things happen. I want to be the impetus for the action, and I want to see the world react realistically to my decisions/choices.

2. Persistent radar/objective markers- Both of these features in DXHR would've been perfectly fine, if included as optional and upgradable augmentations. Many of my problems with Human Revolution's gameplay would've been fixed by a single design maxim- when in doubt, make it an option. Radar would be fine, if you had to make a choice to install it and dedicate resources to improving its functionality. Same with the objective marker, or the "mark and tag" feature (which was all but useless in DXHR due to persistent radar). Most critically, these features when combined with 3rd person cover make stealth painfully simple. Don't hold my hand, don't cripple the challenge of playing as a stealthy character.

3. No melee weapons- I'm honestly okay with takedowns (why shouldn't a powerfully-augmented character be able to disable/kill an enemy with his bare hands?) I'd prefer them to be in 1st person, but whatever. I'm okay with them.

However...there is absolutely no excuse not to have regular melee weapons. Knives, batons, crowbars, blackjacks, riot prods/stun sticks, swords, etc. These are the most basic weapons in humanity's arsenal, and there is no reason why Adam should not be able to use them. It also ties into the ridiculous energy management system of DXHR. A player should never be unable to execute a non-projectile attack simply because he hasn't eaten enough candy bars. Give me a break.

4. Third-person cover- I'm sorry, I don't enjoy this hybrid 1st/3rd person nonsense. It leads to the oft-maligned "waist-high wall" syndrome, and it gives the player too big of an advantage when it comes to stealth. It also reduces tension when a player is able to see around corners or over obstacles.

5. No mirrors, water, or other realistic environments- If you expect your gameworld to feel realistic, then it needs to include reflective surfaces and water. Swimming also makes for an interesting facet of your level design and can lead to more believable environments (how can you have a mission set on an island nation like Hong Kong or Singapore if you can't go in the water? or a mission on a floating platform or submarine or ship?).

You can also apply this same complaint to a lack of animals or wildlife of any kind. Or children, for that matter. I'm sorry, I need the world to feel populated by actual people, and actual people have small children. You will simply have to tolerate the inevitable YouTube videos of players skewering kids with their arm blades or other weapons. It's a video game, and people will be idiots no matter what you do.

6. Monochromatic color scheme- I'm fine with the gold palette for some levels. But the ubiquitous, monochromatic gold tint does not need to be applied to every single environment in the game. It simply isn't realistic or visually pleasing. Use more diversity, and for god's sake don't bludgeon us with the "Golden Age" metaphor as much.

7. Cyber-renaissance- I applaud EM's design team for trying to give the game a distinctive art style, and honestly, this one I consider to be a "noble failure." I'm okay with creativity, but I just don't see how the character design of DXHR and DXMD merges at all with what we see in DX1. I know the world of 2027-2029 is supposed to be a more decadent age, but it still seems like an entirely different universe than the more familiar clothing and architectural styles of DX1. In particular, the sleek, easily-concealed augmentations we see in the prequels do not gel at all with the clunky, '80s-influenced cyborgs of 2051-52.

8. Path/Pillar level design- Too many times in DXHR, it was painfully obvious which route was intended to be the "frontal assault" path, the "stealth" path, etc. Deus Ex should be all about giving the player a chance to devise his/her own creative solutions to challenges. Don't box them into an obvious tunnel or corridor (this also ties into the obnoxious need to funnel players into a trigger point for cinematic cutscenes). Give me more wide open levels, more vertical or multi-tiered pathways to objectives. Give me more Hengsha and less Detroit.

9. Highlighting/interactivity- The visual splendor of DXHR seems impressive at first (every map is obviously waaaaay more populated, in terms of objects, than the relatively empty maps of DX1). However, barely any of these items are able to be interacted with by the player. Ultimately, the player just begins to ignore this detail as irrelevant clutter. It's extremely frustrating to throw a grenade into a room and see it explode, yet all the books on the bookshelf remain perfectly in place, or other small items remain bolted on to a desk.

With more interactive world items, it would no longer be necessary to implement a highlighting feature to point out what the player can and cannot pick up.

