PDA

View Full Version : DEUS EX 3 What to keep/toss



Pages : [1] 2

guardian130270
17th Aug 2007, 18:26
Hello all, first time forum user here. When I found out that a another Deus Ex was in the works I just had to put my two cents worth in. I apologize for the long start but I think it's worth the time.

In terms of my opinion of the first two Deus Ex, I will sum up as briefly as I can: Deus Ex 1: LOVED IT, only FPS I've ever played more than once (bought when it first came out and definitely got my $60 worth). Deus Ex 2: had to wait a couple of years before a new computer allowed me to play it and was so impressed with it that I uninstalled it after leaving the Tarsus Academy and it sat in a drawer for two years until just recently when I decided to give it another try (after playing #1 yet again!). Played it all the way through, still sucks, only bothered with one ending, deleted off hard drive already.

The main reason for this post is my list of what I believe should be kept or tossed from the first two Deus Ex ("mechanics wise" at least). I'll try to keep my comments simple with a list of suggestions at the end. Here goes.

Deus Ex 2: Keep:

1> Nothing. Too many bad changes, too little space.

Deus Ex 1: Keep:

1> Skill list and their effects on gameplay: It is cool how skill increase allows more abilities relating to computers, etc., reduced item use, and my favourite, increased damage and accuracy from weapon skills. It was great starting with those wobbly long range sniper shots and progressing to rock steady 'snap to target' shots.

2> Wide open spaces: Being able to operate in three dimensions (rather than running around what was basically a bunch of hallways) allowed for many more tactical options (and made the sniper rifle, rocket launcher, and range mods a little more useful/practical).

3> Biomods: Deus Ex #1 had 18 mods of which you could use 9; Deus Ex #2 had 15 mods of which you could use 6. Also in #2 there were way to many chances to upgrade your mods. By the end of play I had 6 mods maxed out plus a half dozen more of each type. Pace the upgrades.

4> Weapon Upgrades: Variety is nice and don't limit it to 2 per weapon.

5> Inventory System: I just preferred the open space vs. one item per slot. Although having to shuffle your inventory around because the item you were trying to pick up was the wrong shape was annoying at times.

6> Hit Locations on Player: I liked how a badly injured (or missing) arm would affect aiming (especially snipering). My favourite was after a particularly hectic gunfight I spent several minutes trying to figure out why I couldn't get out of the crouch I was in. Then I realized both of my legs were gone and the image I had of this crack commando scooting around on his butt cheeks makes me laugh still.

7> HUD: Unobtrusive and out of the way.

8> Weapons: Variety is nice and it is best to make them different enough to affect how a player will travel through the game. I prefer the grenades from #1 over the mine/grenade breakdown of #2.


If you are still reading, here are my general comments:

My only real complaint about Deus Ex #1 was the illusion of choice. None of the choices you made truly affected the outcome of the game. A similar mistake was made in Deus Ex #2, except this time you find out that it didn't matter which path you took you still ended up in the same place.

My suggestion would be to have one or two opening levels in common then have the story split into two distinct paths. Each level from then on could share the same map with only the opponent/objective changed. (ie: sneak into location [X] and do [Y] to take it over, the other side being: sneak into location [X] and do [Z] to take it back). Ideally, in this type of scenario the start/finish locations for each path would be different.

Also relating to choice is the XP system from Deus Ex #1. In the opening Liberty Island scenario you are given orders to subdue rather than kill but in the end, aside from a bit of dialogue, how you handle things makes no difference. I always felt that XP rewards tied into orders/situations would add another (small) variation to gameplay. Example: Liberty Island: ordered to subdue; subdue target: 100 XP; kill target: 50 XP. In Paris: 100 XP for not setting off any of the police; 50 XP for subduing them; 0 XP for killing everything that moves.

My second to last comment is on cut-scenes. When I first played Deus Ex #1 I somehow missed the opening cut-scene. This actually made the story aspect of the game much more interesting as I went through and gathered clues the JC's past and making the discovery of the cloning vats that much better. When I played it again I saw the opening and thought how, even without my knowledge from playing already, the dialogue in the scene gives away the whole plot of the game.

I would also have liked to have seen something more between levels (travel, landings, etc.). This is especially true for levels that had something significant happen at the end (like the nuking of Area 51 and end of game).

:mad2: Lastly, comments on both games conclusions. Deus Ex #1 has you choosing between chaos (letting the world find its own way), maintaining the status quo, and setting yourself up as ruler (more or less). Ok, but better cut-scenes would have made it better (more visuals on the impact of your choice).

Deus Ex #2, however, really disappointed me:mad2: . In this case you basically get to decide which ***hole gets to be in charge. The writer(s) may have simply been making a statement about world politics, freedom of choice, etc. etc. but the bottom line is none of the endings justified all your hard work (as player or character).

So that's what I have to say for now. Interested in comments/ideas (I know I missed things). Thanks for reading all the way to the end.

Grox
19th Aug 2007, 02:08
What to keep, and what to toss, is a tough and complex question.

One thing is certain, though --- it's CRITICAL that DX3 keep DX2's concept of "universal ammo". It feels so stupid to be effectively unarmed with your sniper rifle and pistol because you have nothing left but "assault rifle" ammo

guardian130270
19th Aug 2007, 19:56
I'm not really a fan of the universal ammo. I agree it does simplify things but I think it actually adds to the game if you have to resort to a backup weapon because you've been favouring one weapon too much. Also, there were a few of times during DX2 that I was forced to use melee weapons simply because a couple of rocket launcher shots had wiped out the last of my ammo. (Also, I gather from your comment that you weren't a fan of the assault rifle either. A half to a whole clip to take out one peon was lame.)

Grox
20th Aug 2007, 00:56
It certainly was . . . was that a function of the base damage being too low?

IIRC, "base damage" for the flamethrower and the assault rifle were both 3. I don't know how that translated into the flamethrower being so deadly and the assault rifle a safe toy for pre-schoolers, but that's how it seemed to end up.

Sometimes I play through DX using only the assault rifle as an extra challenge.

gareis
20th Aug 2007, 04:11
In real life, a shot from an assault rifle is probably less deadly than one from a 9mm pistol, but a sparrow could starve on the difference. Moreover, the rifle is more accurate than the pistol. If you're not using a scope, you can't target an M16 well enough to have to worry about the weapon's accuracy; it's your own accuracy that you have to worry about.

But, for balance issues, it's preferable to have an assault rifle do significantly less damage than a pistol. On the other hand, in DX1, a single headshot from the pistol takes down an enemy, and it takes ten rounds from the assault rifle, but the guy would have been carrying as many rounds of 10mm ammo as 7.62mm. Contrast to real life, where the guard would have a full 30-round clip for their AK-47, or a full 8- or 10-round clip for their pistol.

Anyway, if you're careful, using the pistol, each person you kill gives you enough ammo to kill the next guy, but with the assault rifle, you need to kill three or four to get enough ammo to kill the fifth. That was annoying.

As for inventory, I'd do a slot-and-weight approach. Each item or stack takes up a slot; each item has a weight. This means you don't need to do inventory tetris.

And as for the endings, for each choice, there should be something drawing the player to that choice, making them think it's a good idea and that they should trust that person to implement it. DX2 gave you three bad choices, so it's no wonder a lot of people went Rambo and killed everyone in sight. While the options had advantages in theory, they came from people who tried to kill you (the Knights Templar) or deceive you (everyone else) up until that point.

If only that one Knight who was locked away didn't try to kill you as soon as you released him...then I might have been slightly inclined to trust the Knights. Maybe.

guardian130270
20th Aug 2007, 17:22
I think you're right about the game balance issue concerning the assault rifle in DX1. That could be why they changed to the SMG label in DX2.

One hit kills with a pistol were possible but only with a well placed head shot. Missed plenty of those and ended up running around emptying my pistol trying to kill the bastard. Also pistol head shots didn't work as well on the tougher opponents.

My thought is to go with the SMG idea: base pistol damage with range and burst option (and bring back the 20mm launcher.

In regards to the flamethrower comments; personally I never used that weapon much but when I did it seems that the 3 points damage was all it took to set someone on fire (no attacks or setting off alarms) and then you could sit back and watch them run around screaming until they died. Morbid but true. Also the flamethrowers (and WP rockets) were about the only way to take down an MiB without him exploding on you.

The slot/weight approach seems to be what they used in DX2 (I didn't even notice at first that I got more slots as my strength mod increased) and there is some appeal to that, but for me not enough. I think DX2 had what, about 16 slots grand total (with maxed out strength)? There were 3-4 different mines, 5-6 grenades, medkit, multi-tool/lockpick, food. Throw in a pack of smokes and you've used up almost all your inventory on small one slot items (assuming you're not carrying 10 of each :) .

I think inventory control is one area most open to debate. Both types have their merits/flaws that go beyond simple personal preference.

SquidPirate
24th Aug 2007, 01:23
I'm also a first-time user here, and the anouncement of Deus Ex 3 has forced my hand. I'm a published novelist and avid fan of Deus Ex.

I'm sure we can all coem to the common ground that the Deus Ex series does things no other game dares to. It tackles philosophy, society, and technology in unique ways, and manages to create an immersive experience we all love.

I thought IW had many good ideas, and overall it was a decent game. But it paled to DX by giant orders of magnitude.

Why?

1. The biggest problem is that IW was very obviously designed to appeal to newbies, in the poorly-conceived hope that it would have wider appeal. And by doing this, the core fan-base rightfully felt abandoned.

2. Replacing J.C. with a character few of us care about was a bad choice. Again, this was done to appeal to newbies (i.e. a new character meant a fresh start.) Bad, bad, bad thinking.

3. Taking a razor to all the elements we love about Deux Ex, in the interest of "simplifying things," was a bad choice too. It resulted in a simplified game.

4. Letting us personalize our characters. In a word: Unnecessary. It just ate up memory that could have been used elsewhere.

For the third installment:

WHAT TO TOSS:

1. Universal Ammo.
Implausible, simplistic, and ruinous of the whole "immersive" feature we enjoy.

2. Short rounds/short game.
One of the things I adored about DX was the vastness of the game. The developers made the mistake of beliving some statistic about how some players don't often play a game all the way through. I know of NO ONE who hasn't finished Deus Ex. Shortening the game cheapens the experience, and having tiny rounds makes the world being depicted seem like a paltry amusement park instead of a 3-D universe.



WHAT TO RE-INSERT:

1. The little details.
Newspapers, books, datacubes, emails, character arcs, dialogue, etc. Where did all these things go in IW? Bring them back, allow us to interact with everything, show us that there is a world going on around us (like Young and Decker and the NSF drama we never see, but read about!) These were masterful touches that gave DX its fan-base. Bring it back!!!

2. Experince points for exploration.
Self-explanatory.

3. RPG elements and skill-sets.
Dear developers. Forgive me, but none of us believed you when you said the elimination of this (and other) features wasn't being done to dumb things down.

4. Huge, sprawling rounds.
Give us a game worth 80 hours of gameplay. We'll love it. Win over newbies through sheer force of presentation.



WHAT TO ELABORATE ON:

1. An even more organic, evolving (or devolving) path as we go about making choices. Someone here already suggested having new responses open up to us depending on how we are playing. Are we being violent? Cautious? Manipulative? Pacifistic?

2. Better AI, please. The DX universe rocks, but it needs better AI -- something on the order of Half-Life or Halo.


That's really not a huge shopping list. Developers, please pay attention to us!!! We love the world you've given us, and our criticisms are (at least from most of us) not done in a mean-spirited fashion, but because we don't want a great thing ruined.

guardian130270
26th Aug 2007, 04:06
Its interesting to see what most people have in common in terms of what they think went wrong with DX2.

I think there was a big disappointment with DX1 as far as the storyline went, specifically the illusion of choice. DX2 only compounded this with their multiple "doesn't matter what you choose" storylines.

At its core Deus Ex is a shooter with customizable elements and a variable (in theory) storyline. When everyone complained about DX1's lack of a variable story Eidos mistakenly thought that's all the players wanted (you can combine that with the general "dumbing down for console play" theories) and you have a mediocre quest shooter with no replay value that is Deus Ex 2.

I'm actually not a FPS fan. Without exception, every FPS I've played, while enjoyable to different degrees were never played more than once.

Deus Ex has been the only FPS that I have ever wanted to play more than once. Not only the skills give you different options (the weapon skills alone give Deus Ex a leg up on other FPS') but the environment also allowed you to try different routes and tactics.

Game companies (of ANY type of game) know that replayability is key. DX3 can accomplish this buy returning to DX1's style and simply adding real (and relevant) choices that affect what you do and where you go.

Bio Denton
26th Aug 2007, 10:47
Well my opinion has not changed since the release date of DX2: http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=321301&postcount=58

guardian130270
27th Aug 2007, 19:32
Just like to say, excellent review by Bio Denton. Mentions a number of small annoying detail items that did just as much to lessen the enjoyment of DX2 even further as the big stuff. I've always liked it when people can tell why something sucks.

I think alot (if not most) of the 'dumbing down' of DX2 had to do with the limitations of the console systems of the time.

I originally favoured PC games because of their superiority over console systems. Hopefully, now that difference is all but gone, game companies will fully embraced this. Its obvious they have in terms of graphics and physics, but what now needs to be done is to expand the consoles use of background details (like in DX1 with in-game skills and equipment affecting gameplay).

Grox
31st Aug 2007, 15:44
I agree on most points, but the universal ammo should stay. You shouldn't be playing the game and be effectively unarmed because your ammo doesn't "match" your gun . . . it's silly.

guardian130270
1st Sep 2007, 20:53
Sorry to say, but I think Grox is in the minority on the universal ammo issue.

As long as you are willing to change weapons (and deal with inconvinences caused by such) I've never had a lack of ammo problem in DX1. Oh, there were many times where I had no ammo for my prefered weapon, but the only times I was ever low/out of all types of ammo was when it was deemed so by the game (like the breakout of UNATCO HQ).

Admittedly I prefer a hide and snipe type game, but in DX I tend to find that any mass brawl gets you dead real quick unless you're very good at strafe and shoot.

In the end, if the plan is to keep universal ammo, then the shortcomings in DX2 (poor weapon damage, what seemed to be lack of effective/consistant head-shot results, etc) have to be fixed, but I still like different ammos.

gareis
2nd Sep 2007, 03:10
Universal ammo did nothing to ruin or improve DX2 for me. I don't think it's a big deal. It is, however, a way to allow people with rare weapons that take unusual ammunition to use their rare weapon. It means that balancing the game is much easier. And I think I favor spending more time on the quality of the story and the controls rather than spending more time on repetitive balance issues.

Actually, DX2 had universal ammo primarily because it didn't have a skill system. Consider DX1. If I have a pistol and an assault gun, and lots of ammo for each, then most likely that isn't useful for me because I suck with one or the other. So that large amount of ammo won't be very useful. Unless, of course, I spend a lot of xp on both pistol and rifle, which means I'm probably bad at other things. So if I want to be Rambo, I can't be Neo as well.

But DX2 didn't have skills, so universal ammo took the place.

That said, skills and universal ammo together will still make balance easier, and they probably won't significantly impact gameplay. Though it will remove that bit of joy at finding a box of Manna from Heaven (aka 20mm HE).

Grox
3rd Sep 2007, 02:32
Sorry to say, but I think Grox is in the minority on the universal ammo issue.

Of course I am. I was kidding in the last couple posts when I mentioned it. I hate universal ammo.

Interesting though, how this position actually gleaned some very salient points from you and gareis. I must admit I'd never thought of it that way, though like you, I would still prefer to see ammo treated as it was in DX1 instead of DX2.

user-9
28th Oct 2007, 10:41
Many sequels are almost remakes of the original but with better graphics and an updated plot, DX2 wasn't.

The game needs to feel like the same universe as DX1.

Needs to keep the skills (DX1)

Keep weapopn mods but better, like in STALKER where you can actually see the weapon upgrading.

THERE WAS JUST TWO THINGS IN DX:IW THEY SHOULD KEEP...

1. "Mantling" - was a really good improvement, having to move boxes around in the first game was unrealistic.

2. Flying bots - just because they were cool.

LASTLY...

They should bring back water and wide open spaces, sub-plots that you can find or not depending on how you play and where you go on a map.

Grox
30th Oct 2007, 04:12
What is this mantling of which you speak?

ikenstein
6th Nov 2007, 11:45
I liked the way deus ex took inspiration from real conspiracy theories - the rothchildes and rockerfellas controlling international banking, the trilateral commission etc. much better than that peequads / queequegs coffee wars malarky.

univeral ammo sucks.

i prefer having biomod upgrades by finding canisters AND skill upgrades by getting exp, over just finding canisters. it should not be possible to max out all skills and biomods, choices that affect gameplay should have to be made. (pistol OR rocket launcher etc.)

as in bloodlines players' actions could affect the tv and newpaper reports.

shops that sell useful stuff.

IceBallz
28th Nov 2007, 15:06
What i really want to see done on Deus Ex 3 is everything from Deus Ex 1. Well some little upgrades, on what taken up here. But grafics dont really matter for me, just keep it upgraded minimal from Deus Ex 1. Just to keep framerate up on almost max, to have good flow in growd and bigger size on maps. Then you could paste in the Eidos "new" growd engine from Assasins Greed. Just bring the maps to huge and open, then i mean huge (like a whole pentagon building and workers inside in one load). That's the real feeling of Deus Ex. Maybe but in some wall triggers. So you can hear your jacket touch the wall when you go real close into wall. And triggers in bushes, so you hear the scrambling bushes when you walk into them. This sound triggers don't take almost no prosessor power from the grafics. But gives that little extra feeling into the gameplay. And no fast navigation huds like in Invisible War. It's just enuff with the old 2D inventory table from Deus Ex 1, don't mess up with using to much of prosessor into grafics. Jamming weapons, loads of modding to weapons, the body hud to see where you been hit. Just all good things from Deus Ex 1 is good to have in 3.

The bad thing is that the grafics have been too imported in todays games, then i mean toooo imported. So every other possibility is forgotten and those little tiny things is the thing of Deus Ex 1. It was that Deus Ex 1 was breaking and what it should do again.
So lay down the hunt of best grafical effects. Just bring us the world of Deus Ex, like it was then. Find some new hidden effects. Like set in AGEIA-physics into all soft wall corners in Deus Ex 3. When you hit a wall corner with your bullets, the small AGEIA cubes that the wall corner is builded with. Will break down with a fast frame flow while they auto fade and delete from game. So if you lean over the corner, while it been broken to pieces. You have later move more behind the broken down wall corner. AGEIA-physics prosessor is actually a very good effect bringer to this big maps i have planned to Deus Ex 3. ;) And there have been more since Deus Ex 1, then only AGEIA-physics.

Dave W
28th Nov 2007, 19:52
A Deus Ex clone is not ideal, but neither is an IW clone. IW had some good ideas, but put simply it...oversimplified everything. Whereas Deus Ex was a bit thrown together with the overlapping skills systems.

So, for Skills, have a progressive system. The more you use assault rifles, the better at them you get. But don't start off with the gun firing all over the place and being completely useless like in the original.

Keep the interface system for computers, ATM's etc. less intrusive like IW did (as in, it doesn't black out your screen) - but don't oversimplify the mechanics.

Basically, I think Deus Ex 3 should find a middle ground that's accesible to lots of players - to achieve sales, but don't eliminate the more complex systems. Just make them far more "background" - such as with a progressive skills system. It worked with GTA.

Oh, an SDK too.

eightbits
28th Nov 2007, 22:26
I generally agree with the original poster here. Some of my concerns:

1. Ammo

a) Get rid of universal ammo. It's a ridiculous dumbing down and streamlining that took away a lot of the flavor of the game. There were just the right amount of ammo types in the original. It was very manageable and was not a problem. Keep it. However, don't add more types of ammo.

b) Modify the way ammo is stored on the character. In the original Deus Ex, your ammo could not be taken from you while other inventory items could. Ammo should be kept separate from the rest of the inventory for cleanliness of the UI, but should still be part of the inventory system in that it counts as inventory that can be dropped and taken from you.

2) Skills. Please keep the skill system from Deus Ex 1. I was really hoping that Deus Ex 2 was going to EXPAND the skill system, but instead it dumbed it down too. The skill system was great. I would have like to see a *little* more granularity. The skills were too few for the awarded skill points. However, I don't think the skill points were awarded too often at all. Maybe instead of 4 levels of skill, it should be 6. Adding a few more skills into the mix could help too. And, some skills were useless, like medical, or heavy weapons. I never needed some skills so I ended up min-maxing the skills I did use. If all skills are very relevant, it will make the current skill list of skills and amount of awarded skill points perfect!

