PDA

View Full Version : So there was a canon ending to Human Revolution?



PugPug
20th Aug 2015, 20:42
It sounds like Mankind Divided is continuing from the Humanity Front/William Taggart ending, is that right?

Or are they pulling an Invisible War thing and combining all the endings of the previous game into a bizarre mashup? :nut:

Cyberhuman
21st Aug 2015, 07:16
There are games where multiple endings doesn't work. Mass Effect is a very good example of this. BioWare painted themselves into a corner with ME3. When you're dealing with a massive universe and you have plans to continue this universe, then you have to make sure that it's consistent and coherent. Multiple endings can make this process complicated and continuity issues will eventually become a problem.

You could make it work in Deus Ex, but it seems a little unnecessary with four different endings. I think they'll accommodate for all the endings. The consequences will be identical regardless of what happened in HR. I don't think this is too much of a problem. The Aug incident was so severe that the outcome would be largely the same regardless of AJ's decision. Marginalization and discrimination of the transhuman population was inevitable.

Irate_Iguana
21st Aug 2015, 18:20
There are games where multiple endings doesn't work. Mass Effect is a very good example of this. BioWare painted themselves into a corner with ME3. When you're dealing with a massive universe, and you have plans to continue this universe, then you have to make sure that it's consistent and coherent; multiple endings can make this process complicated.

Bioware ****ed that up by promising a trilogy when they only had the writing for a single game and a rough idea of where to take the other two should the first one be a success. Proper planning prevents piss poor performance.




the consequences will be identical regardless of what happened in HR. I don't think this is too much of a problem. The events of HR was so massive that the outcome would be largely the same regardless of AJ's decision. Marginalization and discrimination against the transhuman population was inevitable.

It was inevitable because DX happened. We know where the future will take us. For as long as they want to keep to the timeline as we know it.

You are correct that they are essentially glossing over the details. The Aug incident is what matters and what leads to the creation of the world as we see it in MD. As Fallout puts it "the details are trivial and pointless." Which button Jensen pushed was of no consequence. If the message was even sent, it could be spun with no problems. I doubt we'll even get a reference to the endings apart from some lampshade hanging on button-pushing.

Cyberhuman
25th Aug 2015, 11:30
It was inevitable because DX happened. We know where the future will take us. For as long as they want to keep to the timeline as we know it.

I believe they've already decided to follow the original timeline. I actually blame the original DX for any potential timeline issues. Fully nano-augmented agents in 2052? Very unlikely to say the least. I think Eidos Montreal felt very constricted by this fact and was therefore compelled to push HR as far back in time as possible. This would at least give them some flexibility with regards to the future. Personally I think HR should've been set to the late 2040's and the original DX should've been set to the late 2080's at least.

Personally I've never been concerned with realistic representations of the future. I only want them to create an interesting Universe that feels grounded and realistic. They shouldn't be so concerned with interdimensional timeline compatibility.

PugPug
25th Aug 2015, 16:39
There isn't really anything stopping them from creating another story than runs parallel in the timeline to another Deus Ex game. It might even be really interesting. Could you imagine being an augmented agent for the NSF or UNATCO, and some missions are in reaction to what the Dentons are doing? Or doing something that JC then has to respond to in Deus Ex?

There's a whole game there just waiting to be written about how Paul started as an agent and learned the truth about UNATCO and joined the NSF.

And is the time after Invisible War really not workable? I expect it wouldn't be about the augmentation/purity issue. That would be settled one way or the other. I guess the Helios ending would have to be discarded.

They aren't written into a corner by any means.

Irate_Iguana
25th Aug 2015, 16:49
I believe they've already decided to follow the original timeline.

That's what they have said. I don't think that they'll keep to that if MD is a success. They are close in time to several pandemics, the earthquake that destroys most of the American West Coast and the second American Civil War. That's a very interesting time to set a game, but I don't know if it is a good time to set a DX game. Especially since they'll want Adam to be the main char for another game.



I actually blame the original DX for any potential timeline issues.

Agreed. Most writers suck at decent timelines. Especially timelines that deal with new technologies.

PugPug
25th Aug 2015, 20:38
...Especially since they'll want Adam to be the main char for another game.

But... he didn't ask for that.

Cyberhuman
28th Aug 2015, 11:00
Agreed. Most writers suck at decent timelines. Especially timelines that deal with new technologies.

Yes. I've always wondered why this is the case. I think developers, producers and directors have a perception that their work won't be relevant if it takes place in the too distant future. I don't understand this myself, but I think it might be the case. It's also undoubtedly much easier to represent a future that isn't too far away from us in time.

However, the problem is that they'll inevitably introduce technology that is completely out of place, maybe decades - even centuries ahead of time. We're then left with a pretty accurate representation of the future in terms of social, political and economical circumstances, but on the other hand we're given a very inaccurate representation of technological advancement.

With all that said, you might be correct that they're just really bad at predicting the future of technology.

ryamkajr
29th Aug 2015, 06:27
At PAX Prime today, they indicated the self-destruct ending is the canon ending (although they also said there are aspects of the other 3 that are "true" as well). But their storyline operates under the assumption that Adam flooding Panchea.

Straight from the mouth of Jean-Fran├žois Dugas.

Shralla
29th Aug 2015, 16:34
So that ending, only Adam didn't die for some reason. That's terrible and bad.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
29th Aug 2015, 17:14
So terrible and bad... :eek: :D

Irate_Iguana
30th Aug 2015, 08:48
So that ending, only Adam didn't die for some reason. That's terrible and bad.

What I don't get is that their idea to keep what happened at Panchaea vague and only focus on the aug incident was pretty good. Specifying an ending wasn't needed to continue with MD.

Cyberhuman
4th Sep 2015, 09:30
Their storyline operates under the assumption that Adam flooding Panchea. Straight from the mouth of Jean-Fran├žois Dugas.

They don't need to do this. Why do developers keep giving us multiple-ending options? I think they should leave it open. I hope this isn't refered to explicitly in-game. If the ending is somehow implied in-game, then it should be open to interpretation.

PugPug
4th Sep 2015, 20:58
Jensen destroyed the system that kept Panchea from being destroyed by ocean currents (the Hyron Project (http://deusex.wikia.com/wiki/Hyron_Project)), whether he pressed the self-destruct button afterward or not. Regardless of how or whether he manipulated or even sent the signal, public opinion seems to have taken its course against augmentation. The different endings aren't so incompatible.