10. Hacking- I, for one, was a fan of the hacking mini-game. I'd like to see continually improved diversity and more creative options added, but overall it was fine for me.

However, there is no reason for every single door in the game to be electronically-locked. Give me more solutions. Let me pick a mechanical lock, or demolish a door with explosives, or THEN open it with an electronic panel or computer.

Writing/Story

1. Characterization- Do not depend on peripheral media in the real world (books, blogs, viral marketing campaigns, etc) to develop your characters. Even your enemies should be plausible, well-written, compelling characters. Want me to hate a character? Give me a reason to do so, and give me time to develop my loathing of this person. Don't just put a gun in their hand, write a few cheesy one-liners for them, and tell me to feel something when I kill them. I felt absolutely nothing toward the Tyrants (Barrett, Fedorova, etc), nothing compared to the emotions going through my head when I battled Gunther or Anna or Walton Simons.

The same goes for your allies. Characters like Megan Reed were woefully underwritten. Give me more than just backstory. Give them rich character moments, interesting e-mails and journals and such, unique character traits and flaws and tendencies. Make me care about them, don't just tell me that I should.

2. NPCs- For the love of all that is holy, have your NPCs talk about something other than augmentation! I hated how every single NPC, from major characters to the simplest bum on the street, talked about one thing- augs, augs, augs, augs. I know you want to focus on transhumanism, but there is a lot more to Deus Ex than the transhumanist debate.

Deus Ex should examine many things: abuse of power, the dangers of surveillance, the risks of rapid technological proliferation and advancement, income/resource inequality and disparity, paranoia and conspiracies, environmental destruction, consumerism and culture, etc. DXHR only had one idea on its mind, and my connection with the game world suffered because of it.

3. Dialogue- I felt that DXHR's NPCs didn't have anywhere nearly as much to say as the NPCs in DX1. Maybe it was simply because they were all so dull and monotonously-focused on transhumanist debates, but I can barely recall any real memorable conversations (other than the vaguely stereotypical trash-digging lady in Detroit). Give me memorable throwaway characters. Fill your world with colorful and distinctive individuals, not merely a bunch of moving bodies.

I'm sure there's more, but I think I've said enough as it is.

Irate_Iguana
15th Apr 2015, 12:45
1. Characterization- Do not depend on peripheral media in the real world (books, blogs, viral marketing campaigns, etc) to develop your characters. Even your enemies should be plausible, well-written, compelling characters. Want me to hate a character? Give me a reason to do so, and give me time to develop my loathing of this person. Don't just put a gun in their hand, write a few cheesy one-liners for them, and tell me to feel something when I kill them. I felt absolutely nothing toward the Tyrants (Barrett, Fedorova, etc), nothing compared to the emotions going through my head when I battled Gunther or Anna or Walton Simons.

The same goes for your allies. Characters like Megan Reed were woefully underwritten. Give me more than just backstory. Give them rich character moments, interesting e-mails and journals and such, unique character traits and flaws and tendencies. Make me care about them, don't just tell me that I should.

This. So much this. I mean, I agree with most of your other points as well, but this really bugged me. I'm forced to kill a few people I don't know with the only motivation being that they almost killed me back in the prologue. This is fine, but not if they are supposed to be the main antagonists and supposedly a major part of the organization behind it all. I shouldn't be forced to find a ******* tapestry out IRL to find out why the lady with the weird legs is in the secret basement of a news agent and wants to murder-kill the protagonist.

cleanedtheplaceout
15th Apr 2015, 18:09
1. Lack of diverse locations.

I understand it was a bit of a gamble, a re-boot at a time when Square were under pressure but still, there could have been more inspiring and unique feeling environments. The original DX had french catacombs, churches, a chateau, parks, underground stations, cemetery, military bases (both naval and army), swish apartments, canals and a lot more 'verticality' such as the statue of liberty, Hong Kong apartments, the crane you can climb etc.

That last area, in DXHR, when you're at the icy base, was a real breath of fresh air, made me feel like Jenson was really globetrotting. I want more things like that.

I'd hate to think it's going to be nothing but cramped, cyberpunk, dystopian locations the whole time. What's the point of globe trotting if you're just going from one ghetto to another?