3) Weapon Mods. While I don't think the weapon mod system in the original is feasible in the real world, I think as far as game play is concerned, it was pretty damn good. However, these upgrades should be spread out more and much more rare. By the time I reached Vandenberg, I had all of my weapons almost completely maxed out and was very often running into mods I couldn't use. That hurt how I felt about going after weapon mods from that point on. A good limit on these would be to make it impossible to find more than about 3 or 4 per weapon at the end of the game. Most people should end up with about 2 per weapon while the "explorer" type of player could end up with all of the ones available.

4) Augs. Oh my god the augs! What a great great thing these were in the original! I loved the whole augmentation system. Installation and upgrades were perfectly balanced (the way the skills and weapon mods should have been.) The decision to take one/leave one was a good mechanic. The fact it was permanent made it even better. Deus Ex 2 screwed up the mods big time. They were not permanent and by the time I left the first building that was blowing up all around me, I was almost completely decked out with mods in all slots and fully upgraded! It's like the game was written for a kid who wants to win the game by merely loading it up. Let's not do that again.

As much praise as I have for the augs in the original, there was one little point that was a bit of concern for me. By the time I finished the game the first time, I realized, I never actually needed the mods. In fact, not only were they not needed, they were almost never used. Almost all of what I did was based on my skills and weapon mods. I was pretty disappointed by that. One of the alluring things of the original game was that I was an international secret agent with the latest in bleeding edge tech. But, since I never actually used it, I might as well have been a foot patrolman for the police. The skills and weapon mods would have done as well for me in that character as they did for JC Denton. (The only aug I used frequently was the built-in flashlight a lot, but come on. It was a flashlight in my eyes. I could have accomplished the same thing by carrying a flashlight.)

I will grant that the augmentations did make some tasks easier. Some of them were made MUCH easier. But I still could have completed the game without any of them. I want to see the next game put more emphasis on the augs. Where the original game's puzzles could be solved without them, the new game's puzzles should require them. They should be things that people without the augs cannot do; something to separate you from the rest of the mundanes. The catch here is that the original puzzles had multiple solutions. The new puzzles should also have multiple solutions, but all of them requiring a different aug. This would make the puzzle accessible to all regardless of the augs they have chosen, and still make you feel like like you're not an ordinary dude just running around.

5. Choices. I was thrilled by the advertisement of choices affecting the outcome and was sorely disappointed by it. To be honest, I would have loved to have been able to chose to stay with UNATCO in the beginning. I would still to this day pay for an official expansion to the original game that would let me do that. The problem we face with choices is that making a computer game with the choices we'd like to see makes the game way too big for developers to get the game out in a timely fashion. We'd be waiting for 5 - 7 years (really!) and the game would have to sell for $70 - $90 retail to make it worth the development costs. So I'm OK with the limited choices. But I would like to see a little more in the way of the choices actually affecting the plot and eventually the outcome. Perhaps making Deus Ex an online game with chapters being released each month could help solve that problem? I would certainly subscribe.

6. Setting. Please keep the game in a real-world setting with real locations like the original. That was one of the best pieces of flavor in the whole game!

7. Audio. I can't remember the music from the second game. I couldn't sit through it enough for the music to stick in my head. But the first game's music was amazing from beginning to end. It set the atmosphere and did an excellent job at that.

9. Dialogue. While I hate dialogue limited by choices, it's a limitation of computer games that I have to accept. But, in the original game, the choices were pretty decent and some of the non-choice dialogue was great! There was some really excellent trash talking in there. I loved it all the way through the game. Keep those nice little touches. They really help take the game from good to great!

10. Keyboard and Mouse. I understand if you have to release the game on one platform only and if that platform has to be a game console, so be it. But please make sure you include the ability to use a keyboard and mouse on that console. It should be as fully functional as the keyboard and mouse were in the original game. I do not own a console, but if the game is as good as the original Deus Ex, I will buy one and a keyboard and mouse for it to play the game.

All in all, I loved the original, hated the second. I hope the third will be much more like the original. I understand the need to upgrade the graphics, but it's not necessary. Using a new game engine could really open up the possibilities of what can and cannot be done. I'd like to see some of that, but really, the main thing that drew me in and made me love Deus Ex was the story and game play, not the graphics. Please keep the story as rich as the first game and I think everyone will be at least somewhat happy with the next release.

Techguy
29th Nov 2007, 00:45
Wishful thinking, random thoughts on DX3...


Created and designed primarily for PC, ported to consoles later. (most Deus Ex fans are PC gamers, DX:IW doubtfully generated much revenue on the orignal Xbox, let alone a cult following as it's predecessor did on PC)
60+ hours of RPG gameplay.
A direct copy (with minor improvements) of the original DX1 user interface, menu system etc.
A direct copy of the PC keyboard/mouse controls from DX1.
"Choose your own adventure" type gameplay with "no turning back" choices and consequence of actions.
Above all else a damn good story, one that I would enjoy reading outside of a video game setting. Whoever is considered the "Steven King equivalent" of speculative fiction writers should be involved with this game.

eightbits
29th Nov 2007, 05:13
I may not have been clear in my eloquent (ahem) ramblings about augs in my previous post. Another poster suggested passive augs could solve that problem but I am not 100% sure of that. I would still use active augs if they were needed. Some scenarios to consider:

- In the original game, I could take out a heavy military bot with a single LAM with my skill for throwing that LAM in an "Untrained" state. So, why bother upgrading the skill or using any augs to take out the bot? I always had plenty of LAMs or even EMP grenades so it was never really an issue. Personally, I'd like to see heavy military bots be so powerful that for non-augmented humans to take it out in combat, it would require a platoon to a company of special forces caliber troops in a highly coordinated assault utilizing the latest weaponry. Even then, they would probably take severe casualties. Now if I'm going to take that bot on by myself, the augmentations become my only option of taking it out. Without them, I can pretty much assume I'll be dead.

- Overcoming obstacles was easy in the game without augs. I used the running/jumping aug to make them easier, but all of them could be overcome by moving some crates around. Takes a little more time, but not much. Sometimes, the crates were so easy to move around, I would do that because it was as easy or easier than using the aug! Some (not many) obstacles should be impossible to overcome without augs.

- Security systems were all easily bypassed by the player simply playing the game. Some required a little skill, but even a "Trained" skill level in computers, electronics, and lockpicking could get you through the game with minimal hassle. Why would any joe schmoe on the street be able to get "trained" and hack into even the toughest security in places where the security clearances names alone are top secret? Perhaps an aug for interfacing a computer could be required to bypass these security systems? Maybe the aug coupled with skills AND an appropriate piece of hardware you find in-game could be required? A little bit of a borrow from Gibson with security systems fighting back and doing real damage to you while you're hacking them could solve this. Something along these lines could be done for the electronic and mechanical security systems too.

One way to test out whether the augs are balanced correctly or not is to put the area you are testing into multiplayer mode. Have all the NPCs controlled by real people with the same interface as the PC. The NPCs can follow their normal scripts until the player playing them takes over. The NPC player only takes control once he has seen the PC or seen some sign of his handiwork (explosion, dead body, etc...) The UI for the NPC is locked until this in-game trigger occurs. Then, the NPC players can choose to open the NPC's UI and play that NPC's role to take out the PC. The NPCs have no augs but do have the appropriate weaponry and skills for their role. If the PC's augs are not used, the PC doesn't stand a chance. The NPC players should have a tough fight on their hands if augs are used.

These are just some ideas and there are many more, but augs really need to be required to complete the game and upgrades should be such a useful piece of an aug that they are the most treasured find in the game. While I enjoyed finding the augs and upgrades in the original, it was not the thrill it could/should have been.

Another random idea is to make the tripwire lasers invisible without some hardware (aerosol-based powder, for instance) or augs to see them. There could be other signs, like *little* holes in the wall that will show up only if you look closely enough. This entire mechanic can be scaled for the difficulty the player chooses when he starts the game.

Yet another random idea in relation to the bots/augs bit above, I would like to see the ability to recruit partners in game who can fight along side me. Even if they are a trivial addition or just fodder, it could still add a lot to the game and make me feel like the people I'm trying to help really want HELP and not someone to do everything for them so they can kick back and armchair quarterback the whole time. It shouldn't happen often, but it should happen at least once or twice in the game.

Techguy has the right idea. Hell, Eidos is missing the boat in not putting out books or comics of their games. I would definitely buy a Deus Ex comic or book that recounts the story I just played.

piratecop
29th Nov 2007, 13:17
Bring Back Zyme

Dave W
29th Nov 2007, 15:50
Wishful thinking, random thoughts on DX3...


Created and designed primarily for PC, ported to consoles later. (most Deus Ex fans are PC gamers, DX:IW doubtfully generated much revenue on the orignal Xbox, let alone a cult following as it's predecessor did on PC)
60+ hours of RPG gameplay.

Good luck. PC sales are small compared to console sales - 20% or so of Bioshock's were PC, the rest were on the 360. Who do you think Eidos will care more about satisfying? Not that it can't do both with a good balance, but telling them to focus on the PC more than the consoles is like telling them to shoot themselves in the foot.

And considering how detailed the Deus Ex world needs to be (we're talking FPS environments, not big open terrain maps) 60 hours of gameplay would be impossible. Matching the original game's length would be hard enough.

Techguy
29th Nov 2007, 23:57
Good luck. PC sales are small compared to console sales - 20% or so of Bioshock's were PC, the rest were on the 360. Who do you think Eidos will care more about satisfying? Not that it can't do both with a good balance, but telling them to focus on the PC more than the consoles is like telling them to shoot themselves in the foot.

And considering how detailed the Deus Ex world needs to be (we're talking FPS environments, not big open terrain maps) 60 hours of gameplay would be impossible. Matching the original game's length would be hard enough.

As I said, wishful thinking :)

However, I refuse to agree with your statement that it's impossible. S.t.a.l.k.e.r. and The Witcher are two games which come to mind that show it is not impossible. Both of which from "low-key" dev studio's that I doubt had anywhere near the bankroll backing of Eidos, except maybe Atari with the Witcher, but I hear Atari isn't doing all that well these days regardless.

Let's also not forget Daikatana and John Romero's Ion Storm offices... lol, how much money did Eidos dump into them and look what us gamers ended up with... Point is, Eidos seems to be willing to take risks, or at least they used to. Maybe they will again :)

Dave W
30th Nov 2007, 01:01
The clue is in the part where I said "we're talking FPS environments, not big open terrain maps". Stalker was a big, open, terrain map. It had buildings in between of course, but a large outdoor environment is far easier to stretch out than a confined FPS like Deus Ex.

And anyway, Stalker was announced back in 2001. And it was released in 2007. The planned release for DX3 is 2009. See the problem? :)

Techguy
30th Nov 2007, 03:03
And it was released in 2007. The planned release for DX3 is 2009. See the problem? :)

True, that could always change though, being they are still early in development. I wonder what engine they're planning to use.

I also really hope the music is as good as the first - there's a lofty goal for ya hehe.. talk about dorky though, my old co-workers and I used to play the dx soundtrack disc at the office :) I can't say that about any other game soundtrack!

guardian130270
30th Nov 2007, 07:03
Lots of good comments being posted. To comment on a few:

Graphics: It's nice to see I'm not the only one to think that graphics have been given too much importance in the video game market. Yes visuals are important, that's a no brainer. However, when graphics are used as a crutch to replace story and good gameplay (or used to distract from a lack of said elements)... Well, that's just a bad thing.

Skills: The progressive skill idea has merit. My only concern with that is ignoring a skill for too long and then discovering you need it late in the game and just are not up to snuff to continue. However, that being said...

Skill & Mod Importance: None of the skills or mods were ever required to complete the game. What they did give though were options and the freedom to do things differently (and more easily in some cases). A high demolitions skill simply allowed you to disarm grenades easily (and prompt fewer reloads from a mistake). High computer skills allowed you to take your time in systems and have fun taking over weapon turrets, etc. Certain Mods allowed you to go places you normally wouldn't have been able to reach (Go Go Run Jump Mod!). In the end the ability to try different routes and tactics through the game played a LARGE part in its replayabilty.

Story Choices: As I have said before, what annoyed me the most about DX1 was not the lack of story options but the ILLUSION of choices. This was made even worse in DX2 with way too many choices and finding out that in the end the choices you made really only determined what shade of brown the crap was. If DX3 has a one track story then fine. Otherwise they could take a page from the Fallout (the closest thing to a true RPG yet) and Star Wars: Knights/Old Republic games. A 'karma' style system that basically determines sidequests and NPC reactions while leaving the main story path clear.

Interface: Another unanimous voice for the DX1 style inventory and interface. I have seen way too many console games with multi-layered windowed info boxes, so game developers should be able to move away from 'dumbed down' inventory systems. I never did understand why DX2 had the HUD in the middle of the damn screen.

Anyway, keep the thoughts coming.

Dave W
30th Nov 2007, 08:37
True, that could always change though, being they are still early in development. I wonder what engine they're planning to use.

I also really hope the music is as good as the first - there's a lofty goal for ya hehe.. talk about dorky though, my old co-workers and I used to play the dx soundtrack disc at the office :) I can't say that about any other game soundtrack!


Everyone's throwing Unreal Engine 3 around, but the only reason Ion Storm used it is because the team was used to it. They could go with lots of engines, to be honest - but I'd say it's between UE3 or Source.

And Unreal had an awesome soundtrack too. I would hope they get someone as good as/or Alex Brandon in to do the soundtrack, and it's similar to the music in the other two games.

Demilitarized
6th Dec 2007, 19:05
What is this mantling of which you speak?
You could climb things that were too high to jump onto. It was quite useful.

I believe that multiple pilots improved the game. you could pay for a better insertion point, or save money which would make you work harder.

The auto selection of multi-tools was one streamlining feature of which I approved. I would actually like lockpicks to be included as well.

Also, its not important but talking robots are cool. Spiderbombs are also cool.

Kneo24
6th Dec 2007, 21:40
Just my personal opinion, but one thread for what ideas to keep and toss seems like a cluster**** to me. Why not create seperate threads, one for ideas to keep, and one for ideas to not keep? Since the development team is looking for constructive criticism, this seems like it would make their work easier to go polling for how people felt about the first two. i.e. "X number said they liked this feature, X said they didn't like this feature."

IceBallz
7th Dec 2007, 15:28
The clue is in the part where I said "we're talking FPS environments, not big open terrain maps". Stalker was a big, open, terrain map. It had buildings in between of course, but a large outdoor environment is far easier to stretch out than a confined FPS like Deus Ex.

And anyway, Stalker was announced back in 2001. And it was released in 2007. The planned release for DX3 is 2009. See the problem? :)

But was not the Stalker dev team much smaller and less experienced? Now we have 80 people working on Deus Ex 3. With many new devs, not so good. But I guess there is the same amount of old devs in the Deus Ex 3 dev team that Stalker had in whole team of less experienced. So they should make it faster and becurse they have a game engine already.

StormFront
7th Dec 2007, 17:21
But was not the Stalker dev team much smaller and less experienced? Now we have 80 people working on Deus Ex 3. With many new devs, not so good. But I guess there is the same amount of old devs in the Deus Ex 3 dev team that Stalker had in whole team of less experienced. So they should make it faster and becurse they have a game engine already.

You really don't make sense at all. It is simply idiotic to compare STALKER to any other game around and if you knew anything at all about the development of that game and the team behind it you would know why.

DX3 will simply not have open environments: It would not make sense. Open environment maps simply would not fit DX style gameplay. We are looking at a high-tech, futuristic environment, most likely an highly urbanised environment. Open spaces are not going to figure.

Oh and talking about the amount of people involved in making DX3 when you have no evidence at all of this is just inane.

I don't understand why people are continuing to try and talk authoritatively about how/why/when/whence this game will be developed when they have no insight or understanding as to how games are made. (Not talking about everyone here - there are plenty if informed voices here but the ignorant are starting to grate...)

IceBallz
8th Dec 2007, 13:43
You really don't make sense at all. It is simply idiotic to compare STALKER to any other game around and if you knew anything at all about the development of that game and the team behind it you would know why.

DX3 will simply not have open environments: It would not make sense. Open environment maps simply would not fit DX style gameplay. We are looking at a high-tech, futuristic environment, most likely an highly urbanised environment. Open spaces are not going to figure.

Oh and talking about the amount of people involved in making DX3 when you have no evidence at all of this is just inane.

I don't understand why people are continuing to try and talk authoritatively about how/why/when/whence this game will be developed when they have no insight or understanding as to how games are made. (Not talking about everyone here - there are plenty if informed voices here but the ignorant are starting to grate...)

It actually standing on Eidos own homepage. That they going for 80 dev teams and 24-months dev time on all game dev times. Just to give us high quality games and 2 quality games every year will be released, at least.

StormFront
8th Dec 2007, 13:47
It actually standing on Eidos own homepage. That they going for 80 dev teams and 24-months dev time on all game dev times. Just to give us high quality games and 2 quality games every year will be released, at least.

I think you are missunderstanding Montreal's site. The only thing that they state is that they will be enforcing smaller teams (below 80 heads) and they will be taking at least 2 years to develop each game (ie they are sick of the rush jobs that have become prevelant now.).

Again you are confused as to how game development works and what a normal sized team would be....

Boiny Bunny
11th Dec 2007, 10:31
Hi all! Just signed up here, the second after hearing this game was coming!

Deus Ex 1 was and still is my favorite game of all time. Even games coming out right now that are talked about alot (take Mass Effect for an example) don't match up to Deus Ex in so many ways.

I found Deus Ex 2 to be incredibly generic, full of bugs and annoyances that shouldn't have been there, and it had an INCREDIBLY shallow plot compared to the first!

I mean, Deus Ex 1 had one of the deepest and most in depth plots I've ever seen! Every single time I play through I find something new still! I couldn't believe it on my 3rd playthrough or something when I found Lucius DeBeers and Morpheus in Everett's apartment - I'd somehow missed them before!

But Deus Ex had so much more than that. Here are the things I'd like to see in Deus Ex 3:

1) Make the game LONG, WAY longer than your standard shooter. I want to see standard RPG (as in 30 hours +) length here, that's how long Deus Ex 1 took me, and that was made years ago.

2) Do NOT whatEVER you do bother with multiplayer!!! So many great companies completely screw over games with great potential by turning all of their attention to multiplayer!

Ok now the more important things:

3) Bring back the interesting characters. In Deus Ex, it felt like practically every single character that you met had their own story (Like the Rentons, the bartender in Hells Kitchen, half the damned staff in UNATCO, a ton of people in Hong Kong etc.). While the player COULD play through the game and ignore these people, talking to them and finding out how they fitted into the plot/what happened to them over the course of the game was amazing.

These people weren't just generic characters that appeared in one set location for the whole game with one set of dialogue options, they felt like living breathing characters. Why? Well for starters, they all changed as the game moved on. They gave you new quests, told you more about their pasts, etc.

The amount of detail put into so many of the characters, and just little bits about them in Deus Ex was AMAZING. I'd love to see this kind of detail in Deus Ex 3, so that we feel like we're in a living breathing world, instead of a generic world where everybody can only ever say one thing.


4) Ok so in my books it would be practically impossible to top the original's plot, but I'd really like to see a return to the Cloak and Dagger stuff. In Deus Ex 2, it sure didn't feel like an Invisible War to me - every faction was constantly contacting me and trying to incite me into doing their bidding. I loved not knowing WHO the badguy was in Deus Ex, not EVER knowing who to trust. Every time I went around a corner, another revelation. Keeping the player in a spot where they constantly have to think about who they should be helping and for what reasons is a very good thing.

Ok now for some more technical stuff. The main point of these points is basically to say, DO NOT SIMPLIFY EVERY ASPECT OF THE HUD AND INVENTORY MANAGEMENT!

5) Bring back Deus Ex's inventory system. Squares (i.e. a finite amount of 'space') and possibly a weight limit. Do not EVER use an incredibly generic 'item' limit, where I can carry 5 different types of candy, or 5 rocket launchers, but not both!

Also, make sure we can still get drunk, smoke cigarettes, eat candy, etc. And that there are still fun items like LAMs!

6) Bring back the more complicated health system. It was awesome to be able to get my legs blown off, etc. Again, don't simplify! On that note, it may be possible to have a slightly more complicated energy system for your augmentation usage?

7) GET RID OF THE HORRIBLE AMMO SYSTEM FROM DEUS EX 2!!! For ammo, go back to Deus Ex style, having multiple types of rounds for different purposes for most guns. Make it plentiful too!

8) Bring back skills from Deus Ex 1. Add some new cool ones, cut Swimming.

9) I'm kinda going out on a limb here and assuming that we're getting a prequel in which we'll be playing Paul Denton - but that's not too important for this point I guess. Don't make a mockery of characters that we've come to love from the 1st/(2nd) game(s)! JC Denton was completely ruined in Deus Ex 2! I manage to cope with this by pretending that Deus Ex 2 doesn't exist - that it's plot NEVER EVER happened!

10) Bring back the people who did the original's music. The 2nd one had one of the worst game soundtracks I've EVER heard! It was WAY too quiet, dark, and generally incredibly boring.