2. Black and yellow throughout the game.

The yellow filter. It meant the locations had less individual identity (exacerbating the point above), not to mention a lack of realism. In short doses it looks great, like say Blade Runner....but throughout the entire 30+ hour game? It drove me nuts. Even Blade Runner mixed things up and it's just a 2 hour film.

If the filter is back, I'll be looking for mods and using SweetFx day one :)

3. The 10mm silenced, armour piercing pistol being OP.

I want more incentive to be versatile and use other weapons, whether stealth (not ghost) or all out attack. Gadgets, items and weapon choice, along with making the player need to plan ahead for different situations, can be engaging and challenging.

4. Greater variety of enemies.


Other things seem to have supposedly been addressed by the team. More skills, more choices in plot and dialogue etc...so that's all that comes to mind. It was a fantastic game to begin with really but there's always room for improvement ;)

cleanedtheplaceout
15th Apr 2015, 18:17
2. NPCs- For the love of all that is holy, have your NPCs talk about something other than augmentation! I hated how every single NPC, from major characters to the simplest bum on the street, talked about one thing- augs, augs, augs, augs. I know you want to focus on transhumanism, but there is a lot more to Deus Ex than the transhumanist debate.

Deus Ex should examine many things: abuse of power, the dangers of surveillance, the risks of rapid technological proliferation and advancement, income/resource inequality and disparity, paranoia and conspiracies, environmental destruction, consumerism and culture, etc. DXHR only had one idea on its mind, and my connection with the game world suffered because of it.

That's a good one.

DaedalusIcarusHelios
15th Apr 2015, 19:39
Great write up WildcatPhoenix.


Alright, here it goes. One last gasp of protest...

(deep breath)

I'll break this into two main categories: Gameplay and Writing/Story.

Gameplay
1. Mid-mission cutscenes- Besides interrupting the action and momentarily reducing the player to a passive observer instead of an active participant, these scenes run counter to the idea of letting a player determine his/her own playstyle. It's extremely frustrating to cautiously sneak your way through a level, only to trigger a cutscene where Adam walks blindly in to a room and sets off an alarm or gets ambushed through his own stupidity. Video games are not movies. I do not want to sit idly by and watch things happen. I want to be the impetus for the action, and I want to see the world react realistically to my decisions/choices.
I don't mind cut scenes, but I think they need to be in-engine. The low-res videos were jarring and didn't look good. The rendering in them made the characters and environments look different, and it just didn't look good, especially on a high-res screen.


4. Third-person cover- I'm sorry, I don't enjoy this hybrid 1st/3rd person nonsense. It leads to the oft-maligned "waist-high wall" syndrome, and it gives the player too big of an advantage when it comes to stealth. It also reduces tension when a player is able to see around corners or over obstacles.

I liked this mechanic because it was fun, but they should at least have more varied-height objects. I do hope they add in leaning and such for those that would prefer it that way.



5. No mirrors, water, or other realistic environments- If you expect your gameworld to feel realistic, then it needs to include reflective surfaces and water. Swimming also makes for an interesting facet of your level design and can lead to more believable environments (how can you have a mission set on an island nation like Hong Kong or Singapore if you can't go in the water? or a mission on a floating platform or submarine or ship?).

You can also apply this same complaint to a lack of animals or wildlife of any kind. Or children, for that matter. I'm sorry, I need the world to feel populated by actual people, and actual people have small children. You will simply have to tolerate the inevitable YouTube videos of players skewering kids with their arm blades or other weapons. It's a video game, and people will be idiots no matter what you do.

I REALLY hope the Dawn engine supports water and reflections. I'd love to see swimming come back. Augs are water-proof, right? :) I can understand logically that the mechanical augs might be too heavy for swimming, but many augs aren't exactly logical/realistic, so I'm sure there could be some technobabble excuse to make it work.


6. Monochromatic color scheme- I'm fine with the gold palette for some levels. But the ubiquitous, monochromatic gold tint does not need to be applied to every single environment in the game. It simply isn't realistic or visually pleasing. Use more diversity, and for god's sake don't bludgeon us with the "Golden Age" metaphor as much.

I agree there should be more diversity. I think we saw some of that with the Missing Link using more blue/cyan at times. Also the Director's Cut largely removed or reduced the gold tint. I don't mind the tint, but it shouldn't be everywhere and overused. It could be more subtle and change depending on the environment or even situation (maybe a slight red tint when wounded, for example). The all-white room where we met Megan shows at least one implementation of changing it up.


7. Cyber-renaissance- I applaud EM's design team for trying to give the game a distinctive art style, and honestly, this one I consider to be a "noble failure." I'm okay with creativity, but I just don't see how the character design of DXHR and DXMD merges at all with what we see in DX1. I know the world of 2027-2029 is supposed to be a more decadent age, but it still seems like an entirely different universe than the more familiar clothing and architectural styles of DX1. In particular, the sleek, easily-concealed augmentations we see in the prequels do not gel at all with the clunky, '80s-influenced cyborgs of 2051-52.

I'm really wondering how they'll reconcile the vast differences between DX:HR and the original DX. It's like 30 years apart, and while a major global depression/disaster could account for some return to older technology and styles, it seems too vast of a difference.


9. Highlighting/interactivity- The visual splendor of DXHR seems impressive at first (every map is obviously waaaaay more populated, in terms of objects, than the relatively empty maps of DX1). However, barely any of these items are able to be interacted with by the player. Ultimately, the player just begins to ignore this detail as irrelevant clutter. It's extremely frustrating to throw a grenade into a room and see it explode, yet all the books on the bookshelf remain perfectly in place, or other small items remain bolted on to a desk.

With more interactive world items, it would no longer be necessary to implement a highlighting feature to point out what the player can and cannot pick up.

More interactive objects would be great. I thought I read that environments would react more, but I don't know what that really means. We'll see.


10. Hacking- I, for one, was a fan of the hacking mini-game. I'd like to see continually improved diversity and more creative options added, but overall it was fine for me.

However, there is no reason for every single door in the game to be electronically-locked. Give me more solutions. Let me pick a mechanical lock, or demolish a door with explosives, or THEN open it with an electronic panel or computer.

I'm hoping that the anti-aug movement will explain the return to more low-tech doors, and also disposable lock picks and multitools that non-augs would use. I'm glad to see non-augs using mech suits and stuff because it shows that non-augs would need to use technology too, especially to combat augs.


Writing/Story

1. Characterization- Do not depend on peripheral media in the real world (books, blogs, viral marketing campaigns, etc) to develop your characters. Even your enemies should be plausible, well-written, compelling characters. Want me to hate a character? Give me a reason to do so, and give me time to develop my loathing of this person. Don't just put a gun in their hand, write a few cheesy one-liners for them, and tell me to feel something when I kill them. I felt absolutely nothing toward the Tyrants (Barrett, Fedorova, etc), nothing compared to the emotions going through my head when I battled Gunther or Anna or Walton Simons.

The same goes for your allies. Characters like Megan Reed were woefully underwritten. Give me more than just backstory. Give them rich character moments, interesting e-mails and journals and such, unique character traits and flaws and tendencies. Make me care about them, don't just tell me that I should.

One of the biggest disappointments to me was how they pumped us up about Barrett prior to launch, and then it turns out he's one-dimensional and killed off very early in the game. I wanted to uncover more about him and the tyrants. No Orange/Lemon-Lime moments. They could have at least done that for the bosses that were fought later, but there was not much of anything. They were just bad guys. I expect shades of gray and some angles to understand their perspective, even if I don't agree with it.

FrankCSIS
15th Apr 2015, 23:05
One of the biggest disappointments to me was how they pumped us up about Barrett prior to launch, and then it turns out he's one-dimensional and killed off very early in the game

I specifically avoided spoilers when the game was released, and so hadn't heard about the boss battles and all that jazz. I was SO surprised to see Barrett show up out of nowhere, with zero context, only to be killed, that for half the game, despite the obvious cut scene, I expected him to return. He had more presence in the different trailers than he did in the actual game!

Wildcat summed up the majority of the points previously brought up, in a nicely packaged way. Some may come down to personal preferences, but they are all around fairly legitimate.