11) MUST HAVE LOCATION: New York City. Really! Show us around the slums and the upper districts. If we're playing Paul, maybe bring us back to UNATCO for a true nostalgic feeling!!!

12) Let us kill non essential characters - and pull guns in bars. If I want to go into a bar and kill everybody except the invincible pilot who will later ferry me around the game, LET ME! I loved the fact that in the original you could kill people that you didn't like, and sometimes you would hear comments about it later on (like about that bartender for example).

13) One thing that could certainly be fixed from the original and the second game is the weapon balance. I always found that the starting pistol was my favorite weapon in Deus Ex.

14) Have consequences for EVERYTHING that you can! I loved the fact that even killing the terrorists on Liberty Island instead of knocking them out makes Paul think less of you, but the UNATCO requisition officer thinks more of you!

15) If you're going to have an energy sword weapon (please?), make sure it looks as cool as the Dragon's Tooth did in Deus Ex, and does as much damage. The swords in Deus Ex 2 looked TERRIBLE, and did so little damage that I refused to carry them around - even when I found the 'supposed' Dragon's Tooth sword.

16) Bring back the more complicated system of breaking into things. I want to see Keypads (where you can FIND keycodes in datacubes if you look around carefully like the Original), things for multitools, and things for lockpicking - ALL seperate items from one another like the first game.

17) On that point, bring back multiple ways to do each area. When I say multiple, I mean 5 or so. One to cater for each style of player, from the type that may like to cloak themselves and place mines around to trap the enemy guards into gruesome deaths, to the player who wants to barge in the front door with a flame thrower and a rocket launcher, to the player who would rather hack the turrets to shoot the guards, or set off an alarm in a different sector so that they can get into the one they are in front of.

Don't force combat in all scenarios - let the player get around it in clever ways and reward them for doing it.

18) Make sure that each location is awesome. Don't let us go to a place because it sounds cool (say Antarctica for example), and then give it attrocious gameplay and plot.

I really do want to see a diverse range of places to go in the game, especially the opportunity to revisit some important areas from the first game (NYC hint hint, maybe Hong Kong?), but it's important that each of them has a non-hostile-ISH area with lots of people that want me to do things for them (i.e. sidequests). Even the original game began to descend into pure shooter territory towards the very end of the game - but somehow STILL managed to keep it interesting!

19) To me this is one of the most important points. Let us explore. Put in all sorts of secret areas and easter eggs that are hard to find. Does anybody remember say this?

I made the way to the roof of Maggie Chow's apartment. After assassinating her with my trusty rocket launcher, I noticed a few other buildings in the distance. I jumped around a bit, and made a large fall, ending up on a tiny ledge attached to a billboard WAY up in the air, where I found a small stash of goodies, before dropping down carefully.

Another one, anybody remember that chunk of half sunken highway full of baby karakens? Well hidden, full of goodies and some small plot insights, but alot of players probably never found it.

Putting in little things like this for us to explore, and of course lots of easter eggs, really 'fills' a game out!


Well that's all I can think of for now, I'll add more if I think of them later!

Hope a dev reads this thread and puts some of these ideas in!

:)

eightbits
11th Dec 2007, 10:59
I pretty much second the previous poster, except . . .

- definitely keep the swimming skill.

Can't remember if I posted (or if anyone posted this) before, but it would be a good idea to make the game modular. Let me buy the game with the initial installment. When the modules (aka chapters) come out, if the game is good and the story from the first one good, I'll continue to buy the future installments. As riveting as the first game was, I would have continued to buy installments of it as well, even (especially) if the included story was spread out over two or three chapters.

ThatDeadDude
11th Dec 2007, 14:41
Can't remember if I posted (or if anyone posted this) before, but it would be a good idea to make the game modular.
I disagree entirely. If I want to play a game of reasonable length, I'd rather play it all in one go, and if it leaves room for a sequel, so be it. The HL2 Episodes for example, have really caused me irritation, if only because the only reliable way to get Episode 2 is to buy all the other games again. And seeing as DLing off steam is not practical in this country, I can't even do the whole give my old licenses to someone else. The other problem is that if for whatever reason the later chapters are never released, it leaves the story far less concluded than it could otherwise have been.

eightbits
11th Dec 2007, 15:18
I understand, but I'm thinking more like a Neverwinter Nights type of module where the original is required, and you merely purchase an add-on. And I'm not saying the story should be cut short. There are many good places to have stopping points in most stories.

Let's understand a little bit about the whole point behind the Montreal Eidos studio. More developers per project, get it done quickly in high quality. Even with this model, I think we will have a hard time with the caliber of the original Deus Ex. However, if we get only the first of three installments with the others in development while we play, we'll be able to easily get the quality we want with the deadlines of the developers met without affecting their profit margin poorly. I think we all can agree that Deus Ex would have been worth the extra cost. I would have easily forked over $50.00 for the initial game plus an extra $20 - $30 per module for two more modules. It would have been completely worth it. I don't think we're going to see the length of play or size of environments we got form Deus Ex 1 if they don't do this as a series of modules. It would take too long in development to do it.

Plus, if it is made modularly, we can still have a complete story in the initial release and have side stories sold later. For instance, in the original, a module sold later could have been the ability to stay with UNATCO and finish the game that way. Perhaps another could have been to play Chad in a mini module or even to play Paul before JC came online. Maybe another could have been to play Simmons. I would LOVE that one!

Modular is definitely the way to go.

WhatsHisFace
11th Dec 2007, 15:23
I disagree entirely. If I want to play a game of reasonable length, I'd rather play it all in one go, and if it leaves room for a sequel, so be it. The HL2 Episodes for example, have really caused me irritation, if only because the only reliable way to get Episode 2 is to buy all the other games again. And seeing as DLing off steam is not practical in this country, I can't even do the whole give my old licenses to someone else. The other problem is that if for whatever reason the later chapters are never released, it leaves the story far less concluded than it could otherwise have been.

I also have to limitlessly disagree with getting a short game and then having to continually buy expansion packs. I'm just not doing it. Eidos Montreal's reputation is off to a bad start if their goal is to release a short game and then add to it later.

eightbits
11th Dec 2007, 15:50
OK ok. But I still want the game to be modular. Even if the initial story (per my last post) is made completely available in the initial release, I still want the thing to be modular so I can get more life out of the game by merely buying modules later.

WhatsHisFace
11th Dec 2007, 16:40
OK ok. But I still want the game to be modular. Even if the initial story (per my last post) is made completely available in the initial release, I still want the thing to be modular so I can get more life out of the game by merely buying modules later.
Why don't you just play through it again making different decisions, and let the team work on a great sequel?

Seriously, with 18-month-minimum dev-time, I don't want a mere expansion pack.

Laputin Man
11th Dec 2007, 18:01
I agree on most points, but the universal ammo should stay. You shouldn't be playing the game and be effectively unarmed because your ammo doesn't "match" your gun . . . it's silly.


No, you should. Why make things too easy for the player? Running out of ammo for a specific weapon can help push some of the other gameplay elements from the first game that many of us all know and love such as exploration, or having to mix things up to get past a situation... out of ammo for a specific gun, then use another weapon or find another way to get to your destination by sneaking or maybe hacking. That is. to me... what Deus Ex is about. Not about player convenience but about choice, exploration, and challenge.

Now in the first game, if you ran out of ammo for a gun. You could either switch to an alternate kind of ammo for that same gun... or use another gun. In DX2, if you ran out of ammo for any gun... you have no ammo at all for anything. So in the first example you have many choices of what weapon to use and how to tackle things... in the latter example you can only switch to melee basicly. Which sounds more silly to you? I think the universal ammo sounds silly. Also, the ammo system from the first game... it kind of helped in tieing that gameworld to our own. Helping me think that the story was pretty believable, in the second game... the idea of universal ammo was so absurd that it took me out of the immersiveness of the game.

Also, I would like them to brin back the "tetris" inventory system because it just worked much better. That and you got an idea of how large items where in game. Also, I didn't like how the combined and seperated some items in the game. I like the grenade/mine lams... I liked that you could use the same device in 2 different ways. On the opposite side, I didn't like that they combined the lock pick and the multi tool... so now if you have to get through a locked door and also a security system and you are limited to how many tools you can use... you're screwed. I liked when they were seperate and not just the difficulty of the lock/ system but the players skill also determined how many tools were used.

pKp
11th Dec 2007, 23:18
Grox was being ironic here :o

CarloGervasi
11th Dec 2007, 23:45
edit: I've reconsidered some things, check new post.

WhatsHisFace
12th Dec 2007, 01:30
Keep from Deus Ex
Split ammo, unified ammo kills the entire concept of a backup weapon. In Invisible War, if you ran out, you ran out period. 5-6 shots from a sniper rifle would deplete your ammo store that would have been 50-60 pistol shots. Just ridiculous, bad design.
I agree with you there. There's no point in carrying multiple guns if when one runs out of ammo, all other guns are completely out of ammo. Eventually I just used the sword all the time because I was afraid to use/waste the ammo I did have.


Near future setting, I have enough Star Trek-ish games out there, what I want is something set in a recognizable place and time but with a few extra gadgets, just like Deus Ex. That was a huge part of it's appeal to me. I don't need enclaves and space stations.
I agree to an endless power. Deus Ex felt like it was taking place at the end of our world. Recognizable areas had plummeted into dilapidation, people dressed in clothes that actually looked like clothes people would wear, and cities actually looked like cities, not the inside of a shopping mall as made from StarTrek set pieces.

(Not to say high-tech areas aren't acceptable. Just save high-tech for Laboratories and Secret Organizations, not some dude's apartment. However the tech should look mech-ish, not StarTrek.)


Toss from Deus Ex
The tetris inventory system. It's just a bother. If a gun takes up 4 spaces, and I have 4 free spaces, I shouldn't have to waste time rearranging crap to make sure the 4 spaces are all right next to each other.
Oddly, I kind of liked the Tetris system. You can either carry a ton of small items or have only a few huge weapons. It makes sense. JC Denton didn't have a choice of carrying ten different machine guns or ten small items. He could only carry so much overall mass. I don't know... I liked it better the old way.

eightbits
12th Dec 2007, 03:24
Keep from Deus Ex
Skills, but toss the fat. We don't need swimming skills if you're only giving us a few puddles here and there. Melee probably doesn't need to be a skill either, just have it be a function of whether or not you've got strength mods turned on or not.

I go 50/50 with you on this. Keep swimming. The problem isn't that swimming isn't a good skill to have, the problem is that there weren't enough areas to use it. Fix the problem, not the symptom. Keep swimming and put more water areas in the game. Like-wise, keep the melee combat skill and put less ammo in the game. I should HAVE to sneak up on people and use a knife to slit throats if I want to do a violent take down in every situation. In the original, I was never out of ammo. I was rarely even low on ammo for any given weapon. I should not be able to find so much ammo that I never have to use unarmed combat. And, in the one case in the game where all of your gear is taken from you, you should not be able to get it all back! You should get a maximum amount back,even if it is less than was taken from you. It's easy to redistribute some of your gear to troops and send them out to he field in a situation like this. Other scenarios include pickpockets taking some of your gear with a potential for you to see/hear/feel it happening.

To me, the important thing is the balance of the skill system. I should not be able to min-max my skills easily. The rest of the game needs to be balanced around the augs and skills so that no matter my situation, choosing an aug or skill to increase is a very difficult choice. Furthermore, if I get every available skill point and aug upgrade canister available in the game and level up my skills and augs evenly across the board, I should never be able to get more than 50% of their max ratings by then end of the game. That 50% is subject to debate of course, but you get the meaning.


Near future setting, I have enough Star Trek-ish games out there, what I want is something set in a recognizable place and time but with a few extra gadgets, just like Deus Ex. That was a huge part of it's appeal to me. I don't need enclaves and space stations.

I agree. Putting it in a real-world setting makes the events feel important to you. There is a built-in attachment to most players if they're in a real world environment.


Toss from Deus Ex
The tetris inventory system. It's just a bother. If a gun takes up 4 spaces, and I have 4 free spaces, I shouldn't have to waste time rearranging crap to make sure the 4 spaces are all right next to each other.

It looks like the option to the tetris management system that you want is a list with the picture in one column and it's units of inventory space in another. For instance:


Item Volume
Pistol 1
Sniper Rifle 4
Available Space 13

This detracts from the geometry of the items which I think is bad. The assault rifle takes 4 squares, but not the same 4 squares as the sniper rifle. It's acceptable, but I prefer the tetris system.

I think dropping this system is the wrong idea too. It needs to be enhanced, not dropped. I would like to see weapons be able to be rotated 90 degrees (even MORE Tetris-like.) It's a nice little and simple puzzle that is continuous throughout the game and is useful for giving the player a break every now and then from the plot's intensity without having to step away from the computer. I think we should keep the tetris-like system but add an auto arrange algorithm. It only bleeps at you when the auto arrange cannot find a way to move things around enough to fit. With the auto arrange feature, we also need a position lock. I should be able to tell an item to lock into a specific position in my inventory in case it matters to the way I use inventory.

To be honest, I never had inventory problems unless I was already full enough that the auto arrange or any other system would not have been able to help me. I would still have had to open the inventory management dialog to address the issue.

StormFront
12th Dec 2007, 10:15
I agree that the inventory system needs some consideration. Tetis systems are just dumb, illogical and immersion breaking. I am actually more swayed by IWs inventory.

Requesting that this game "not be too high tech" is quite without doubt the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

1) It's not your game, it's Eidos's and they'll do what they like.
2) Nanotech is a staple of the Deus Ex world so it HAS to be high tech. The first 2 games completely failed to show what impact full blown, commercial Nanotech would have on the world. The closest they came to demonstrating it was with the Arcology. Medicine would be potentially perfect (you can forget cancer), buildings would be fabricated not built so they can be vast and quick to construct, weapons would alter immeasurably (projectile weapons would be a nonsense in a world that employs nanotech).

DX 3 needs to up the technology of the world MASSIVELY if it is to be believable. Sure there was the collapse, but that would have been overcome with great speed. The only thing that would be an issue is dissemination of the techniology. If governments keep it for themselves then sure, the tech may not be everywhere, but if we are to play government agents then...
Cost, before anyone says it, would not be a factor. Once you have nanotech, you have nanotech. It's a self advancing science.

eightbits
12th Dec 2007, 12:40
StormFront, you're a weird one. Sometimes you post and you make perfect sense and other times you come off like you did here and I wonder if there are two different people using your account.

You are as wrong as wrong could be. It IS my game. That's why I like the original game so much. It makes a big impact on me. It draws me in. It is my little escape from reality. It can be yours too. But if it is merely some company's game that they're trying to sell me, it will fail. It has to be my game or it will suck. I think the company agrees or they would never consider any feedback. I think the developers love this game as much as we do and it's their game too. I don't think it belongs to the company. Only the profits from the sales belong to the company and that is as it should be.

No-one said to not make the thing hi-tech. We are just saying we want a down to earth setting. A city that doesn't exist in a future that looks like it's from 1000 years in the future is what we want to avoid. That's what Deus Ex2 looked like. We are talking about bringing it back to a near-future earth with the same places we can visit in the real world. The tech has nothing to do with it. We all want the tech. We all understand the nanotech aspect of the game. Really, we do.

I think the picture you paint of the setting of Deus Ex is a completely and totally unbelievable world at best and I would not be happy with it.

StormFront
12th Dec 2007, 13:04
StormFront, you're a weird one. Sometimes you post and you make perfect sense and other times you come off like you did here and I wonder if there are two different people using your account.

You are as wrong as wrong could be. It IS my game. That's why I like the original game so much. It makes a big impact on me. It draws me in. It is my little escape from reality. It can be yours too. But if it is merely some company's game that they're trying to sell me, it will fail. It has to be my game or it will suck. I think the company agrees or they would never consider any feedback. I think the developers love this game as much as we do and it's their game too. I don't think it belongs to the company. Only the profits from the sales belong to the company and that is as it should be.

No-one said to not make the thing hi-tech. We are just saying we want a down to earth setting. A city that doesn't exist in a future that looks like it's from 1000 years in the future is what we want to avoid. That's what Deus Ex2 looked like. We are talking about bringing it back to a near-future earth with the same places we can visit in the real world. The tech has nothing to do with it. We all want the tech. We all understand the nanotech aspect of the game. Really, we do.

I think the picture you paint of the setting of Deus Ex is a completely and totally unbelievable world at best and I would not be happy with it.



I think what you mean is that sometimes you agree with me and sometimes you don't ;) and that is fair enough.
However, it really isn't your game. You are a died-in-the-wool DX1 fan and they are not going to make that game or anything much like it as it will simply not sell enough copies. This is the trial-by-fire release for a multi-million dollar start up team who intend to sell truck loads of their games to the 360-crowd. You are not their audience mate, sorry.

As to the tech I still disagree. Nanotech and nerve splicing (augs) would change the world completely. The advances made in IW should be the tiniest tip of the iceberg. I am not saying we should not go to real world places (nothing is going to make them not exist) but the world around us should be very, very different from our own.

If NTech has been perfected (and it's a fairly binary thing - You can't have "some" Ntech: the development is likely to be exponential) and is released into the world then everything changes. Medicine becomes perfect, diseases are irradicated, death before old age becomes legend. Populations explode and the demand for food and power can now be met. Arcologies/mega-cities-whatever you wish to call them, become a likely truth as land becomes the only currency. As the building materials become more exoctic so do the sizes and shapes of the buildings. The world would look VERY different.

All this depends on when this game is set, on what ending to IW they have followed on from (assuming they have) and what state the world is in. However, a lot would ahve had to go wrong before the tech used to build the 2nd generations dentons could be taken from the world.

We'll see, I guess, in 12 months time when details start to emerge.... but I will bet whatever anyone asks me to that DX3 will not resemble the original in any noticable way.

Tyrant Worm
12th Dec 2007, 19:48
I pretty much second the previous poster, except . . .

- definitely keep the swimming skill.

Can't remember if I posted (or if anyone posted this) before, but it would be a good idea to make the game modular. Let me buy the game with the initial installment. When the modules (aka chapters) come out, if the game is good and the story from the first one good, I'll continue to buy the future installments. As riveting as the first game was, I would have continued to buy installments of it as well, even (especially) if the included story was spread out over two or three chapters.


I absolutely refuse to buy episodic content. The only reason I played HL2E2 was because it came out w/ HL2 on the 360. I wouldn't have gotten it otherwise, no matter how much I enjoyed playing HL2.

eightbits
12th Dec 2007, 20:38
I absolutely refuse to buy episodic content.
That's good because I am not a fan of doing that either and it should be obvious that's not what I'm talking about. I don't want a series of episodes that are tied together only by the fact that they are played by the same engine and set in the same setting. I want a continuous story where episode 2 assumes and even requires the player to have played episode 1 to get full enjoyment.

A lot of people bought tickets to all three Lord of the Rings movies and many of them bought all three movies on DVD. The model works just fine.

I think you're missing the big picture here. I don't want to spend $50.00 on a game then $50.00 on it's sequel story-wise. For instance, Why spend $50.00 on Half Life and then $50.00 on Half Life 2? We spend it because the studios have to recover the costs of implementing a new game engine with new technology to keep up with the competition. I don't want to wait 3 to 5 years for a sequel with a new engine and different UI. I want the story. I want the sequel in 1 year with the current engine. In 3 to 5 years, the game gets revamped with a new engine and I spend the $50.00 again.

I want to spend the $50.00 one time and then $30.00 per sequel. I can't do this and this is why I only buy one or two games a year. If they were cheaper, I would buy more. I would easily buy two or three sequels a year in addition to the $50.00 games I already buy. More money for the studios and more game time for me. Everyone wins.

StormFront
12th Dec 2007, 22:48
Nah, I'm down with Tyrant Worm here. Episodic content is crap and has yet to prove useful. The only games to be delivered in this form are Half LIfe 2 which is just bloody dire and Sam & Max (which I have to admit to not playing).

Episodic content is simply not shaping up to be what it could and even if it did, I'd still not want it....

eightbits
13th Dec 2007, 00:11
Again, I'm not talking about episodic content. I'm talking about a single fluid and complete story released in pieces. Definitely NOT episodic. If you insist on calling this type of content episodic, then you are buying episodic content when you buy Deus Ex, Deus Ex 2, and Deus Ex 3. If you have purchased Deus Ex and Deus Ex 2, you have already done this. I'm just saying that the engine should be modular so you can release these pieces more cheaply and quickly where Deus Ex and Deus Ex 2 don't merely represent two pieces of the story, but core technology upgrades, each with a complete piece of the story with future pieces requiring the latest core.

One of the nice things about this model is that it is between conventional game distribution and subscription-based online distribution (which is the most profitable model to date but doesn't really fit Deus Ex in my opinion.) I don't want to pay $15.00/month to play a game. But I wouldn't mind buying a game core and when I'm ready for the next piece, pay for it at a cheaper price than the core.

At least wrap your head around it if you're going to comment on it.