Sanunes
21st Apr 2015, 02:55
I recently finished replaying Deus Ex: Human Revolution, now I had a few issues and most of them are minor, but a few would be welcome changes.

Inventory: I am the type of person that loves exploring in games and collecting things, but the inventory in the game for me was extremely frustrating because you get stuck trying to have different tools for different situations and don't really have the room for that style of play. I think the grind design is fine, but the size and stacking limits of the items in the game could be greatly improved or the items that drop can be a little more streamlined.

Hacking: I enjoyed the idea of finding passcodes or hacking doors, but at the same time even with hacking at level 5 it still felt like I am gambling at the interface for I had more problems in an area with a Level 2 Door then I did with a Level 5 Terminal due to luck alone.

Weapons: The distribution of weapons and upgrades becomes aggravating as well for if you want to find upgrades for any of the weapons that are found later in the game, you better have the foresight that you are going to need to bring them from earlier in the game. Most of the time I played the game I stuck with barehanded combat with a 10mm pistol because that is what you started with and because of how upgrades for weapons worked normally it was on par with anything else I could find later in the game. I have experimented with a P.E.P.S. in Panchea, but found just carrying a few extra energy bars worked just as well.

Lethal versus Non-lethal: Now I am not sure how to fix the divide, but it feel like I was being punished for taking a lethal approach the one time I tried from not having high damage weaponry until late in the game to every enemy being alerted when I started to clear areas it did feel like I was being guided to going back to non-lethal.

As far as solutions or ideas:
Inventory: Have more items that are just counted on the side of the screen, such as the Nuke Virus for almost all the ones I did find were from hacking, a primary and secondary weapon slots and if you want more then that you can then stash it into your bags.

Hacking: Instead of having it all based on chance make the skill points invested mean more to event itself or even have it based a little more on player input besides an "attack this node", "defend this node", etc option.

Weaponry: The problem with weapons is the size and the upgrade system mostly, but also making weapons more modular based on the upgrade system. So instead of having a separate weapon for grenades, just have an under-barrel launcher or swap out the fire mechanisms to switch to a weapon that fires primary fully automatic. I think people who know more about weapons could give better ideas.

Lethal versus Non-lethal: I think a lot of people touched on good points already, but something to balance it out or at least not make non-lethal feel like that is the way you should go would be great.

MalikNL
11th Jun 2015, 15:52
Some great stuff

zwanzig_zwoelf
17th Jun 2015, 12:59
EIDOS MASTERS, PLEASE, MAKE BEN SAXOPHOBE ROMANCEABLE ALREADY
Or Pritchard, at least.
Or, I dunno. Gunther?

Just someone, I'm tired of your oppression of homosexuality in games. I'm sure a lot of people (even straight people) will agree that we need the diversity in romances to keep little girls like me silent~~

kiadaw-Spidey
27th Jun 2015, 17:52
1. Long loading times
2. Limited & mostly yellow color palette in the game
3. Storage space. Would be nice to have stash or something

68_pie
27th Jun 2015, 21:16
In no particular order:

Level Design
TPP
Stealth
Maps
Aug system
Lack of skills
Writing
Story
Relation to DX
Regenerating Health
Hacking for locks?
Speech battles
Cutscenes
XP
Lack of Melee
Piss filter
Takedowns
Cool **** TM!!!
Hub design
Forced simplifications
ILS activating auto
Lack of choice and consequence
Forced do things that I wouldn't choose to do as the player
Enemy variety
Difficulty
Regenerating Energy
Lack of locational health
Ending
Controls not being fully mappable
Shadows

Isumbarus
27th Jun 2015, 21:28
I think some enemies should yell 'I am hit' and then should drop weapon and run as fast as they can.

xaduha3
28th Jun 2015, 14:46
You're incorrect.

Whether non-lethal was superior to lethal is not the "point" being raised (although, again, you're still incorrect, because it IS debatable, considering that this is a GAME and not an accounting spreadsheet where higher numbers=better--the fact that something has less power does not mean it doesn't have other advantages. There are other reasons why lethal is better than non-lethal).

The point being raised is whether non-lethal being superior to lethal is a bad thing or not. Which is quite debatable.

You're incorrect.