Boiny Bunny
13th Dec 2007, 12:20
Stormfront - just a quick comment about 'futuristic' idea. If you watch the teaser trailer frame by frame you'll see some interesting images. One of which is a man's hand dropping a vote into a ballot box marked
'Biopolitic 2027' - the original Deus Ex occurred in 2052.

Deus Ex: Invisible War occurred roughly in 2072 then, and I would venture to guess that's as far into the future as we'll see the world.

Since Deus Ex 3 is most likely going to be prequel (as indicated by that frame), and IF in fact the game is going to be set around 2027, I would expect to see a fairly normal looking Earth.

Even the world of the Original Deus Ex looked fairly like Earth does today - just 'slightly' more futuristic in some of the door panels, etc.


On the ammo thing, I think the idea of 'universal' ammo is retarted, and compeltely unrealistic.

If you run out of assault rifle ammo, that is likely to mean one of two things:

1) You've been wasting FAR too much ammunition per kill
or
2) There are very few guards carrying assault rifles - suggesting that a different weapon might be more appropriate to take them down with


BUT even those reasons aside, the point of having limited ammunition for each type of weapon is to encourage strategy.

Think about it.

In Deus Ex, if I run out of assault rifle ammo then I realise that I can't just charge in the front door with only my crap pistol and shoot everybody, and instead I am forced to sneak in the sewer entrance or find a point of elevation and pick em off with my sniper rifle.

In Deus Ex: Invisible War, if I run out of assault rifle ammo, I am automatically forced to run in the front door equipped with NOTHING except my melee weapon (and they all sucked in IW).

You may 'think' that universal ammo gives you more choice - but in point of fact it gives you less, and encourages you to just stick to one weapon/style of play for the entire game.


Also, as for the swimming thing, I think that would have been better off as a mod alone. Why on Earth would I want to swim faster, if I could seriously improve my accuracy with a Sniper Rifle, or damage with my trusty Dragon's Tooth sword?

It might be an idea to keep combat skills seperate from non-combat skills.

In Deus Ex, the swimming skill was basically useless. All the long swimming parts in the game could be gotten across by using a medpack or two, or using a rebreather. The skill itself was only useful in 1-2 parts of the game.

While adding more swimming may initially seem like a good idea, how much water would they have to add to make the skill as useful as an excellent combat skill?

I don't know if I'd want to see that much water in a video game!


Another thought I just had - it would be really cool if you could get some kind of 'persuade' or 'charisma' skill to juice extra rewards and info out of contacts, etc.

This skill was always my favorite in games like KOTOR.

StormFront
13th Dec 2007, 12:31
@Bunny

Gotta disagree with you utterly. MOST of the images in the trailer are historic. I think it is clear they are showing the chain of events that leads up to the game, not what goes on in the game. Sure the ballot box has a date on it but in order for Ntech mods to have ever taken place there will have been voting like this in the worlds history. The video is tryig to build up a "what went on to bring us here" story, nothing more. The entire point of the imagery (IMHO) of a fetus is a new beginning or "the next stage", therefore the images show previous events

As for limiting ammo to encourage strategy: Total bunk. Limiting ammo is limiting your choice and is therefore a bad game design decision. DX games are supposed to be about you playing it how you want. Impossing daffy restrictions makes me play it the way the developers want. This has always been an issue with the original DX. You are this hard-ass super soldier sent out into combat yet they fail to give you any ammo? WTF? To make matters worse, when you return to your base you still are not allowed to pick any more up, or at least not in any quantity. Ammo should be freely available at ALL times else the designer simply has run out of ideas and has resorted to forcing me down a set path

eightbits
13th Dec 2007, 13:53
It seems that swimming was completely misunderstood in the game. First, swimming didn't just make you swim faster. You also got to hold your breath longer. This makes places like Hong Kong VERY fun instead of resource intensive. I wish there were more underwater in HK, but as it was, it was OK and was still made fun by the skill. The options were to use a LOT of resources like having a rebreather on you all the time (taking inventory space) or using med kits all the time, or using an aug slot. Unfortunately, the swim skill was mishandled in the game. For instance, how many people took the aug instead of the skill? There were always very easily attained rebreathers, and most of the time, the amount of water you were in didn't require an increase of the skill. If it did, med kits could take care of you. So the swim skill was handled poorly. It's a simple game mechanic issue. These measures can make the swim skill useful again:

1. no aug to enhance swimming
2. med kits don't take care of your suffocation (they heal damage, but you still soffucate)
3. rebreathers should be more expensive and harder to come by.
4. make modern tech like scuba gear available, but that means not being able to get through small holes or being very slow.

These things all make sense anyway. I think the problem everyone has with the swim skill has nothing to do with the swim skill itself, but with the rest of the game and how it shoves the swim skill into a corner.

We DID see that much water in the original in HK and the sub base. But, as I discussed above, we don't need to add water to make the skill useful, but change the way the skill interacts with other game mechanics for balance.

I agree that I never ran out of ammo and if you did, you were not playing the game very well.

I also think there was WAY too much ammo available in the original game. The fact that I could never run out was just too damn much. You realize this means I was carrying about 300 rounds of 7.62mm ammo which is 10 clips of ammo (fewer if you used the weapon mods.) Additionally, I carried about 10 clips of 10mm ammo, a LOT of shotgun ammo (two types actually), some grenades for my assault rifle and all this in addition to my inventory which commonly included 15 medkits, 25 bio cells, 2 pistols, an assault rifle, a sniper file, an automatic shotgun, a hazmat suit, and more. Understand the problem here? Keep in mind that 7.62mm rounds are what the AK-47 shoots today. Can you imagine seeing someone carry 9 clips of that plus the rifle, and still carry 10 clips for a pistol? Don't you see where this is already ridiculous? Especially if you're trying to be covert? I don't understand how people didn't just shoot me on site for carrying all that crap. It's not like I could hide it! A standard US infantryman carries about 300 rounds of M16 ammo (5.56mm) and a few grenades. Have you ever seen what that looks like? You're not going to conceal the load carried in Deus Ex from ammo alone much less the rest of the gear and look even remotely close to normal.

No, the problem is that the ammo carrying limit in the original game was already munchkined out for the nintendo generation. The limit to carry ammo needs to be lower. The issue isn't that you didn't get enough ammo. I was always unable to pick up most ammo. It was too plentiful. But the choices that need to be made should be forced by a lower ammo carrying limit. Your statement that reducing the output of ammo to you is a limitation of the game designer is preposterous at best.

Xcom
13th Dec 2007, 19:15
Again, I'm not talking about episodic content. I'm talking about a single fluid and complete story released in pieces.

Unless you propose they turn DX into some kind of shallow soap opera, how is it any better than releasing complete story at once? :scratch:


I wouldn't mind buying a game core and when I'm ready for the next piece, pay for it at a cheaper price than the core.

Assuming you'd want to see how the story (arc) ends, it looks to me that in the long run, you'll be paying much more for all the pieces combined (as apposed to just one complete package).

gamer0004
13th Dec 2007, 19:20
I hink the swimming skill was just fine. Never used rebreathers because they were too expensive (and you want them to be even moe expensive?). Swimming aug was fine too, the point of augs is to add functionality to your body. As you can't get a high skill in everything, you'll have to choose and you can install some augs if you really want them.
I do agree that you shouldn't be able swim on when you're out of breath.

eightbits
13th Dec 2007, 21:24
how is it any better than releasing complete story at once? :scratch:

You missed part of an earlier post of mine. I said that you will get more timely and higher quality releases of the story than if you have to wait for a new engine to be developer for every piece.


Assuming you'd want to see how the story (arc) ends, it looks to me that in the long run, you'll be paying much more for all the pieces combined (as opposed to just one complete package).

Wrong. In the end, instead of 20 hours of gaming per $50.00, I will have gotten 100 hours of gaming for $170 or 20 hours of gaming per $34.00.

Xcom
13th Dec 2007, 23:43
You missed part of an earlier post of mine. I said that you will get more timely and higher quality releases of the story than if you have to wait for a new engine to be developer for every piece.

What makes you think you'll get higher quality by using cheap and quick approach? Good stories, characters, levels -- basically everything takes time to design and create. There is an article at gamasutra (I believe it's Warren Spector's revelations) that describes how much prep work went into the making of Deus Ex.

Secondly, I know a game that I think follows your idea. It's an adventure called The Longest Journey. It had a sequel Dreamfall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamfall) which ended with a terrible cliffhanger (that has upset many fans). The devs said that the story isn't finished and that they'll be releasing Dreamfall Chapters on-line and in episodic format to continue with the story. It's been 2 years since Dreamfall, and the Chapters are apparently nowhere near completion. Since I liked that game, I was expecting continuation soon, but unfortunately, your "timely release" theory doesn't apply to Funcom even though TLJ is far more linear than DX.


In the end, instead of 20 hours of gaming per $50.00, I will have gotten 100 hours of gaming for $170 or 20 hours of gaming per $34.00.

I'm sorry but for some reason this reminded me of South Park episode about WalMart where Cartman buys 3 DVDs of Time Cop to "save" money. :D

Anyways, paying for games per hour (of gaming) just doesn't sound right to me. Maybe for some kind of MMORPG - I don't know, but DX? If they plan to create a single story with 100 hours of gameplay (which I don't think will be the case anyhow), I still don't see why it shouldn't be released in one piece for normal price.

WhatsHisFace
14th Dec 2007, 00:27
I will never, ever advocate "episodic" gaming. The Half-Life "episodes" are merely expansion packs. "Yearly" isn't "episodic".

As long as there are traditional release games, I will not buy an "episodic" product.

eightbits
14th Dec 2007, 13:02
Guys, go look up the word "episodic". It doesn't mean what you think it means.

Xcom, I appreciate your example, but like any model, the timed release of pieces of the story can be screwed up. While I'm willing to give the devs a chance to show their mettle, I do not have high hopes for a good release because Deus Ex was so damn good. It's basically the "you can't do better than the best" mentality. Because the story is what made the original so much more than just another computer game, I would rather see them take their time to get the story right than to try to cram as much content in as they can in a short time to meat a release deadline. Per your comment on the dev time of the original Deus Ex, I'm saying that the same amount of effort and time should go into this game, including a long deadline to get the story right and the play-testing for quality done.

The fact this is being produced by a for-profit organization means we will not see a long-term deadline. The nature of any development project is always to have a short deadline set by the higher-ups and a demand to push the deadline back by the developers. The problem is that the short deadlines are never realistic, so the developers who want to release the best product possible usually cannot and have to settle for compromises. We did not see that in Deus Ex, but I doubt the third installment will get away with it now that it's an established franchise. The best way to get the content out in a way that doesn't compromise the story and quality of the content will be to appease upper management with a short release date of an initial release, but to still give the consumers the full content over time. It's a difficult thing to do, but I have more faith in that model than I do a rushed release. I believe that trying to develop a game on the caliber of Deus Ex in only two years is asking for the impossible.

And Xcom, this is not a cheap and quick approach. The cheap and quick approach is exactly the opposite, the one I'd like to see avoided. The cheap and quick approach is already being taken, with a two year dev cycle and using the engine they've chosen. That is exactly the quick and cheap approach. The engine may work for this game. Only time will tell. But it is a sign that quick and cheap is their mode of operation right now and I'd like to see quick removed from the equation with a long drawn out series of releases.

The Southpark reference is funny, but I'm sure you understand that's exactly not applicable here.

I do not advocate paying for gaming per unit time. One of the big pieces of feedback I've seen on this forum has been that the game should be 50 - 60 hours or longer in terms of play time. Without a timed release of additional content, that's not going to happen without destroying the quality of the game. The mere idea of releasing 100 hours of Deus Ex-quality gaming in a story-based RPG after only two years of dev for the low low price of a single $50.00 game on a store shelf is ridiculously retarded.

I'm not so sure a single one of you has really understood what I have said. Or, some of you have understood it and are just being facetious. I think I'll stop commenting on it now. I just don't see how hard it is to get this concept and, at the risk of sounding like an ass, I am tired of trying to communicate it to you guys. Either way, the idea is out there and it will either be accepted or rejected. Not really an issue at this point because i'm sure the decision is already made within the dev team one way or another and probably was before I the idea was posted in this forum.

Bluey71
14th Dec 2007, 18:21
Would the term 'Add on' be more fitting to what you are trying to say eightbits?

Xcom
14th Dec 2007, 22:44
The mere idea of releasing 100 hours of Deus Ex-quality gaming in a story-based RPG after only two years of dev for the low low price of a single $50.00 game on a store shelf is ridiculously retarded.

Fixed. :thumbsup:

minus0ne
14th Dec 2007, 22:54
I'll re-post what I posted on the deusex3.com forum;

"Let's begin with the sour and end with the sweet. DX:IW sucked because of the stupid short small similar symmetrical (heh) level design, the utter dumbing down of everything (or 'streamlining' and 'removing of obstacles' depending on whichever way you look at it), the unsympathetic main characters (and even more blank-ish protagonist) but MOST OF ALL, it was the completely non-nonsensical, mechanically put-together sorry excuse for a story (and subsequently, pretty much every mission and most of the game). Especially compared to the first. Speaking of which... here's what comes to mind about DX's greatness (in 'random organic' order :P);

1. The game world. Magnificently crafted and well thought-out with miraculous attention to detail (I know, I use too much adjectives, but just on the topic of Deus Ex). Every location from Liberty Island (both UNATCO and 'above'), Hell's Kitchen (and every adjoining location) to Hong Kong and onwards were completely immersing. The world felt much bigger than just the locations you visited. There was LOTS AND LOTS of backstory you could explore though non-mission related dialogue or books, notes, memos and emails. You could discuss politics with a bum and give him some credits (or for the more sadistic JC's, do target practice on rats and birds) and perhaps get a little useful info. I could go on and on but those who played DX know what I'm talking about.

2. The story. It walked the fine line between open-endedness/choice and 'set in stone' events. Despite being somewhat linear, you could choose to do what roughly in your preferred order (with mostly logistical limitations). You had to WAIT to see the outcome of your actions (unlike IW where someone was shouting at you through your own skull the moment you completed/failed an objective or triggered an outcome, like bizarro-instant 'gratification'), in the original sometimes it wasn't until a few missions later till you realised - hey, I did that or this early on in the game and that affected something here and now.

3. The gameplay. Far from the average FPS there was a large diversity in gameplay - exploring, dialogue/buying/bribing, sneaking, hacking/reading, etc.

4. The PC and NPCs. JC had a clear opinion to go with his cyber-badassedness and common sense attitude. The NPCs (from the smaller to the larger ones) are all carved out nicely and are 'believable'.

5. The customization (of character and inventory/etc.). While the biomods could use some work in terms of usefulness, most of them still came in handy quite often. Plus I quite liked having to choose between keeping a shotgun or machine gun (or at least, some similar system where you can't carry everything which forces you to think about your method of playing). The skill system is a keeper.

6. The art-direction (very related to #1). Pretty much the most down to earth sci-fi setting there is, but still with enough outlandish elements to set it 40 years apart from now.

That's what springs to mind most."

Though I don't think it's that helpful if people on this forum went about 'deciding' what should be kept and tossed in terms of like "keep the swimming skill!", that should be left to the devs. Here's a great editorial by idlethumbs' Marek Bronstring;
(could only find the cached page and not the original url)

"It's a phrase that is almost instinctive to say: "They should listen to the fans!". But should developers really do that? Or more accurately, should they listen to those few fans who spend far too much time discussing games on internet forums? At a certain point during the life of a game or franchise, some vocal devotees will inevitably begin to feel ownership of their subject of fandom. But when game developers appear to ignore their wishes, this should not be seen as a bad sign. It probably means they know what they're doing. - An Editorial by Marek Bronstring


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Don't listen to the fans


During my gaming life I'm sure I've complained angrily at least once about a company not listening to my demands, but as I matured and learned more about game development, I began avoiding this attitude. It seemed silly to believe that game developers still owe you when they were actually nice enough to create a piece of entertainment that you loved. Now that I've jumped the fence and become a developer on a small MMO, I've been on the receiving end of fan complaints, and it hasn't been much fun. At one point I was convinced that the overwhelming majority of fans are completely full of crap, and that they should be blissfully ignored at all costs. I loathed fan attitudes, the kind I probably once held myself, with furious passion.

The MMO I work on is a Mafia-themed online game that you can play in your browser, and it already had about 40,000 active players before I got on board. The game had been developed by various amateurs in their spare time, and it was the task of my team to redesign and professionalise it. Immediately it became clear to me that many changes would have to be made. Great, wonderful changes.

One of the first things we did was give the game a new interface and visual design. The original design looked much like a Geocities site circa 1997, and its menu system was essentially a list of 40+ unordered options. So we created a new skin and a categorized menu system with icons. I was very pleased with the results, but the fans hated it. They hated it so much that some of them formed coalitions in which to express their anger, toting banners stating "100% anti redesign" or "game admins = n00bs" in big red letters. With every little change that followed came a big community backlash. Even when small translation errors were corrected, the forums would be flooded with players demanding an explanation. Tough crowd...

Of course, MMO games consist largely of repeated patterns. Fight, loot, sell, level up. When those comfortable patterns are changed ever so slightly, you can be sure that the players will notice, and they will complain. No one really saw an improved interface when we updated it; they only saw that the interface they'd been using for two years was suddenly gone, disrupting their usual navigation routine.

As we added great new features in the following weeks, I became increasingly cynical. The changes were met with an ultra-conservative stance, even though they were blatant improvements in gameplay. It seemed the fans didn't want anything to change ever (or thought they didn't), yet they would still complain when there weren't regular updates. Whatever we did, it was always wrong.

I soon stopped soliciting for ideas, stopped answering the fans' questions, and felt increasingly superior. I almost got a perverse pleasure out of implementing changes that fans would hate, but which I knew would benefit the game in the long run. I felt the people at the bottom didn't understand what I was trying to make, despite constant efforts to explain it to them. The player community soon became the subject of many sardonic jokes made by our team over lunch.

But then an interesting pattern emerged: as it started to dawn on the players where the game was heading, attitudes began to change somewhat. The general outcries of "change it back!" and "what was wrong with it?" evolved into "I liked all the previous changes you made, but the last one is horrible". Of course the next week, the thing they hated before was amongst the things they loved, and they found a new thing to complain about. At least we knew it wasn't the new features they disliked, but de facto change.

The way the players switched opinions so easily meant it was very hard for us to figure out what they really wanted. A problem with most feedback, especially in a persistent game that is constantly evolving, is that most players are really just trying to protect their immediate personal interests. The guy who has slavishly hoarded a billion credits will be crying favouritism when a new feature gives newbies an advantage, and the guy who just got a guild after a month of levelling clearly isn't going to like it when you make it easier to start a guild.

In the end, it's obviously the game's overall balance and the lead designer's vision that should be listened to, not all the different player lobbies. On the other hand, it feels like the players should always be heard, as they're ultimately the customers who pay our bills. What kept me from turning bitter towards my audience was the realisation that content players normally won't post about them being pleased. Through getting to know some of the community members and being forwarded conversations from private guild forums, the fans actually seemed wonderfully supportive. It turned out the real fans were too busy playing the game to go into a forum and debate some minor change. A few players even secretly liked changes when talking in private, but went out on the public forums to complain anyway. (In which case I was strongly reminded of Penny Arcade's classic equation of "Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total ****wad".)

I discovered that the players I had been listening to most of the time were mostly, well, whiners. As long as there's the perception that there's something in it for them (i.e. the possibility of something getting changed in their benefit), they'll continue whining forever. It's easy to forget that they only represent a small minority of players. So instead of milling on the forums and addressing individual complaints, I took some steps back. I sent mostly standardised confirmations through private messaging to those who contacted me with ideas or concerns, and only appeared publicly once in a while to explain the reasoning behind a certain change. And it mostly worked. As the whiners realised they had less to gain, the atmosphere improved noticeably.

What I have experienced with this project for the past three months is probably a pretty extreme version of what developers generally have to cope with. Extreme because this was an MMO with an already established fanbase who were facing a new development team that they didn't yet trust. But I get the feeling that every game developer goes through this eventually even though, when working on a boxed product, this kind of feedback won't appear until after the game has shipped.

Realistically, you can't listen (let alone reply) to everything fans are saying. Not if you still want to spend any time actually working on the game. There is far too much noise amongst the feedback that players post online, and it usually comes from a loud minority that just complains because they have too much time on their hands. I learned to never get too emotionally involved, and to only occasionally post diplomatically phrased messages to deal with widespread concerns. When user feedback is actually needed, using private beta groups gets you a lot more bang for your buck. In a small group, it's a lot less rewarding for players to be loud and obnoxious, especially when they are posting in a private forum where all the developers are watching. They feel privileged to be on the beta group, and will try a lot harder to give you reasonable criticism.

The best thing to do as a designer is to let your instincts tell you if you're doing right, and to keep a good professional distance from your audience. After all, most fans couldn't design a game even if the world depended on it. Listening to the fans...? It's a good idea in principle, but rather pointless (and potentially destructive) in practice. "

comy
14th Dec 2007, 23:31
DX IW was sadly just a shadow compared to the original.
I agree with most of the arguments presented.
- Level design was really weak in IW, leves were small, unimaginative, they just didnt feel right, dunno cant really describe it. In dx the locations were much more realistic, the NY streets, labs, paris, hong kong, everithing.
- Music that was nonexistent in IW, give me good old DX soundtrack :cool:
- No skills in IW, a real dissapointment
- While in DX you strugled to get the biomod canisters and upgrades, in IW they were lying everywhere, man in the end I had like 10 extra, whats up with that? And besides the biomods in IW were kinda useless, since they were a weird mix of skills from dx and biomods, the whole biomod section was kinda lame. A huge letdown.
- The story in IW was kinda yawnish? I never felt that i was particulary sucked into it, I never cared for any character or organisation, it was all so vague. Do this, do that, ok I do this I do that, whats next ? Oh do more of this and more of that. Oh, its over ? Bah...
- Get a good voice actor for the main character, and others too :P In the original the voice actors were just awesome, but in IW it was like they were all just waking up after a hangover.

Thats it for now :P

guardian130270
14th Dec 2007, 23:43
As far as deciding what skills go into the game I think the determining factor is still not what does the skill do but rather what does it do to affect the game. Like many have mentioned, swimming is not a necessary skill but it does make certain levels more interesting or less stressful.

During one play I maximized my swim and breathing Aug specifically for the undersea lab level. The maxing out allowed me to fully explore the entire water area (surface and dea sea sections). This included swimming over to the underwater habitat windows and seeing which rooms had bad guys in them before going there.

On the other end, I almost never bothered to buy up the heavy weapons skill. Other than out of curiosity I never used any of the heavy weapons except the rocket launcher. This doesn't mean the skill should be tossed (especially since I know I'm in the minority on the heavy weapon issue) it's just about how you play the game and what your strategy is.

It all boils down to: If you make a skill then give a reason to use it, even if it's only to increase strategy/game play options.

Basket weaving is a viable skill if the baskets are good for something.

midna1
16th Dec 2007, 21:40
Don't ignore the structure of Invisible War. ****

IW's greatest success was its countless interweaving pathways, while the world readjusted to the player's action. And there was no moral compass for the game. In Bioshock its pretty obvious what are right and wrong actions. But not in IW. Just make the cities bigger. And I'd love to see vehicles or some transport system.

doomhammr
17th Dec 2007, 09:55
What needs to go:
DX2: Universal ammo. I HATED UNIVERSAL AMMO! What I loved so much about the original DX was the ability to customize my weapons with different types of ammo and the thought of running out of ammo with one weapon means your're screwed with every weapon just sucks. It's just not realistic anyway and realism is what I loved in the first game.

Both games: Improve the animation. The character animation for both games was horrendous. DX1 could get away with it though since it was made in 1999, but with technologies such as mocap more available when the sequel came out, there's no excuse not to have your models idle animation to be standing with their arms firmly hanging a foot away from their sides like they haven't even been rigged yet.

DX2: Console ports first: Screw the console market. The PC market was what made the first game such a hit. Don't spit on the PC users by making the game dumbed down just to accommodate console users.

JC and Alex Denton: Alex just cannot be in this game. He/She didn't even exist in the first game until the very end in Area 51 (if that even was him/her). JC couldn't be in the game either since the trailer seems to hint that the game takes place in 2027 and DX1 takes place in 2052. If JC were alive then, he'd be a baby. Now clones of these guys would always be a possibility.

What needs to stay:
DX1: THE MUSIC! GOD DO I LOVE THE MUSIC OF DX1!!!! Best VG soundtrack. Bring back dynamic music that picks up when you're under attack and slows down when you're undercover. That was absolutely badass and I want it back. And make the music more like the first game too. The soundtrack in the second game was too slow and had not action themes in it really. Horrible.

DX1: Reloading. DX2's combat was just braindead clicking without the danger of having to reload when your weapon was empty. Reloading adds much more tactical elements to combat.

StormFront
17th Dec 2007, 12:58
DX2: Console ports first: Screw the console market. The PC market was what made the first game such a hit. Don't spit on the PC users by making the game dumbed down just to accommodate console users.

But the first game wasn't a hit. This will be console game first and foremost - quit kidding yourself


JC and Alex Denton: Alex just cannot be in this game. He/She didn't even exist in the first game until the very end in Area 51 (if that even was him/her). JC couldn't be in the game either since the trailer seems to hint that the game takes place in 2027 and DX1 takes place in 2052. If JC were alive then, he'd be a baby. Now clones of these guys would always be a possibility.


There is still no evidence that this is a prequal and I still cannot get behind any of the so-called reasoning as to why a prequal is a good idea. Why everyone has assumed that the date in the trailer is the date of the game when they are clearly a set of flashbacks is beyond me...

SageSavage
17th Dec 2007, 15:20
But the first game wasn't a hit. This will be console game first and foremost - quit kidding yourselfSaid who?


There is still no evidence that this is a prequal and I still cannot get behind any of the so-called reasoning as to why a prequal is a good idea. Why everyone has assumed that the date in the trailer is the date of the game when they are clearly a set of flashbacks is beyond me...
Agreed but it can't take place after IW and it shouldn't during IW. That 2027 on the ballot is no evidence at all.

StormFront
17th Dec 2007, 15:29
Said who?

Which part? The console thing? That's obvious. THe team has been set up with a view to making games for current ggen consoles (PS3 & 360) and PC as stated on their website. Simple fact is that a console game will sell MANY more copies than a PC one so it would receive the focus. Beyondthat if you you are developing a multi-platform game you ALWAYS develop for the console and then grade up (well normally up but PC gamers are just such bloody cheapskates)


Agreed but it can't take place after IW and it shouldn't during IW. That 2027 on the ballot is no evidence at all.

I keep seeing this statement that the game cannot take place after IW and yet I see no earthly reason why not. With all the hate, rebelion and segregation that is shown in the video I think it is obvious that it IS set after IW. During the first 2 games augs are VERY rare: pretty much confined to the military and the super-rich. Fore there to be all this hostility toward aug'd people, augs must have become MORE prevelant. This would indicate that it is set after the first 2 games.

Also the hints bout "Emile" in the video (the likely codename of the player character) imply that genetic engineering has progressed even further, not regressed.

I freely admit I could be just as wrong, but I cannot see a prequal being a good idea - it is certainly not what I'd want....

SageSavage
17th Dec 2007, 16:27
Which part? The console thing?
Actually I was more interested in evidence indicating that DX1 wasn't a hit. Just because Ion Storm Austin vanished? Anyway... even if they do DX3 as a crossplatformer, we still don't know anything about their plans or how much work they'd put into a PC version. It is save to say that large parts of the community demand a good PC version. This is something they really should take care about in their own financial interest. They fooled us with Bioshock but since this was partly the same community and the fact that they promised to make the PC version top priority, people will be more wary this time (I hope).

I keep seeing this statement that the game cannot take place after IW and yet I see no earthly reason why not. With all the hate, rebelion and segregation that is shown in the video I think it is obvious that it IS set after IW. During the first 2 games augs are VERY rare: pretty much confined to the military and the super-rich. Fore there to be all this hostility toward aug'd people, augs must have become MORE prevelant. This would indicate that it is set after the first 2 games.
Your argument makes sense but just like the 2027 on the ballot, there's nothing in the teaser that we can take as evidence for the time DX3 will be set in. By saying that it can't play after IW, I actually mean that it's almost taboo, given the change from Cyberpunk to a boring SciFi-style. Although there are people who are unhappy with the Cyberpunk-label for DX, I am pretty sure most of the fans agree with me, when I say that it was a big part of the originals charme and has been missed badly in IW. Setting it after IW makes the whole "revive successful franchises" pointless, since it'd mean even more SciFi and less Cyberpunk.

I freely admit I could be just as wrong, but I cannot see a prequal being a good idea - it is certainly not what I'd want....
I simply want it to be much more like DX1 than like IW - as it has been already said by the overwhelming majority of the community.

StormFront
17th Dec 2007, 16:59
Actually I was more interested in evidence indicating that DX1 wasn't a hit. Just because Ion Strom Austin vanished? Anyway... even if they do DX3 as a crossplatformer, we still don't know anything about their plans or how much work they'd put into a PC version. It is save to say that large parts of the community demand a good PC version. This is something they really should take care about in their own financial interest. They fooled us with Bioshock but since this was partly the same community and the fact that they promised to make the PC version top priority, people will be more wary this time (I hope).

Your argument makes sense but just like the 2027 on the ballot, there's nothing in the teaser that we can take as evidence for the time DX3 will be set in. By saying that it can't play after IW, I actually mean that it's almost taboo, given the change from Cyberpunk to a boring SciFi-style. Although, there are people who are unhappy with the Cyberpunk-label for DX, I am pretty sure most of the fans agree with me, when I say that it was a big part of the originals charme and has been missed badly in IW. Setting it after IW makes the whole "revive successful franchises" pointless, since it'd means even more SciFi and less Cyberpunk.
I simply want it to be much more like DX1 than like IW - as it has been already said by the overwhelming majority of the community.


DX did not sell well at all. I can't find sales numbers anymore but it sold very poorly inspite of amazing reviews.

As for not following IW because of the changes it made: Well I would have agreed with you up until about 2 weeks ago. Recently, as I've extolled at great length on these forums, I have had a major change of heart however. Now I have made the effort to look past the aweful engine I now like IW a great deal. I think it does make a fitting sequal to DX and I personally would like to see the story continued onward from there.

WhatsHisFace
17th Dec 2007, 17:31
DX did not sell well at all. I can't find sales numbers anymore but it sold very poorly inspite of amazing reviews.

As for not following IW because of the changes it made: Well I would have agreed with you up until about 2 weeks ago. Recently, as I've extolled at great length on these forums, I have had a major change of heart however. Now I have made the effort to look past the aweful engine I now like IW a great deal. I think it does make a fitting sequal to DX and I personally would like to see the story continued onward from there.

Deus Ex 1's sales came in very slowly, but it did eventually hit 1 million.

SageSavage
17th Dec 2007, 17:36
DX did not sell well at all. I can't find sales numbers anymore but it sold very poorly inspite of amazing reviews.There are no sales figures floating around. Many people have searched the web for them and nobody has yet presented any evidence that it sold bad. Why do you think they talk about reviving "successful franchises"? I don't think it's because of IW which wouldn't even exist if DX had been a flop. As far as I know, DX recieved mainly positive reviews but they rarley realized that it would become something that outstanding. Those who did have mainly been written long after it's original release.

guardian130270
18th Dec 2007, 00:46
Just to comment on a couple of recurring themes in the last group of threads:

Episodic/Expansion pack ideas: I'm definitely inclined to steer away from episodic/expansion style releases. I think that Deus Ex strives to be too large in scale (both environment and story line/plot) for this to work. Small stand-alone missions aren't really the style of DX. Also, my own personal experience with expansion packs is that, at best, the results can be summed up as "It was OK, didn't feel ripped-off but nothing spectacular either."

DEUS EX sales: I have to assume that DX1 had solid sales figures as many have stated/assumed. Otherwise you must of had a brilliant BS artist if you can get a sequel from of alot of word-of-mouth and hype. Personally I bought 2 copies (1 full price and a re-release for $10 a few years later when that loaned out copy never came back. 5 years and counting Zef! :)

DX2 Story: A little ways back Midna1 made a comment about "interweaving pathways" in the DX2 plot line. I never saw the DX2 storyline as all that interesting or relavent. Typically it simply determined the colour of the uniform of the guy you shot and often not even that. I never tried it but I'm guessing that you could have walked through DX2 slaughtering everyone you came across and still get the same option of endings.

I know I'm pretty much beating a dead horse with another dead horse with the number of times I've commented (here and elsewhere) on the illusion of choice in the DX games. In DX1 it was a minor annoyance; in DX2 it was a massive all encompassing waste of time.

One last time (yeah right): if there are multiple paths in DX3 please make it count. In a perfect world choices in game would allow or eliminate the availability of a level. Can you picture a DX1 where, after choosing to stay with UNATCO, JC then leads missions against terrorist cells instead of being highjacked and taken to Hell's Kitchen to see the error of his ways? Defending Area 51 instead of attacking it?

However, I realize the development nightmare that this would be. Instead, the option is to remove remove major choices like that and keep the main story simple and straightforward. Sidequests could be made optional though. Failure to talk to, treat right, or not kill the right person and a sidequest simply disappears.

Also, I would restate that endings that simply don't have a different f***wad wrecking the world at the end would be nice (DX2 you listening?). DX1 endings were fine (3 different choices for the world). They weren't necessarily happy endings but better than the end of DX2.

And in closing: cut-scenes between missions where possible and more dramatic finishes at the end (a-la Fallout "what happens in the world end narratives").

Xcom
18th Dec 2007, 06:01
There are no sales figures floating around. Many people have searched the web for them and nobody has yet presented any evidence that it sold bad. Why do you think they talk about reviving "successful franchises"? I don't think it's because of IW which wouldn't even exist if DX had been a flop. As far as I know, DX recieved mainly positive reviews but they rarley realized that it would become something that outstanding. Those who did have mainly been written long after it's original release.

The precise figures are hard to come by because they're obtained by market research companies (such as NPD) who don't give them away for free.

As for DX, I think an estimate of a million copies worldwide is probably right. That, however, is likely to be over a period of 7 years and including PS2 port. DX wasn't a flop by all means, especially for its time. I believe Spector was pleased about how it was selling. I, however, wouldn't call it bestseller either, but anyway, the situation now is entirely different. Just to put things in perspective: Assassin's Creed sold one million and COD4 sold two million copies just in November alone, and just in USA.


Simple fact is that a console game will sell MANY more copies than a PC one so it would receive the focus.

Yeah, it's true, but I came across an interesting article (market research DFC Intelligence) that predicts bright future for PC as gaming platform. I think it's remarkable if true.

Who Will Win the Video Game Wars? The Definitive Answer (http://www.dfcint.com/wp/?p=190)

StormFront
18th Dec 2007, 07:10
The precise figures are hard to come by because they're obtained by market research companies (such as NPD) who don't give them away for free.

As for DX, I think an estimate of a million copies worldwide is probably right. That, however, is likely to be over a period of 7 years and including PS2 port. DX wasn't a flop by all means, especially for its time. I believe Spector was pleased about how it was selling. I, however, wouldn't call it bestseller either, but anyway, the situation now is entirely different. Just to put things in perspective: Assassin's Creed sold one million and COD4 sold two million copies just in November alone, and just in USA.

One article I came across (then instantly lost!) stated that in fact DX only sold around 100,000 units and had SPector quoted as saying that if you added all sales of DX, Sys SHock 1&2 and the first 2 Thiefs together, you got a total sales figure of about 250,000. THe figure of 1 million copies is, as you say, sales to date but DX was written off as a budget title, what, 5 years ago and most of the sales came from that (Take 2 and others). Dunno how mush truth there was in all that but hey...
Oh the artical also confirmed that IW sold just under 1 million copies




Yeah, it's true, but I came across an interesting article (market research DFC Intelligence) that predicts bright future for PC as gaming platform. I think it's remarkable if true.

Who Will Win the Video Game Wars? The Definitive Answer (http://www.dfcint.com/wp/?p=190)

Interesting article. I think they are probably correct. When I live in a world where even my Mom (the worlds biggest techno-phobe) has a PC, then I think everyone must have one now!:D

piratecop
27th Dec 2007, 11:39
ive said it before and i'll say it again and again... ZYME!

its the small things that make a world believable or at least really really cool.
getting drunk in deus ex, smoking damaging your chest, talking to zyme dealers and even using the numberpad to punch in a code, that was awesome and deus ex 2 just missed out on those things. i mean, sure beer and smokes were still there, but they were nowhere near as cool, all they did was kill your health, with no mad effects! what is this madness?!

Alex D
3rd Jan 2008, 00:13
The universal Ammo is kind of cool. I mean seriously who in the hell can carry 20 GEP rockets,300 rounds of Automatic Rifle rounds and 3 canisters of Napalm? They need to toss the DX2 health Bar and get back to the DX1 health and skills. Keep Bot Dominataion and the other good mods in DX2. Toss the DX2 inventory that sucked major ass. Damn Im trying to think of more crap to kep and toss Lol

Harakiribert
3rd Jan 2008, 00:57
I mean seriously who in the hell can carry 20 GEP rockets,300 rounds of Automatic Rifle rounds and 3 canisters of Napalm?
Fictional characters in a fictional world can do that. I mean, come on... it's a game made for entertainment, not a physics simulation.


The universal Ammo is kind of cool.
Yeah, now let's hope the devs make a universal weapon that shoots fire, rockets, projectiles, grenades and which can also be used for melee combat. You know why? Because nobody can carry like 10 partly large weapons on his body. [/irony]


They need to toss the DX2 health Bar and get back to the DX1 health and skills. [...] Toss the DX2 inventory that sucked major ass.
Agreed!

Alex D
3rd Jan 2008, 03:43
Yeah fictional but wont the game be better if it was more realistic? I think so Yeah it's a fictional story but I would really like to see this game in a real world situation. In DX1 the AI was way better than DX2 not to mention the voice acting in DX2 was crap was well. bring back the key codes! I hate not being able to punch in the code myself seemed to "lazy" for me lol. I mean since everyone is whining about how horrible DX2 was and prasing DX1 I dont think it would really hurt to see some more realistic features in the new game. I think that would give the game a chance to be revived and Eidos better not dumb it down for the Crapbox 400 or whatever its called. Or Oh Oh Deus Ex on the Wii!!!!!!!!!



You want me to steal a carcass from a night club?

minus0ne
3rd Jan 2008, 04:54
Yeah fictional but wont the game be better if it was more realistic? I think so Yeah it's a fictional story but I would really like to see this game in a real world situation.
I wouldn't. Realism and gameplay are in some ways mutually exclusive, meaning most 'realistic touches' add nothing or little and get in the way of gameplay. You're contradicting yourself and proving this point by advocating the use of universal ammo (anything but realistic), which I incidentally don't agree with either. I'd rather have them make the game world and characters feel realistic (or rather, believable and relevant) than to have them make the gameplay 'realistic' in any way. DX's inventory system was pretty clever though, it still forced you to think about what you needed to carry and what to toss. Besides, just watch "The Matrix" to see how many weapons JC's coat could possibly conceal :D . And it's not a big stretch to imagine someone who can leap from tall buildings, turn invisible, bite a hundred bullets and throw a sofa like it were a basketball could also carry around that much ammunition and weapons (hell, an actual sherpa could probably lug that around no problem).

gamer0004
3rd Jan 2008, 10:15
A lot of people are talking about choices. Being able to choose what to do and in what way is fine, but not for really big issues. I wanted to stay with UNATCO on my first playthrough, but I wasn't able to. But it's a good thing, because if I was able to stick with UNATCO I know the game wouldn't have been as good as it was. You should've got completely different missions, completely different maps and completely different conversations. In fact, the game would've been almost twice the size if they contained the quality of the first missions. There's simply not enough time to do so, so the devs would've to use the same maps for different missions (as in DX:IW), which is bad for the realism and the immersion of the game, or it would be impossible for the player to make that kind of decisions (like in DX1).
I think the DX1 solution was the best. At the point when you have to join the terrorist you may not like it, but further on you don't mind. But you do mind when the rest of the game and storyline is unrealistic because you had to be able to choose whatever you want.

@guardian130270: yes, you were able to kill everyone you wanted and still get all the options to finish the game.

professen
3rd Jan 2008, 18:09
Keep:

-Skill System of DX. No further comment neccesary

-Aug System of DX. Once you chosen one you cannot change it afterwards. Therefore the player had to think and plan carefully

-Loot Chars... in IW I always had to pick up dead enemies and throw them away (:lol: ) to get the ammo. But pls change it! I want to chose (while the game is paused!) what I want to take. I don't want any army knife in my inventory. PLEASE!

-DX Inventory System. It is pritty old fashioned but it is good. the IW system was simply a pain in the ass... It was also great to switch to objectives or images or health in DX. By contrast in IW you had to close the current screen. :mad2:.

-INFORMATION yes, keep us informed! About everything important AND(!!!) about everything unimportant! You design a world... IW was like Quake with many conversations ****

-Something to keep from IW (:nut: ;)): The choises u make have to have an impact on the world. Like the order got angry at me after finishing a job for WTO (AGAIN...). But more like that in it

-Great Variety of Weapons. PLS!