There were no reasons for me to prefer a lethal takedown. If I ever did it was by mistake.


I think some enemies should yell 'I am hit' and then should drop weapon and run as fast as they can.

Running NPCs in DX were... something.

Isumbarus
13th Jul 2015, 17:17
I was thinking about this and I have to say that we can't match Human Revolution and Mankind Divided to Deus Ex series.Those games using cheating system mechanics that Deus Ex doesn't have.Square and Eidos change your direction or don't use Deus Ex name in your next titles when core mechanics and philosophy of Deus Ex is not there.

What we have seen so far in Mankind Divided is same Human Revolution in version 2.0 and there is no debate that Human Revolution was garbage game compared to original. And now you want to give us overpowered abilities,bullet time from Max Payne.Mixing this staff together is definitely a sauce.You mixing this staff and you calling it "this is Deus Ex".No, Eidos and Square I am telling you right now, it's not working.

You can't change your direction because you ****ed it up in 2007 or earlier so I request for Deus Ex character after you finish Mankind Divided.

Character will use:
-first person perspective plus leaning system.
-game will be based on maps, schematics ,blueprints.There is no radar , objective markers in Deus Ex series.
-Deus Ex game without melee weapons does not exist.
-regen system based on food and medkits.
-no more cheating in level design, you are calling it 'cover system'.
-no more rewards xp for killing.
-no more stupid bonus weapons for pre order.
-Deus Ex should have a lot of secrets .Secret areas ,secret dialogues ,secret societies , hard to find.
-you can do better interaction with objects Dawn Engine that the players is able to pick any object and throw at someone.

I missed ton of staff but those are core mechanics if you want to use Deus Ex name.
You must understand this if you want to make great game .

FrankieSatt
13th Jul 2015, 20:42
I'm not understanding this post at all. First off, this has nothing to do with having a Female Character in Deus Ex, so unless I'm missing something your topic title and post do no match up.

As far as your post, I have played every Deus Ex game and I can tell you that Human Revolution was a very good Deus Ex game. It had the same feel as the original Deus Ex game. Mankind Divided looks just as good and I'm personally excited to play it when it comes out.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
13th Jul 2015, 20:49
I'm not understanding this post at all. First off, this has nothing to do with having a Female Character in Deus Ex, so unless I'm missing something your topic title and post do no match up.


Yeah, I have already PM'd Isumbarus requesting that we merge his post into a more appropriate existing thread.

EDIT: Done. :cool:

Isumbarus
14th Jul 2015, 11:35
HR was good game but It's not Deus Ex game you can call it Splinter Cell mixed staff together and no one will notice it.If they want to continue this hybrid leave the Deus Ex name to someone else.

Fest1984
18th Jul 2015, 12:47
I enjoyed the 3rd person take downs, as I personally like sneaking around/hacking etc. I do think there shud be some reward for spending more time sneaking around/trying to resolve stuff amicably but not to the extent that it almost forces you to only do that, otherwise no point putting weapons in the game in the first place.

maybe a 5% reward for the extra diligence etc. or if possible maybe different areas unlocked thru various game styles so it rewards both styles but different outcomes.

Boss modes in HR were ok but not good/great im not sure if its something that's needed or not.

introducing the omar is MD would be cool as would give another angle for other people to play/persue.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
18th Jul 2015, 13:11
introducing the omar in MD would be cool as would give another angle for other people to play/pursue.

Oooh, you need to join my Friends list. :D

Yeah, hopefully we'll be introduced to the Russian scientists who later become the Omar. I'm not sure we'll see them in MD but it has to happen at some point. :cool:

Shralla
18th Jul 2015, 15:29
I enjoyed the 3rd person take downs, as I personally like sneaking around/hacking etc.

I don't see the connection between these two things.

Fest1984
26th Jul 2015, 08:42
Oooh, you need to join my Friends list. :D

Yeah, hopefully we'll be introduced to the Russian scientists who later become the Omar. I'm not sure we'll see them in MD but it has to happen at some point. :cool:


agreed, as we are getting closer to the originals timeline a lot of these organisation should start to appear, I often wonder if it would be worth almost remaking the original once we have reached the point in time where you cant fit any more in between because although the original seemed like you had choice it was very linear but done so well that at the time it was very much next gen stuff, where as now I almost cringe that we used to play games like that. But the memories are so fond of what you felt at the time its almost worth not ruining those memories because you cant help but compare stuff line graphics etc.