-Female Fighters. That was a nice aspect in IW. Let there be also female enemies

-SOMETIMES the enemies in DX saw dead bodies and then sounded alarm. Well that would have been great if it was always so. Why should i be able to pick up dead bodies, if soldiers just walk on bye



Toss:

-IWs simple use of weapons... DX was a bit realistic but IW... well... i compared it to quake :|

-Strange physics of IW. Everything seemed so light. I could pick up big boxes and throw them and... well... the dead body desaster. Don't know why I should be able to throw a human body 10meters...

-AI always nowing that you are somwhere even when you move crouched (IW)


PS: Sorry for my Gunther like English :)

Alex D
3rd Jan 2008, 19:18
The unviersal Ammo yeah highly unrealistic but a cool idea. I never said for it to be a keeper. Keep Sid Black Lol so I can kick his ass and get back my 2,000 credits he ripped off me. Doesnt Ava Johnson kind of look like Britney Spears?


"Penthouse nice!"

vecima
3rd Jan 2008, 19:43
This is my first post, so as a bit of introduction...
I'm a die hard Deus Ex fan. while the 2nd game wasn't quite as good, i still enjoyed it and will in fact play it again (already twice i think). I'm also an aspiring game developer. I've been working on a project on the source engine (Half-Life 2) for over two years, and as such I have at least a small insight into the challenges developers face in balancing things, figuring out what works, and what's fun.

there have been a lot of good points made in this thread, but i feel that many people are looking at the smaller picture. it's useless to say "DX:IW sucked... forget it and redo the DX1 with new story" (at least it wasn't as bad as the crapfest that was project: snowblind. yes, that was originally going to be a DX game... it shows in some ways). rather, I would propose that some things from the first game could be expanded and in a sense even "include" some aspects of the second.

some examples of old ideas as well as some new ones follow:

regarding weapons
-you have your rifle of choice, but ammo for it is slim. you find a weapon mod that will allow this gun to fire another type of ammo that is plentiful (though slightly less effective).

-you've modified your pistol with some must have feature like a specialized chamber. do to overuse or being damaged by enemy fire, the hammer on your pistol is shot. your only choice for the moment is to take the hammer from the pistol of an enemy you just dropped. it will work, but your fire rate is reduced, until you can get to that arms dealer and get the proper part for your weapon.

regarding skill points / leveling up / nanoaugs
-the skill ponts and nanoaugs could be more integrated. you're hard pressed to find an upgrade canister so you can use your augmented jump to reach a secondary entrance to your goal. rather than waiting to find a canister you can spend some of your credits on a downloadable upgrade from the black market. credits can also be spent on training sessions (previously "skills" in DX1). you can earn your place in a training session by performing something related to that training in the field. example: taking down a few enemies in a mission with a sniper rifle at untrained level earns you a pass to "attend" sniper training... in actuality "training" happens when you visit a console and the nanoaugs in your brain are imbued with the added ability. this way isn't really "dumbed down" but rather streamlined, and more realistic... it makes more sense to find 25 credits on a body that fell victim to a hazard in a hidden area than to attain 25 skill points for arriving there. i also think there should be some passive and some active nanoaugs, or perhaps each nanoaug having a passive feature and and active feature. after all, (I don't think the game is a prequel, at least i hope not) the tech should be a bit more advanced.

regarding HUD / Interface / Gameplay
I've got to start this off by saying I loved the game STALKER, not so much for STALKER itself, but because it was the closest thing I've felt to playing DX1 in a long, long time. aside from all the bugs, the repetitive side quests, so so story, and more bugs, they did something right, and it wasn't just graphics. I would be quite pleased if the movement and general gameplay mechanics felt like an extended STALKER. some things i think should definitely happen in DX3 are the ability to lean left and right, and crouch for increased accuracy. I don't think it matters if the HUD is square, circle, octagonal or whatever so long as it works and isn't obtrusive... it's not my job to design it so i won't but just be sure it's tested thoroughly. and for the love of all things playable don't make text pop up in the very center of the screen. this was another thing STALKER pulled off... it wasn't complex, but it worked. another thing i honestly think could be changed in a new way is the health / energy. perhaps a universal gel would restore both things, (what did you do with those cells anyway, eat them?) or if not that then a nanoaug that allows you to use the tech gel to heal, and the heal gel to restore energy.

technical (added)
-support wide screen monitors and resolutions on PC.
-support AA and AF on PC.
-support windowed mode (in case your game doesn't work, at least i wouldn't have to hard restart my pc).
-optimize the crap out of it... i don't know why but DX:IW ran like crap on computers that blew the system requirements out of the water.

what do you folks think?

gamer0004
3rd Jan 2008, 20:09
As for the training: how extensive do you want the game to be? DX is not TES. Being able to train would be ok, but having to earn a place in a training session? It doesn't make sense for an expensive state-of-the-art augmented agent.
And the hammer-thing: DX is not a sim. Besides, if the hammer can get shot of every part of the gun should be able to break down, which is a bit overdone.

vecima
3rd Jan 2008, 20:18
i think you may have misunderstood me... by training i was referring to the skills in the original deus ex. rather than earning skill points to spend on them, you could use credits to buy the "training". if you remember, the levels were untrained, trained, etc...

keep in mind, training could come from the "black market" yielding varied results

as for the weapons, perhaps rather than parts breaking weapon mods could cause jamming more or less often... it's a realistic aspect of gunfighting that adds intensity that very few games use, and adds a balance to what may otherwise be overpowered weapon mods.

anyway, as i said before i have no say in this game so i'm not even sure why i'm here... i just thought i'd voice some ideas i had.

Unstoppable
4th Jan 2008, 18:24
In speaking of what to keep and toss how about what to add? I'd like co-op and multiplayer with in game voice support please.

I had a dream I was playing Deus Ex: Invisible War it in a co-op game.(before it was released)

It was me and someone else and I parachooted on top of a roof. Then I was able to activated my systems and communications were online. The coolest part was that it was two of us.

My buddy had dropped on the street down below and I was serving as the sniper. I would cover his approach to the WTO building as we began our stealth assault.

Unfortunately as soon as it started my dream ended. However I always hoped that Deus Ex: IW would have co-op. Why not Deus Ex 3? Online co-op could be a feature that sets it apart from the rest of the crowd.

Also they could ad in game voice support. Or you could just use ventrilo for that. Anyway Bioshock had no co-op or multiplayer and that was surely missed.

burnsound
5th Jan 2008, 01:50
I overwhelmingly agree with Squidpirate. Also, Deus ex had always been an immersing RPG first and a FPS second.

vecima
6th Jan 2008, 02:39
...I had a dream I was playing Deus Ex: Invisible War it in a co-op game.(before it was released)...I would cover his approach to the WTO building as we began our stealth assault.

so you had a dream about WTO before IW was released? ...right.
i don't think coop is necessary.

Unstoppable
6th Jan 2008, 02:56
Co-op would set the game apart from the rest of the crowd. The game can easily be dismissed by many people as another "first person shooter." Plus with the backlash following Invisible War I don't see why co-op would be such a bad thing if they have time to do it. :cool:

gamer0004
6th Jan 2008, 11:24
About the augmenations: I liked the system in DX better (once you've chosen for a miomod you can't change it), but I still think the DX:IW system was good as well. Not gameplay-wise (like DX) but the technology had advanced 20 years. So those kind of options would've been developed by that time...

rizzo265
6th Jan 2008, 11:48
DX2:
Keep:
See through lockers.
Black market biomods.
Aero security bots.
The Omar (if it adheres to the plot).
Weapon upgrades like the EMP boost thing or the glass destabilizer (man that mod rocked).
Mantling.

Ditch:
Universal ammo. (UA made IW too easy. It would be better to actually conserve ammo and adapt to situations when you have no ammo for your fav. weapon).
Small areas (should be a given).
Retarded, annoying NPCs.
Crappy endings.
Repetitive NPC model. (Does the WTO only have one guy working for them).
The ridiculous HUD.
Everything else.

DX1:
Keep:
MiBs/WiBs (if it adheres to the plot).
Newspapers, hilarious emails and other personal notes.
The left and right lean. (the lack of in IW really pissed me off).
Hit locations for the player.
Hard to find logins.
Manually typing in codes and logins.
The nanokey (onscreen).
The 'cyberpunk' feel. (IW felt way too futuristic-not that it shouldn't have hich-tech areas).
Wide spaces based on real locations.
The menu/inventory system. (It was simple and worked. I even liked playing inventory tetris, but you should be able to rotate the items, ala the tetris bricks).
HE ammo for the assault rifle.
The shrinking/growing crosshair.
Skill system.
Guard dogs.
Exploration points.
Stimulating conversations (like with Morpheus and the Hong Kong bartender).
Memorable characters (like Gunther, Walton Simmons. I shook in my boots whenever he was around).
LAMs.
The soundtrack. (Or something similar to it).


Ditch:
Crappy AI (forgiveable for the time).
Making it necessary to kill some characters. (If you were untrained in heavy weaponry some battles were a bit tough-Walton Simmons).

JulianP
6th Jan 2008, 16:21
Co-op would set the game apart from the rest of the crowd. The game can easily be dismissed by many people as another "first person shooter." Plus with the backlash following Invisible War I don't see why co-op would be such a bad thing if they have time to do it. :cool:
Co-op, hell yeah! Playing System Shock 2 co-op with a friend of mine is the best multiplayer experience I've ever had. It's very sad how few games have co-op these days.

vecima
7th Jan 2008, 16:08
(what to keep and ditch from both DX games)

very good points... especially keeping the lean from DX1 and mantling from DX2... so few shooters do those two things even though they make perfect sense. (though in DX2 i "mantled" my way to an area that you aren't supposed to reach - near herons loft apts, lower seattle).

as for coop... i'm not entirely opposed to the idea, but think about how much harder it is to convey the story... will each player be in separate conversations with NPCs?

gamer0004
7th Jan 2008, 17:36
very good points... especially keeping the lean from DX1 and mantling from DX2... so few shooters do those two things even though they make perfect sense. (though in DX2 i "mantled" my way to an area that you aren't supposed to reach - near herons loft apts, lower seattle).

as for coop... i'm not entirely opposed to the idea, but think about how much harder it is to convey the story... will each player be in separate conversations with NPCs?

This might be a stupid question, but what's mantling?

imported_van_HellSing
7th Jan 2008, 21:09
Mantling is climbing onto stuff like big crates or short walls. Like in the Thief games, for example. You stand in front of a big crate, push space, and instead of a normal jump your character pulls up onto the crate. One of the few things I sorely miss in DX1.

maddermadcat
7th Jan 2008, 21:14
Agreed. Crate stacking should still be available for places too high to mantle, though. (Seen in Thief as well.)

GundamXXX
8th Jan 2008, 08:28
Very good topic ;D

Well I havent played DX2 in a ery long while but I finished DX1 bout 1week before I heard of DX3

What to keep? The fact that DX1 is the only game ever where at certain points I used cheats -_-
Ive used cheats and usually its to either get past a point that Im bored with or because theyre fun cheats but DX1 really had me go "FFS!!! DIE YOU UNATCO *****" so I used cheats sometimes :P

Also keep the fact that it takes about 15h to finish it in a record time (my official record is at 12h but still)
When I finished DX2 my first impression was "What the...." and replayed the last level just to make sure it wasnt a bug!
Then I spend hours trying to find a Chapter 2. It took me like 10h to finish the game the first time. I now describe it as the Unreal 2 effect. Great potential but damn it was short.

Skills is what we want and need. Nothing is better then cursing at your sniper rifle moving about because you suck at it :D

Universal ammo? No way! Why take away the reality of ammo? Might aswell make everything laser based and have 'photon chargers' instead of guns.
Diverse ammo forces the game into a certain reality check, wich is something DX2 lacked.
To the people who say "Nanotech = futuristic enviroment" they dont know what theyre talking about. JC and the gang were basicly beta stages for the nanotech. So I think a gritty, non-neon, realistic, earthly, spacious world is needed.


The only thing I want changed from DX1 is gfx. Why? Because theres nothing else to change!

Ofcourse a diffrent story but other then that they can just cut copy and paste the whole game on a UE3.


What I do think they need to change aswell is the augs. Make em usefull. I only used run/speed/eyes

I just hope that the plot is twisting enough to keep in touch with the first part

Mengioto
8th Jan 2008, 14:26
I absolutely agree!

I hadn't really thought about it, because I used the augs for the simplest things, just because it was fun^^ but it would be more interesting if you were to actually need to use them..

And as many here, I agree: no more universal ammo! And as many here, I have the same reason :p : Different ammo makes you use other guns then just the smg or assault rifle, for example. I have played Deus-Ex about the time it was released (when was that?) and I remember I didn't really understand what 'stealth' was:whistle: ... So I just Rambo'd and shot everyone on sight (even the NSF, which made me feel bad when I discovered they were the good guys...). Then the only thing I had left to use was the stun gun and a baton... I used the stun gun because I just loved the sound it made and its color:rolleyes: .

So that was great! I also think that.. I don't really need a great new version that looks like Crysis, or UT2007... I would love it if they'd just expand the first one, make new maps etc. and that's it! Maybe with the scenes in between maps they can make the 'rotoren' from a helicopter (the four things that make you fly on top^^ rotors?) actually turn.. so it won't look like you're just being lifted up:p Or when the boat, at the end of Liberty Island, departs, you can see those moving too! (I hope you understand what I mean and don't think I'm some crazy human lol).

Well.. that's all I have to say, the rest has already been said :)

-- Mengioto

DXJohnny1981
9th Jan 2008, 22:40
Things I want in DX3

1) Bring back skills and experience system.

2) The story needs to be deep and interesting with interesting characters like DX1. One of the things that made the original game so great is that the story had more twists than a bag of pretzels which made the DX world seem complex and interesting from start to finish. DX: IW's story was watered down, not very complex and I just didn't care about the playable character which leads me to my next want...

3) Bring back JC Denton as the playable character or at least make a new cool trench coat and shades wearing badass in the JC Denton mold. No more of this generic and boring male/female characters that we choose from, make one really cool character that we all will actually care about.

4) Bring back bigger more complex levels that give us lots of options for exploring, infiltrating and combat. Like someone else said the rocket launcher and sniper riffle were kinda useless in DX:IW's small and narrow levels but in DX1 the sniper riffle was my favorite weapon. I also want allot of varied levels in DX3. In DX: IW you only had 4 or 5 main levels; Seattle, Egypt, Germany, Antarctica and Liberty Island.

5) I want DX3 to be a long game like maybe 20 hours. In DX:IW I think the combination of a watered down story, small levels and not as many different levels made that game too short so please bring back the deep 20 hour DX experience.

Laputin Man
10th Jan 2008, 00:11
I am pretty sure that the first game was a bit longer than 20 hours.... I'm thinking it was more like 40 hours. I could be wrong though, it just seemed a lot longer.

Inane Mythos
10th Jan 2008, 00:46
I am pretty sure that the first game was a bit longer than 20 hours.... I'm thinking it was more like 40 hours. I could be wrong though, it just seemed a lot longer.
My average playtime now is around 15 hours, and my first play time was around 20. It can't have been more than that. :p

DXJohnny1981
10th Jan 2008, 00:49
I am pretty sure that the first game was a bit longer than 20 hours.... I'm thinking it was more like 40 hours. I could be wrong though, it just seemed a lot longer.

You may be right I'm not totally sure... I was never really someone who counts the hours when playing through a videogame so maybe DX1 was closer to 40 hours. All I know was it took quite awhile to play through DX1 even on my 2nd, 3rd and 40th play throughs it didn't matter and I want DX3 to be as long and deep.

I'd also like to add that unlike most other people I actually prefer the universal ammo and biomods. You can still have the same customization with weapons while using universal ammo. There's no reason why a crossbow for example can't fire tranquilizers, arrows and flare darts like in DX1 while still using universal ammo just make it where you go into the inventory and select the different weapon options or something. This allows players to stick with their favorite weapons for the most part without worrying about running out of a particular ammo and then having to switch to a weapon they really don't want to use.

As for biomods I prefer the DX:IW system here to. Unlike in DX1 you weren't locked into a biomod after you installed it and you pretty much had access to all the biomods from the start because you didn't have to wait until latter in the game before you found the organic cloak mod for example. I definitely liked the freedom of the biomod system in DX:IW.

matches81
10th Jan 2008, 01:21
Hello there!
First post on the new DX3 forum and I finally managed to find the time to read the whole thread.

I agree with most people here: I would hate universal ammo, it's just nonsense. Also, I'd love to see gritty near-future scenario, although I don't have a problem with settings after IW. It just has to be gritty and of course, the story must fit.
But in terms of setting and story I trust the developers for now. I liked the style of the teaser, so I've got no reason now to be especially worried.

Instead of reiterating all the other things other people have already said I think I have something to say to vecima's idea with that training / skills for money:
I honestly dislike it. Among other things with their character system that was a major fault in Morrowind and it almost ruined the game for me. The reason I don't like it is that it is pretty hard to properly balance the amount of money a player has, depending on the openness (is that even a real word?) of the game. And even if you can almost exactly say how much money a player has earned at a certain point of the game, you don't know how much of it he has spent, except perhaps for some story-driven expenses. So, while a skill point or experience system might make less sense from a realism point of view, it is far easier to balance and almost inherently results in forcing the player to choose. I've never seen a money-driven skill system that didn't utterly fail at that and left the player with all the responsibility not to overpower his character.
The only positive thing I can see when money would be involved with skills is that it sometimes might require the player to choose whether he wants the newest, biggest weapon upgrade or a skill upgrade. So, perhaps a combination of "skill points" and money would be a good thing.
Also, a nice idea I just had would be to make storage capacity a factor instead of "skill points". If we assume that those skill upgrades are actually software upgrades, you might just as well just make them bigger than their previous version and give the player a limited amount of storage, which you increase like you would skill points. Basically, replace the term "skill points" with "storage capacity" and that's what I mean. :)
But, again, this has one drawback I see: Seeing skill upgrades as purely software upgrades leaves the question why the player wouldn't be able to downgrade. And if the player could downgrade his skills in any way he pleases the result is a skill system that doesn't require any thought, just like the plasmids / tonics in Bioshock. Don't like your current character? Rebuild it just now. No need to think. And I definitely wouldn't like that.

So far, my 2 cents.

Mengioto
10th Jan 2008, 15:51
As for biomods I prefer the DX:IW system here to. Unlike in DX1 you weren't locked into a biomod after you installed it and you pretty much had access to all the biomods from the start because you didn't have to wait until latter in the game before you found the organic cloak mod for example. I definitely liked the freedom of the biomod system in DX:IW.

I thought that was a good thing about Deus ex 1; It made it seem like you really had to look for the canisters to get 'better' (getting more and more elaborate). And I really liked that there were 2 cans of each, so when you didn't find it the first time, you would find it again!

and welcome matches81^^

DXJohnny1981
10th Jan 2008, 21:21
I thought that was a good thing about Deus ex 1; It made it seem like you really had to look for the canisters to get 'better' (getting more and more elaborate). And I really liked that there were 2 cans of each, so when you didn't find it the first time, you would find it again!

and welcome matches81^^

Yeah, the DX1 biomod system did contribute allot more to the RPG side of the game because you would start out with basic biomods and as you progressed through the game you would find more capable biomods that made you more powerful so I can definitely understand someone liking the DX1 system. At the very least I hope we can overwrite biomods that we installed earlier in the game. I remember the first time I played DX1 I pretty much installed the biomads as soon as I found them so latter in the game I would find better biomods that I wanted to use but then I would find out that the torso slot was full so I wasn't able to use this better mod.

matches81
10th Jan 2008, 22:16
I'd also like to add that unlike most other people I actually prefer the universal ammo and biomods. You can still have the same customization with weapons while using universal ammo. There's no reason why a crossbow for example can't fire tranquilizers, arrows and flare darts like in DX1 while still using universal ammo just make it where you go into the inventory and select the different weapon options or something. This allows players to stick with their favorite weapons for the most part without worrying about running out of a particular ammo and then having to switch to a weapon they really don't want to use.
I think there are reasons why a crossbow should use different ammo than a pistol for example. Simply because it makes more sense to have cheap and different ammo types for two completely different weapons instead of building some high-tech universal ammo for lots of money that somehow "adapts" to the weapon. It's simply not too feasible to build that "adapting" ammo when you could just as well shoot cheap, trusty bolts with that crossbow. Also, I guess this falls into the same area as "swappable biomods": Universal ammo requires less thought from the player. If you really can't find two or three weapons in a game that you don't hate to use, different ammo types can be a problem, right. But I've actually never experienced that myself. But even if I would: I would like the challenge resulting from that, instead of having plenty of ammo for that weapon all the time. If I only want to use one weapon then I better think about how I manage to do that. Also, in the case I run out of ammo with universal ammo, I'm left with just a single option, instead of having the option to use another weapon just in this emergency.