I'm hoping MD is such a financial success if there are any current restrictions the dev team has due to money/time those are completely removed so if it takes 3 years to make another sequel its completely fluid game with multiple choice and paths where no 2 times you play it they are the same, then its worth doing.

Shralla
26th Jul 2015, 17:06
I enjoyed the 3rd person take downs, as I personally like sneaking around/hacking etc.

Still not seeing the connection.


although the original seemed like you had choice it was very linear but done so well that at the time it was very much next gen stuff, where as now I almost cringe that we used to play games like that.

It was not "very linear." It was far less linear than Human Revolution and a vast majority of games on the market even to this day. It is still a fantastic game and if you "cringe" playing it, it's because you're far too obsessed with aesthetics to be bothered considering the actual gameplay elements.

ilweran
29th Jul 2015, 16:32
Playing the DC now on hardest level, mostly ghosting it, and I never thought I'd say this as I'm not great at games.... but it's too easy. Also you do get way to many praxis.

And maybe I'm the only one, but I liked the yellow filter and think it's a shame they removed it for the DC.

Really looking forward to MD as I really enjoyed The Missing Link and think it showed that lessons were learnt.

Speaking of The Missing Link...


There were no reasons for me to prefer a lethal takedown. If I ever did it was by mistake.

... did you play it? Surely Burke provided a good reason to prefer a lethal take down? And his men in the Detention Centre?

I must admit on my original playthrough of HR I did try and maximise XP slightly (hacking when I had the code mainly, and going through every vent though I do that anyway - can't not crawl through a vent!), out of worry that I wouldn't get enough praxis, but I needn't have as I had more than I knew what to do with and haven't bothered this time.

When I play it again I may try being a bit more violent. Had great fun on the original DX playing a grief stricken JC, who, filled with guilt for letting his brother die, went on a murderous rampage against MJ12 then plunged the world into a new dark age.


Just read this and it's a rather disjointed post, but never mind. I'm in work and it's been stressful - internet/network problems on a day when I really needed to be online and have ended up having to connect through my phone - which is good for the online stuff but no good for printing. And of course uses my data allowance :hmm: Would quite like to go home to knock men unconscious and drag them into vents :D

SageRhyme
1st Sep 2015, 09:13
Looks like Eidos is ignoring all of us. The number 1 complaint in professional reviews for DX:HR was third person cover/take downs. None of the reviewers liked it. The number 1 complaint from Deus Ex fans, is also third person cover/take downs.

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided's first shown feature, third person cover and take downs.

SMH.

Why can't they just put back in melee weapons and make it first person only? They also need to make it so you can't unlock every aug and you actually have to make choices -- isn't the games first pillar "Choice Matters?"

Then why is there no meaningful choices?

You don't need a cover system, we can see through walls. You don't need to see Adam's back when climbing ladders, and we damn sure don't need a "Press "x" to kill this group of enemies with a tedious animation that breaks immersion.

If they want a cover system so bad, they should take it from Killzone instead of Rainbowsix Vegas. We can see adam all we want during conversations and cutscenes, but the gameplay immersion should be paramount.

Eidos learns nothing and sticks to bad design that is universally hated by virtually everyone, professional critics and fans alike.

It's great that they finally have a decent game engine, so the old school 1990's robot animations and stuff are finally gone, but the third person stuff needs to go too. This very well could be one of the best games of all time, but they want to keep it simple for the plebes instead of juicing up the things that make deus ex unique, they are focusing on features that make Deus Ex less unique and more like "Bland game number generic."

Melee weapons and play style is much different than sneaking around with a gun you never intend on using and pressing "Q" for free take downs, very one dimensional. What happened to real melee combat, and sneaking up behind people and trying to aim for the head [a skill based instant take down] where if it goes wrong [which is like the core gameplay experience, managing mismanaged attempts and making the best of it] you can then fight with your melee weapon.