As for biomods I prefer the DX:IW system here to. Unlike in DX1 you weren't locked into a biomod after you installed it and you pretty much had access to all the biomods from the start because you didn't have to wait until latter in the game before you found the organic cloak mod for example. I definitely liked the freedom of the biomod system in DX:IW.
In fact, exactly that swapping out of biomods any time you wanted to was one thing that annoyed me. It doesn't require the player to think before doing something. Sure, some players may use the first biomods at once, but I think a Deus Ex player should be clever enough to stop doing that as soon as he learns that these things are permanent. I simply don't like the "rearrange your character anytime" idea. Also, for me it is part of any RPG-ish experience that my character probably won't end up as strong as he could be, because I've made some not-so-wise decisions, but for me that's part of the game and adds replayability.

DXJohnny1981
10th Jan 2008, 23:03
In fact, exactly that swapping out of biomods any time you wanted to was one thing that annoyed me. It doesn't require the player to think before doing something. Sure, some players may use the first biomods at once, but I think a Deus Ex player should be clever enough to stop doing that as soon as he learns that these things are permanent. I simply don't like the "rearrange your character anytime" idea. Also, for me it is part of any RPG-ish experience that my character probably won't end up as strong as he could be, because I've made some not-so-wise decisions, but for me that's part of the game and adds replayability.

I guess we can agree to disagree here. :) With permanent biomods you run into two circumstances one I already explained in my previous post and the other is where you will hold off on installing biomods because you realize that they are permanent and you don't want to run into the situation that I described before so you wait until latter in the game when you will find a biomod that will knock your socks off for each slot so you end up not installing any mods through most of the game. So what's the point in having biomods if you're not going to use them for most of the game?... Without biomods DX is just a another FPS.

You still have the core RPG element with "swappable" biomods because you start out with basic and weak mods and as you progress through the game you find better mods that you can upgrade your systems with. So your character gets stronger as you progress through the game and that's really the core RPG gameplay.

gamer0004
11th Jan 2008, 07:52
Dx is definately not a normal FPS without biomods. Project Snowblind was.
I liked the biomod systeem, but they should tell you the mods are permanent, because else the millions-worth superagent isn't so... super :P

matches81
11th Jan 2008, 11:08
I guess we can agree to disagree here. :) With permanent biomods you run into two circumstances one I already explained in my previous post and the other is where you will hold off on installing biomods because you realize that they are permanent and you don't want to run into the situation that I described before so you wait until latter in the game when you will find a biomod that will knock your socks off for each slot so you end up not installing any mods through most of the game. So what's the point in having biomods if you're not going to use them for most of the game?... Without biomods DX is just a another FPS.

You still have the core RPG element with "swappable" biomods because you start out with basic and weak mods and as you progress through the game you find better mods that you can upgrade your systems with. So your character gets stronger as you progress through the game and that's really the core RPG gameplay.
Yes, I guess we have to agree to disagree. I had no problems using biomods in DX1, even if I did find another later on that I would have liked more. Basically I like it when I can make decisions in a game that have an impact, even about my own character. That's what I like about RPGs. I wouldn't like an RPG where I can exchange my learned skills any time I wanted to, or at any time, without a cost, because that makes the decisions I make regarding my character pointless. For me it is part of a system like that in DX1 for the biomods that I have to consider whether or not that biomod could be useful for my playstyle and the direction I want to go to. With swappable biomods I don't have to make up my mind about what direction I want to go to and can change my playstyle anytime I want. So, while swappable biomods may allow you to "max out" your character at any given time, it also makes the game simpler and less thought-requiring. Also, I don't like that maxing out your character being overly important. I'm more the "style over everything" kinda guy :)
It would be a different matter altogether if I had to pay a hefty price for swapping out a biomod. At least then there would be a bit of weight in the decision I made when installing one biomod.
Also, whether or not biomods are swappable could be determined by the difficulty of the game, but I think that could be problematic because it would throw the game balance off too much. Still, it could be worth considering.

DXJohnny1981
11th Jan 2008, 21:28
Dx is definately not a normal FPS without biomods. Project Snowblind was.

You're right even without biomods DX1 at least was still not a typical FPS with the complex story and skills system. I just think if you're going to have these cool biomods you should be able to use them without worrying about being locked in to weaker mods throughout the game.

@matches81

I'm not saying it should be wide open like DX:IW where you have universal mods that you can swap in and out willy nilly, I thought that was cheap. What if they went back to using separate biomods for each ability like DX1 and to make it even more thought provoking there would only be one of each biomod in the whole game, they should also bring back the upgrade canisters. So you may run into a situation where you maxed out a biomod and then latter you find a better one however realizing that upgrade canisters are limited throughout the game you have to make a decision if you really want to overwrite that current mod and waste the upgrades you spent on it. You also have to remember once you overwrite a particular biomod it's gone for the rest of the game because there's only one of each biomod and the game would have to warn people of these facts when they try to overwrite a biomod. So with this system you would definitely have to weigh the decision to overwrite a biomod.

matches81
12th Jan 2008, 00:42
That sounds much more feasible to me. That way there is a really hefty cost to "overwriting" a biomod, which would be a nice thing. The only drawback I see is that I would find it a bit odd that the game tells me there will be no other instance of this biomod available for the rest of the game. That's a bit like a spoiler :) I guess a warning that the current biomod will be lost including its upgrades should suffice. That way you wouldn't "spoil" that part and could, for example hide another instance of a biomod in a secret area or something like that.
I somewhat liked that you could find biomods more than just one time. That way, if you missed the first time, there was a chance you got it later on in the game.
Basically, it doesn't matter how often a biomod can be found, as long as they're still a rare find. I'd still like your idea, simply because it denies the possibility to constantly swap your biomods like you want to without thinking about what you're doing.

DXJohnny1981
12th Jan 2008, 03:08
Basically, it doesn't matter how often a biomod can be found, as long as they're still a rare find. I'd still like your idea, simply because it denies the possibility to constantly swap your biomods like you want to without thinking about what you're doing.

Yeah you're right having 2 or 3 of each biomod isn't a problem, just having a limited amount of aug upgrades throughout the game should make people think hard about overwriting biomods that they spent upgrades on before.

hydro0083
12th Jan 2008, 03:36
Dump universal ammo:- Universal ammo was the biggest step backwards for the DX series. The DX games are supposed to be about letting you play any way you want, yet if you tried to take a run-n'-gun, shoot-'em-up style, you would be out of ammo in no time. And when that happened, you had no choice but to resort to taking the stealth approach. While the original DX had you strategically use a full repertoire of different weapons, IW's ammo system made it better strategically to stick to just a few.

Accents:- All the different accents from DX1 gave each city a sense of authenticity and gave the game as a whole a sense of cultural diversity. The way the characters intermingled words from their native language with their English made it all seem even more authentic. So it was very disappointing that you didn't hear a variety of different accents in Invisible War. A few people in Cairo make half-hearted stabs at sounding Arabic but other than that, most everyone sounds the same. Why didn't the Germans sound German? Why didn't all the Egyptians sound Egyptian? It would be great if Eidos had native speakers to handle the different accents for DX3.

Relatable themes:- DX1 was intruiging because it dealt with a lot of themes completely relevant in the present-day. DX2, on the other hand, was so far removed from the present day, that while its story was well written, it felt a lot harder to relate to. For DX3, it would be great to have a setting closer to the present with themes you can relate to. How about references to present-day people and events? And how about themes that deal with present-day issues like terrorism, jihad, and torture - maybe even with a city set in the Middle East. It would be great to play in a 2027 version of Baghdad.

Return to Hell's Kitchen:- Liberty Island was one of the best levels from DX2. It was different enough from the original Liberty Island to feel fresh and intriguing, yet similar enough for nostalgia. Similarly, Hell's Kitchen was a fan favorite from the first game and most gamers would love to go back there.

Real consequences for your actions:- It was great how the factions were set up in DX2. Instead of handing you a gun and telling you, "These are the good guys over here and those are the bad guys over there - go kill 'em," like most games do, IW let you choose who to side with and who to turn against. With that said, those choices didn't have long-term consequences. You could stab a group in the back over and over and over again, yet they would keep coming back to you. This dynamic made it feel like a lot of the choices didn't matter since there weren't long-term consequences or decisions where there's no turning back.

Little to no swimming:- This is one thing that DX2 did better than DX1. Swimming in the original game was slow and boring most of the time. DX2 fixed this problem by not having any swimming at all. If DX3 has no swimming at all, that'll be fine. If it does have swimming, it should be in short stretches limited to small areas.

Hacking mini-game:- To hack a computer in the DX games, all you do is push a button then stand there and wait until you're through security. It's as exciting as waiting on a loading screen. For DX3, let's see a hacking mini-game a la BioShock or the Ratchet and Clank series. Not only would a mini-game make hacking more exciting, it would also feel more rewarding.

gamer0004
12th Jan 2008, 09:39
You're right even without biomods DX1 at least was still not a typical FPS with the complex story and skills system. I just think if you're going to have these cool biomods you should be able to use them without worrying about being locked in to weaker mods throughout the game.

@matches81

I'm not saying it should be wide open like DX:IW where you have universal mods that you can swap in and out willy nilly, I thought that was cheap. What if they went back to using separate biomods for each ability like DX1 and to make it even more thought provoking there would only be one of each biomod in the whole game, they should also bring back the upgrade canisters. So you may run into a situation where you maxed out a biomod and then latter you find a better one however realizing that upgrade canisters are limited throughout the game you have to make a decision if you really want to overwrite that current mod and waste the upgrades you spent on it. You also have to remember once you overwrite a particular biomod it's gone for the rest of the game because there's only one of each biomod and the game would have to warn people of these facts when they try to overwrite a biomod. So with this system you would definitely have to weigh the decision to overwrite a biomod.

This is, in fact, the "cheap" system of DX:IW.

matches81
12th Jan 2008, 16:24
Relatable themes:- DX1 was intruiging because it dealt with a lot of themes completely relevant in the present-day. DX2, on the other hand, was so far removed from the present day, that while its story was well written, it felt a lot harder to relate to. For DX3, it would be great to have a setting closer to the present with themes you can relate to. How about references to present-day people and events? And how about themes that deal with present-day issues like terrorism, jihad, and torture - maybe even with a city set in the Middle East. It would be great to play in a 2027 version of Baghdad.
Please... Please don't make DX3 about terrorism or djihad or anything like that. I'm sick of it. Relatable themes, sure. But not necessarily the currently most overused topic available. Also, while terrorism does fit into a Cyberpunk-like setting, I would find djihad in the current common sense pretty odd and misplaced.


Hacking mini-game:- To hack a computer in the DX games, all you do is push a button then stand there and wait until you're through security. It's as exciting as waiting on a loading screen. For DX3, let's see a hacking mini-game a la BioShock or the Ratchet and Clank series. Not only would a mini-game make hacking more exciting, it would also feel more rewarding.
There's nothing to say against a hacking "mini-game" in itself, at least not from my point of view, but like Bioshock? Please don't. That was fun the first 5 times. Then it got overly repetitive and just annoying.
I'd opt for the more "classical" approach to hacking: Doing a brute-force attack (which is what I thought of when seeing that "progress bar") with some kind of software, after which you have a rather limited amount of time, because the logon process was pretty suspicious, or finding the needed password to get into the system by exploration and thinking, like finding out all sorts of info related to the system's user and combining those to find the password. If you find the password the clever way and only needed one or two logon attempts, you get much more time to fool around, because you didn't behave overly suspicious.
Of course there could be some mini-games like rewiring something or things like that, but they shouldn't be overused and at least need brains, instead of that simple PipeMania clone used in Bioshock.

JulianP
12th Jan 2008, 16:35
There's nothing to say against a hacking "mini-game" in itself, at least not from my point of view, but like Bioshock? Please don't. That was fun the first 5 times. Then it got overly repetitive and just annoying.
I'd opt for the more "classical" approach to hacking: Doing a brute-force attack (which is what I thought of when seeing that "progress bar") with some kind of software, after which you have a rather limited amount of time, because the logon process was pretty suspicious, or finding the needed password to get into the system by exploration and thinking, like finding out all sorts of info related to the system's user and combining those to find the password. If you find the password the clever way and only needed one or two logon attempts, you get much more time to fool around, because you didn't behave overly suspicious.
Of course there could be some mini-games like rewiring something or things like that, but they shouldn't be overused and at least need brains, instead of that simple PipeMania clone used in Bioshock.
I agree, not like Bioshock. God that got on my nerves... I think hacking was done pretty nicely in System Shock 2. A similar system could work in Deus Ex as well.

matches81
12th Jan 2008, 19:45
System Shock 2's hacking just wasn't as annoying because you didn't hack that much as you did in Bioshock. In Bioshock you hack every god-forsaken little turret and camera on its own, in System Shock 2 you hacked terminals controlling them, which drastically cut down on the amount of hacking you did.
The game itself was a good idea, but too depending on luck. Even if you thought about what you were doing there and your skill was high enough, there was a good chance you'd fail simply because of the total dependence on random numbers.
Anyway, I think if there is much hacking involved a single mini-game is just not going to cut it, or it should be combined with other methods to get into a system. Any simple mini-game you can come up with has the problem that it is simple, so it will get annoying when you have to repeat it say 10 times in 2 hours of gameplay or even more often.

gamer0004
12th Jan 2008, 20:22
I have THE solution at hands: hack by playing tetris :nut:

DXJohnny1981
12th Jan 2008, 22:20
This is, in fact, the "cheap" system of DX:IW.

No, it is not...The difference here is there's no universal biomods that you can swap in and out at will as the situation calls for it and there where plentiful biomods throughout DX:IW so it was easy to swap like this. Also with my version you're wasting upgrades so it costs you to switch a biomod.

As for lock picking mini games please don't... I hate mini games, if I wanted to play mini games I'd buy a Wii...

minus0ne
12th Jan 2008, 23:01
Accents:- All the different accents from DX1 gave each city a sense of authenticity and gave the game as a whole a sense of cultural diversity. The way the characters intermingled words from their native language with their English made it all seem even more authentic. So it was very disappointing that you didn't hear a variety of different accents in Invisible War. A few people in Cairo make half-hearted stabs at sounding Arabic but other than that, most everyone sounds the same. Why didn't the Germans sound German? Why didn't all the Egyptians sound Egyptian? It would be great if Eidos had native speakers to handle the different accents for DX3.
Actually the voice acting in DX was far from top-notch. Case in point: Hong Kong. With the exception of the Tracer Tong character and perhaps a few of the more subtle voice actors the "accents" here were AWFUL, as in, completely beyond redemption. I could even go as far as outright racist. I realise this wasn't done intentionally by IS, but still, the end result was pretty nasty. It was worse than many 1970's American movies' portrayal of Asian people, and that's saying something. I can't remember an example of "intermingling" of languages, though that could be done (if not used for more than one time, since it'd make no sense). I agree though that IW's "Hollywood" solution of completely dropping anything non-english was even worse (and to this very day, I still drop my jaw in awe when I see an film where non-english speakers are for some mysterious reason talking in english, worse yet, they speak English with - for example - an accent - what the hell?). I'd rather have them attempt accents (and for the love of Zeus; some non-english languages, more than DX1 did). I liked reading "Tandis quils dorment, nous gagnerons", as there's just no way in hell a Frenchman (let alone a resistance movement) would WILLINGLY have an English-language motto (though I did miss the occasional NPC who would just refuse to say anything English, that would've been authentic as hell).

Relatable themes:- DX1 was intruiging because it dealt with a lot of themes completely relevant in the present-day. DX2, on the other hand, was so far removed from the present day, that while its story was well written, it felt a lot harder to relate to. For DX3, it would be great to have a setting closer to the present with themes you can relate to. How about references to present-day people and events? And how about themes that deal with present-day issues like terrorism, jihad, and torture - maybe even with a city set in the Middle East. It would be great to play in a 2027 version of Baghdad.
DX dealt with terrorism and torture (NSF prisoners were tortured, sometimes to death, Jaime Reyes even objected to this in an email to Manderley). "Jihad"? Why? Who cares what some fringe fundamentalists proclaim as their holy war? Baghdad? Besides being the gazillionth game to do it, they'd have to do a lot of things right to make that work.

Return to Hell's Kitchen Agreed, though only if it fits.

[B]Little to no swimming:- This is one thing that DX2 did better than DX1. Swimming in the original game was slow and boring most of the time. DX2 fixed this problem by not having any swimming at all. If DX3 has no swimming at all, that'll be fine. If it does have swimming, it should be in short stretches limited to small areas.
If you never bothered to even upgrade your swimming past "Untrained", then that must've been quite slow and annoying, yes. I actually missed swimming in IW, and I've played quite a lot of games where swimming actually added to gameplay (NOLF for one). Plus, I can guerantee you must've missed a whole lot of loot (including an aug. upgrade cannister) if you didn't swim in DX.

Hacking mini-game:- To hack a computer in the DX games, all you do is push a button then stand there and wait until you're through security. It's as exciting as waiting on a loading screen. For DX3, let's see a hacking mini-game a la BioShock or the Ratchet and Clank series. Not only would a mini-game make hacking more exciting, it would also feel more rewarding.[/quote]
Agreed. HOWEVER, mini-games such as this often get rather tedious, fast. So it'd actually have to be fun to do. I loved TDS' clever lockpicking system, I'd like to see something along those lines. Though I'm not too sure I like having all sorts of minigames for picking locks, hacking electronics AND hacking computers - that may just be a little much.

SageSavage
12th Jan 2008, 23:38
NSF prisoners were tortured, sometimes to death, Jaime Reyes even objected to this in an email to ManderleyYou can become a witness of the assassination of an imprisoned NSF member. Just follow Simons to the cells when he leaves Manderlays office (the first time you meet him ingame). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7thlKJaC-Fs

I fear it's indeed impossible to use 9/11 and the serious conspiracy stories surrounding it for a game, although I agree that this is the kind of stuff that I'd love to see.

matches81
13th Jan 2008, 00:14
I don't see any harm in swimming. In fact, I think it could add to the game quite a lot, for example it could be used to open different possible solutions. A player who invested into swimming would be happy to have, for example, the possibility to close in on a target more stealthily by swimming through a river or something like that. Other players might just choose a different route.
Although I admit there were examples where swimming was used badly, most of the time it was in a game, I enjoyed it. It just shouldn't be overused, like every other element of a game.

@minus0ne: what's "TDS"? It rings a bell somewhere...

hydro0083
13th Jan 2008, 03:43
Thief Deadly Shadows

gamer0004
13th Jan 2008, 10:26
No, it is not...The difference here is there's no universal biomods that you can swap in and out at will as the situation calls for it and there where plentiful biomods throughout DX:IW so it was easy to swap like this. Also with my version you're wasting upgrades so it costs you to switch a biomod.

As for lock picking mini games please don't... I hate mini games, if I wanted to play mini games I'd buy a Wii...

You wasted upgrades in IW too. And biomods weren't THAT common...

Kassian
14th Jan 2008, 09:38
Among all DX2's faults the greatest fault was really I don't see how it fit into the Deus Ex universe. The game takes place 20ish years after DX1, if i remember correct, yet the almost apocalyptic world of DX1 suddenly changes to a modernized and centralized world. Maybe it was just the environment visited in DX1, but if I remember correctly, wasn't there a lethal disease that was killing off much the world? Grey Death? Yet, even with the "great collapse," somehow mankind not only was able to rebuild society, both in ghettos & "enclaves," but also managed to make some rather substantial huge technological jumps, more over in the public sector. DX1 had some advance gadgets and "space edge" tech, but it was all top secret stuff, hidden away in secret labs, not walking the streets. DX2 had to many inconsistencies, to many open ended, unanswered questions. When DX1 ended I wanted more, much much much more, and I had a feeling of closure. When DX2 ended I wasn't sure what to think. The game just gave a quick 30 second cut scene and ended. It didn't provoke anymore thought, other than who wrote the game and what a shotty job they did.
><
DX3 needs, must have, more to do with DX1 then simply playing a clone of the Dentons. If its a prequel, it has to explain why the world is the way it is during DX1, why there was a virus created, give a much more detailed explanation of where MJ12 came from and their motives. Yes i realize that most of that was covered in DX1, but hearing it and playing it are different. If it’s a sequel, there should be a nice apologize letter for DX2 at the beginning asking us to disregard it. When the game begins the whole story should be just given away, but there needs to be some connection to the previous games. Possibly even follow JC's become a victim to his own philosophy of political corruption, and have your character over throw JC, or what he became. Regardless of what path the game takes, it has to make the player think.
><
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. has some great aspects which i really hope are in DX3, primarily because they are simply upgrades of DX1 traits. While the actual game has no parallel on DX1,2,3 because its set in fields and valleys, the UI is straight out of DX1. The UI needs to be minimal, almost non-existent. What made DX1 so great was the players frailty. Even with augmentation and your infolink J.C. Denton was still just a man. 1 shot deaths, as irritating as they were, made the game different, and forced the player to adapt to each situation differently.
><
Oblivion's skill system, while a bit over the top for DX3, really shows what the game needs. The game should allow the player to play DX3 like Doom, Hitman, or Thief.
><
I hope DX3 lives up to more than just being DX3, and that it doesn't turn into another Doom 3 or Crysis. While Crysis is a very good game, with outstanding graphics, the story line is lacking tremendously by RPG standards, and we all know what FPS standards are, ie Doom. So maybe it would be better to start referring to DX3 as an RPG instead of a FPS?

gamer0004
14th Jan 2008, 13:47
It IS referred to as an RPG.
Anyway, why would you want the story to be given away at the beginning of the game :scratch:

DXJohnny1981
14th Jan 2008, 21:44
You wasted upgrades in IW too. And biomods weren't THAT common...