I miss my stun baton, I miss my Dragon Tooth Sword -- I really hate this "Push Q for free kills" easy mode immersion killing non-sense. It also takes away from the need for strength augmentations, since they no longer do anything other than let you carry more stuff and lift heavy objects. It's main purpose was for increasing melee damage -- now it's main purpose is holding more crap I never plan on using.

Womp womp, this is the very definition of missing the point and ignoring the unanimous feedback to push "cool" design, that nobody else thinks is cool.

Eidos needs to stop being obstinate. When you make a sequel, you're supposed to removed the things people didn't like and enhance the things people did. You're not supposed to try to enhance the things people didn't like, because it's not suddenly going to make people like it. There is absolutely nothing they can do to make the take down system or forced third person during gameplay a more attractive option than letting us choose to play exclusively in first person and including an actual melee combat system.

Continuously barking up the wrong tree even though everyone keeps telling them "WRONG TREE, IDIOT."

If they insist on this "We want you to be able to see Adam's cool tech non-sense" then clearly the most sensible solution in a single player only game is to make first/third person a toggle and let us play through the entirety of the game in either perspective.

This is innovation, because this actually satisfies people who like to see adam and people who like the core traditional classic immersion of the original -- repeating a mistake is making a mistake for a second time, and that's not helping anyone, the critics, the players, OR Eidos Montreal -- it's just a proverbial middle finger to the fans and critics and a prime example of EM sticking their fingers in their ears and going "Lalalalalala" we don't care about you! Which is obviously bad for business and reputation.

In 7 minutes of gameplay for Mankind Divided, there was over 40 camera perspective shifts and they were purposefully playing slow, and the worst part, was 1st person, take cover to 3rd person, while in cover, change ammo type back to first person back to third person, shoot camera, back to first person. So the camera changed perspective 4 times in less than 5 seconds.

Like, come on! It's so much worse than HR.

Isumbarus
1st Sep 2015, 13:33
I doubt they will listen ,now it's too late.They ****ed it up in 2007 when decided to go hybrid . They don't understand the first Deus Ex game.I think it goes like this: people from Square (old Eidos)who have rights to Deus Ex title forcing simplifications to focus fully on consoles to make more money.You remember The Fall?After failure of The Fall chief EM studio was fired. And they are doing everything like radar, objective markes,cut scenes that Square demands.In this way there will never be true next Deus Ex game.
And I really think they should stop fooling people about cover system too.They should say 'We are just cheating you'.
Entire game is build on stupid thinking.It will be ok if they name the game different.

BridgetFisher
1st Sep 2015, 13:33
def would like more exploration, more world stuff, atmospheric things to interact with so we feel like were in the world and its not just a prop for a background. Last game did a great job of this, can how good it was be done even better :o Excited to find out!

Would rather play first or third person or both? but having it switch back and forth always felt immersion breaking. People are saying the new game is broken because the devs dont listen. Maybe they dont use the forums or their not allowed to make it first or third person?

BinaryBoy
6th Sep 2015, 15:09
Working Showers - How am I supposed to role play a guy going out for a night of spying and ass kicking without a shower first? It's just unprofessional.
More Hidden Areas - Should have been more hidden areas that weren't just the same ventilation shaft copied/pasted over and over.
More Rooms - There were many large buildings with a very small number of rooms. Create more places to explore in each building.

BridgetFisher
15th Sep 2015, 14:36
didnt like that they took out the yellow filter. Hated it at first looked like pee. But then when playing it without the yellow it felt like the atmosphere and style was missing which made the game feel like any other game without its trademark.

zwanzig_zwoelf
18th Sep 2015, 17:14
I believe Deus Ex should grow up and offer mature romance subplots. It's way more interesting to fight for your woman (or man, depends on whether Eidos are ready to embrace the progress) than following some megacorporation and uncovering conspiracies. It actually gives more room for conspiracies, such as stealing Pritchard's pants and putting them in Manderley's locker to make them meet each other, give each other a soft, passionate kiss and discuss the matters of national security. :)

Lolssi
23rd Sep 2015, 11:30
That snap to cover system. Give me lean keys and crouch and I'll be fine. Preferably on first person.
Also didn't like the lack of skill system.