After thinking about this a little more it seems you're right. Aw well, just forget it and go back to the DX1 system... LOL

Kassian
14th Jan 2008, 22:24
I'm not saying the story should be given away at the beginning, just it would be nice to actually have the games share more then simply the name, to build off each other.

A good example of this would be what the folks at Bioware are doing with Mass Effect. The series is suppose to be a trilogy, but if u don't play number one, number 2 will make minimal sense. the games build off each other, there was even rumors of the games having multiple beginnings and as to incorporate what ever ending the player choice in the previous game.

DX1 was great because it played like an RPG, DX2 wasn't because it played like an FPS, with more npc interaction.

guardian130270
16th Jan 2008, 01:00
Concerning story background: A funny (to me at least :)) story about my first playthrough of DX1.

I'm not sure what I did but playing DX1 the first time I managed to skip over the opening cinematic. I played through the entire game revealing small bits of the story and background by reading all the in-game e-mails, newspapers, etc.

It was actually a much more rewarding a story as I slowly discovered the world and conspiracies that filled it. Within game context, it was great how I became more involved in the story as I discovered how these people had played "God" with my life and manipulated me for their own purposes. I was "shocked" when I found out that I was a clone and intended to be a puppet for the establishment to further their agenda. It made the final choices in the game more interesting as I had to decide who to follow. (The endings were still pretty weak but getting there was fun.)

It wasn't until the second playing that the opening cinematic played and it was actually a great relief that I had missed it because it gives away everything leaving no mystery to the conspiracies. I don't know how much I would have enjoyed the story aspect of DX1 if I had had it all laid out before me with the opening they had.

For the DX3 developers, maybe you could consider implementing that kind of twist to increase story interest. Don't tell players the truth, let them figure it out for themselves as they go along. Probably too late for a change like that but there's the idea anyway.

gamer0004
16th Jan 2008, 09:33
I liked the opening cinematic. When you've finished the game you think it gives away way too much info, but the first time it didn't make sense to me. I thought I recognized some people from the intro, but I just couldn't believe they were the bad guys.
Also, why would you have to find out yourself? In DX it was just fine.

Slack
16th Jan 2008, 22:23
The loading time in DX2 are horrible... the game stops every time to... load.
It ends with all the ilusion of reality.

gamer0004
17th Jan 2008, 14:56
The loading time in DX2 are horrible... the game stops every time to... load.
It ends with all the ilusion of reality.

That's not the worst, I think. The problem wioth the small maps is that you can't run from the enemie to hide.
Fir instance, I have to get to a door (loadscreen). In DX I could just run for it, until I was far enough and then hide somewhere. In DX:IW I can't because if you go through the door, it takes like two seconds before you can slect "yes" (travel to ***), in which the guards can shoot you, and when you do get through alive, when you go back the guards are at exactly the same spot as when you left so they'll kill you. It's not only unrealistic, but very annoying too.

Caradoc
18th Jan 2008, 01:49
Hey fellas.

I loved deus ex. To be honest its the best game I know and deus ex 2 on the other hand is the most dissapointing game I've played in my lifetime. So let me throw my 2 cents what made first game so great.

1). Skills made it possible for all of us to choose our own playing style. How to proceed and solve different problems in gameworld. I personally think that the biggest flaw in dx2 was removing skills. It was fun to try different combinations, in dx2 everyone was forced to be jack of all trades. Sure there were biomods, which actually leads me to next major flaw in dx2...

2) Bring back the non-removable biomods.. It felt really dull how a player could easily reverse all his "non-so-good" choises. Finding a biomod canister was a huge thing in first game and choosing which one to apply was as hard as nails. Silent running or jumping ability? Invicibility from cameras or humans? With different sets of skills DX enabled vast number of different playing styles. In IW the whole biomod concept felt really really cheap because one had the option to change his choises in fly.

3) Larger levels. I absolutely hated the level design in deus ex 2. Devs really butchered the whole essence of deus ex with those tiny little maps of theirs. Do you guys remember the vandenberg military base? Didn't it feel HUGE first time, like a real thing.. Nothing felt same in invicible war, 90% of the levels seemed awfully fake and unbelivable.

4. Get rid off universal ammo.. I pardon my juvenile comment ahead, but the whole concept was from the begining terribly lame and judging by the posts on various forums 9 people of 10 hated this.

5.Inventory. Don't fix what isn't broken. Dues ex 1 had an easily functional inventory system, so why on earth did they go and replaced it with that dreadfull non-working stiff piece of crap?

6. Deus ex mythology or whatever you call it. One of the reasons why IW didn't feel like a proper sequel was the lack of game lore. There were all kinds of newspapers, books, emails, letters, notes which all reflected what the world was like from JC's eyes. For example it was really cool to hack in walton simons' account and read his personal emails regarding latest augenmation upgrades or whitness what kind of dirty pig Mr mandorley actually was behind the scenes or read from the paper what ordinary people thought about terrorist attack against statue of liberty. Or the doctor's last sad note where he stated that hospital had no drugs left... Deus ex was full of similar small details. :)

7) The storyline in DX was truly complex and every character was a personality (smugler, tracer tong, a bum behind maggie chow's apartment, Walton simons, gunther hermann.. they were all wonderfull characters.. Not to mention how the storyline had so many twists and turns, that I never really knew what was coming. Heck it was a shock when Men in black raided Paul's apartment. I never saw it coming or how the terrorists were actually good guys and i had been sniping them from the day one. I felt REALLY sad. When i found out that Anna knew it all along, i hardly belived my ears. Later on in paris I was almost heart broken as I read from an email how Gunther hermann mourned anna's death. Dx2 never made me feel anything not towards game characters or my character. Jc was a personality with a history (even if a fake one) and had his own moral code (which ofcourse reflected player's choises).

Atlan
18th Jan 2008, 05:26
To call Dues Ex: Invisible war completly useless is something of an over statement.

Sure, it was slow, the level design was terible, and most changes sucked. There WERE, however, good points.

The begining had the best atmosphere I'd played up till that point, and still pretty good in hindsight. I remember walking through those coridors, no idea what was happeneing. People were saying "don't worry, everything's fine" when the janitor was killed and the whole building was shaking. It was the most paranoia inducing atmosphere ever.

The Greys were cool. I would love to see more of them (and their true origin) in DX3. Mabey more of the Transgenics.

It would be nice to have stealth become a more viable option than in the previous ones. The stealth Augs from the first game were useless- who in their right mind would pick 'Walk Silently' over 'Run hell-ass fast, and leap tall buildings in a single bound'? The invisibility Aug was a lot more useless than it should have been.

Hopefully we'll see a return of individual health for individual body parts. When I first had my arm taken out, and found I couldn't use a GEP gun- that was so awesomely shocking.

The origional had a (canceled) level that would have taken place in the White House- here's hoping we'll see that again.

gamer0004
18th Jan 2008, 07:48
No, the mods were perfect in DX. I really liked the invisibility augs and used them a lot. Other people like the run-fast aug, but I preffered the move silent augmentation.

Caradoc
18th Jan 2008, 16:43
Few good elements that IW had were buried under the huge flaws. Few storyline bits were nice and the concept of illegal biomods was intresting, but overall the whole experience felt so bad that I never fully enjoyed anything I came across. Thats why I said IW to be the most dissapointing game I've played. I finished the game once because I hoped it to get better, but it didn't.

Silent running was as good as the running fast aug. They simply had different uses. A guns focused player might enjoy fast running aug more, but silent running made it impossible for them to hear you, thus you could easily suprise vast number of enemies with melee weapons.

digzDX
19th Jan 2008, 19:58
I've skimmed many of these posts and overall I have to say that this is probably one of the most passionate group of fans for a particular game I've ever seen. A forewarning right now that this will be a long read so if you're not in for a trip down memory lane and some extended musings then skip this post.

Its to Ion Storm's credit we have this much to talk about, and it is to Eidos advantage as well. They would be simply foolish to not read every last letter of these posts. I would guess many of the same differences in opinion noted here probably existed (atleast I hope) within the Eidos team as well as they were hashing out conceptual, design and functional things. We can only hope that every single person on their team is as equally passionate and captivated by the game as this community is. And, its incredibly rare to find a community that has remained as dedicated and involved as this one has - for a now 7 year old game.

To try and respond/agree/disagree to all these posts is impossible. What I would rather do is provide a sense of why to this day, having played countless shooters, RPGS, RTSs, etc, Deus Ex still remains one of my top 3 games of all time. And, some insight on what would make DX3 great for me. For the record, I didnt even play DX2. The demo was so absolutely dissapointing I didnt even bother. Flame away if you will but I suspect Im not alone here.

Ok, so on to the analyses....

Until Deus Ex, no game had ever really made me THINK about its story. Got me INVOLVED and truly INTERESTED. The original DX is a masterful piece of writing. And as many have already noted, the fact that it was set in our real world made it that much more immersive. I remember thinking I had never played a game this dark before. Both visually and thematically. It felt serious. It made you think that your participation in this world, and your influence and choices mattered. It urged you to pay attention. To listen to the dialog, to be keenly aware of the environments, and objects around you. Even the smallest details in the game like pay phones, graffitti on the bathroom wall, etc appeared to have potential relevance. Because of this, exploring was hugely satisfying because it had so consistenly created a believable environment - destructible, useable, informational, or otherwise contributing to the overall texture of the sense of place and time.

I havent played DX in a few years, and I'm sure if I went back to play it again the levels would feel much smaller than they did when I first played, especially compared to the size of many SP game levels now. But, again the impression was that the levels WERE big. Not only that, but that there were SO MANY nooks and crannies that had some sort of interactive potential. Visually DX seemed so unique, and fresh, unlike anything I had ever seen before. High-tech, futuristic, dirty, dangerous...Just so INTERESTING to simply experience.

Every object in the game was identifiable. Again it gave you the sense that "Wow this bottle might actually be useable for something.."

It was this sense of open-endedness that made every second of DX feel like your every action and motion were vital.

And, it was a game that wasn't easy but wasnt ALWAYS hard. It forced us to try and connect the dots. It presented us with challenging situations that sometimes seemed to have no immediately obvious solution. It made us WORK. This was so crucial to the sense of satisfaction you got when achieving objectives. It kept you guessing like a good mystery. And that word, mystery, is one that I think sets DX apart from tons of other games that try to APPEAR to be mysterious and arent.

As we know, the more flexibility you give the player, the more options to solve problems and achieve goals, the more difficult it becomes to balance the game for everyone. I sincerely hope that DX3 be a game first and foremost for DX fans and serious gamers. These are gamers that are not only WILLING to invest time in learning, observing their enviroments, researching, exploring, gathering information, etc in order to solve problems but they LOOK FORWARD to that. They love the idea of trying to discover whats relevant and what isnt. What's useable and what isnt. What the "rules" of this virtual world are, and how to either play by them, or in some cases exploit or violate them. You can argue that much of the open endedness or sense of dynamic story and plot in DX was just an illusion. But at the end of the day, if the illusion WORKS, then its irrelevent unless the illusion is broken as it was at the end of DX. Elements within the game that give the SUGGESTION of depth, in main story, or back story, or gameplay choices are welcome IMO. It all contributes to further immersion and the suspension of disbelief, which the first game approached many times but fell short on a few occasions.

The bottom line is DX took MANY chances in how it was presented, how the gameplay worked (or sometimes didnt). It was a game that clearly had a point of view and was unapologetic about it. For the love of God, I hope DX3 is willing to put itself in that position. With the advancements in AI and the ability to create much more fuzzy logic between events and actions in a game, I really really hope that DX3 can push the envelope even further to a place where choices truly DO create diverging paths, but allow the advancement down those paths to remain reversable to an extent. A way for the player to have an alliances, reputation, and dispositional nuancing that is dynamic, and effects how the player might interact with NPCs (and MAYBE other human players?? wink wink nudge nudge), objects, environments, and organizations or factions.

As an example, imagine discovering a smugglers hideout. You can stealth in, or go in guns blazing. You can kill the smuggler who is currently there, or reveal yourself and attempt to interact. You can attempt to steal objects there, or potentially buy, or barter for them. Or, you might even be able to set up surveillance that allows you to gather MORE information about this place, to aid you in making one of those decisions down the road. Perhaps there are recurring events in that hideout that, without knowing it, can be interrupted or canceled inadvertantly due to one of your hasty decisions prior to the event's occurence. Perhaps this event, like a meeting of several smugglers, will give you valuable information, or simply an opportunity to kill multiple enemies and get 5 times the loot, or presents a new side objective, or presents an opportunity to increase/decrease reputation that would otherwise not have been had before.

This is the kind of persistant, multi-relational, event-driven world I am talking about. A true sandbox type enviroment that has primary objectives, but also many many secondary gameplay experiences that either support the primary objective in some way, or offer some sort of enhancement, reward, or simply entertainment value.

About the closest thing I can compare it to would be Oblivion. But unlike Oblivion, I dont think DX3 needs to be this vast geographically open ended world. It could be just a collection of richly detailed, highly interactive set pieces, that still could feel fairly massive in scale and be internavigable. Vehicles would be a nice addition to provide alternate ways to travel, but I could see making them sparse, and difficult to obtain, in order to control how fast the player can achieve objectives and move through the game.

Graphically, its a foregone conclusion these days that even budget titles look halfway decent. I dont think DX3 has to have any groundbreaking, incredible new visual feature. It has to be BELIEVABLE. And making something believable is not just about how it LOOKS but how it ACTS. I would rather see DX3 focus on extending the influence of physics and AI on the gameplay that DX2 tried to have (based on what I remember reading about its features). For me, most games these days look hella realistic. Any new visual feature should exist because it enhances the actual gameplay in some tangible way, not just provide "ohh and ahh" moments. Todays rendering technology is well capable of providing those.

And, here comes the statement I know people will immediately hang me out to dry on here.

I dont think DX3 needs multiple endings. It wasnt the reason I loved the game in the first place and it wasnt the

Why? Because if its structured like Oblivion, with a main objective and then numerous secondary ones, it can provide a TON of gameplay that allows for a vast amount of trial and error, discovery, and yet can still be forgiving when it comes to the many styles of decision making gamers have.

I will say though that I think DX3 should be a game that doesn't force, but HIGHLY ENCOURAGES and rewards deliberation and premeditative decision making. It should be impossible to Rambo style through it. It should rather provide situations where Rambo style game choices can be advantageous, or not, depending on the situation. After all, most human beings when presented with a REAL LIFE situation, whether its a hostage crisis or a nuclear meltdown, or a viral outbreak, would not make hasty decisions without gathering sufficient information first. I hope DX3 presents situations that feel equally as weighty.

DX3 should be a game designed for intelligent, well-oiled gamers. The time is right to make a game thats more challenging, deeper and more complicated because today's gamer (and DX fans) are far more sophisticated, much more familiar with traditional game conventions, and less adverse to a higher learning curve IF the opportunity for a deep, dynamic and momentous gameplay experience is waiting for them at the other end. Can it have more mindless, simple tasks or experiences that cater to the casual gamer? I think so. But, the reward in that case should fit the investment, and those experiences should ladder up at some point to more sophisticated ones. Hell, I think you shouldn't even publish a manual for it. Let the gamers figure it out. You know they'll blog about it, post it in forums, etc. The mystery and discovery is half the fun!!! As a matter of fact, wouldnt a community forum IN GAME be a real interesting feature? Imagine a user generated database of tips, comments, etc that you could access at terminals throughout the world...but accessing it would cost you in some way. There could be some management on how much content players could share and how it was formatted. Maybe information becomes a commodity in the game and somehow there's an economy in place to support the transactional process of obtaining it. Speaking of economy, theres definitely room to expand what DX did with the purchasing (or less than lawful obtainment) of items. Imagine if your actions in the game affected how much things cost you at vendors, whether you can even buy certain items, or even what vendors inventories are. Vendors could have operating hours. Some sort of built in community between them and competitive, market-driven relationships that affected pricing. God I could go on all day. I'm just completely blue skying now but its an interesting concept.

Anway, the potential for greatness is there. Take your time. Lots of it if you need it (but please dont take a page from DNF :) Get it right. Be bold. Take risks with this game. Make it darker, more intense, deeper, more dynamic, and more diverse than the original and you will win.

Please, Eidos Montreal, give us a game that is worthy of the Deus Ex name.


:thumbsup:

matches81
20th Jan 2008, 00:49
wow, that was a long read.
On most things I agree, but especially on the Oblivion comparison I have to strongly disagree. And somehow I think what you are saying in most of your post actually is exactly what Oblivion is not. Oblivion is no game for a mature gamer who wants intricate interactions with the world. It is a "true" sandbox game, in my opinion that's a pretty negative thing: A sandbox is a place that has lots of opportunities, but no challenges in itself. Oblivion offers a big world, you can do lots of things, but there are close to no challenges involved. Also, due to the very open-ended nature of the game world, it utterly failed to keep me interested in the story at all. Might be because the story was pretty generic, as well as the world.

So, I don't want a sandbox game in that sense. I want challenges. I want a story-driven game. Your posts sounds like you wanted that, too, so I think the Oblivion comparison just was a bit out of place.

Some of your ideas were pretty cool (I especially liked that part about wiring the smugglers' hideout). Another thing I would love to see is something similar to Hitman: Blood Money: When you act like Rambo, people will see you, and if somebody lives to tell the tale, you will get well known. Okay, I couldn't tell the effect in Hitman except for the mission rating, but the idea is awesome, and would lend itself ideally to a game striving to portray a persistent world: If you get caught on camera stealing something or killing somebody, for example, it would be great if you got somewhat notorious in the world. The more you act sloppy, the more people on the street will "recognise" you and act accordingly.
On the other hand we'll probably deal with something so top-secret in DX3 that it's unlikely the public will ever know about it anyway. Still, the conspirators / evil guys could use footage of the hero doing something "bad" to discredit him and things like that. Would be a nice surprise to find the "normal guy" on the street suddenly much more frightened when you approach him, because you appeared on the news yesterday.

gamer0004
20th Jan 2008, 11:02
I do want multiple endings. That's what made DX great. You have to think about what to do. When there is only one ending you don't have to choose, you don't have to think about it and it will be like "Do this, go there, do that" kind of game.
I don't like the online part either. It doesn't reallt contribute to the realism.

DXeXodus
24th Jan 2008, 13:00
DX1 was the first game I ever finished. I think that it is by quite a large margin, the best game ever created. This, as before mentioned, has led to other games just being dissapointing. Don't get me wrong though. I love gaming and It's something that I have put many hours into. But I always tend to benchmark a game against DX. After finishing it like 10 times I always find different ways to do things, new areas to explore and easter eggs which I never knew existed. The story-line gets me everytime.

Then along came Invisible war. I almost wet my pants when I heard it was coming out but when I played it I almost cried :mad2:

Please Eidos. Dont be ridiculous. Take the first game and build on that. Dont put it on a block and try and chip away at it because you will always end up with less. Take 1 or 2 things that worked from the second, but for the love of all things DX please dont screw this up.

We all want:

skills
cool biomods/augs
Large, multi-approachable maps
The good old crossbow that was kinda attached to your hand
properly upgradable weapons
target reticles that change according to your skill level
Meaninful characters
REAL frikkin' ammo
And most importantly a good storyline. A very very good storyline

:scratch:

Oh, and if there is some time left in the development cycle you can dabble around with the graphics :)

I mean, tell me a console cant handle that.....

DXeXodus
24th Jan 2008, 13:08
Oh... regarding storyline. I know they probably know exactly what they are doing by now in terms of the plot. But there was a mod for deus ex (cant remember it's name. Maybe someone can fill me in) that focussed on the actions of Paul during the same timeframe as the original game. I tought thats a really good idea and could be developed quite further. I dunno. Just puttin it out there

A.C
27th Jan 2008, 23:45
It was J.C, that made DE what it was. J.C had personality, whatever he did he had a reason for it, and if needed, he could state his mind clearly. Alex from DEIW was... confusing. I felt like Alex would sell out for anything, not having a clear idea about anything and not having any sort of attitude. Alex felt like he/she was on medication. J.C felt like an educated, dissilusioned third year student-dropout bad mofo who could act with words or fists. And that voice of his, it hit the spot, flat-line emotionless calculating cold at first glance. J.C was a perfect protagonist for the setting of DE, his personality reflected by the settings. Alex was like a third grade clone with a neat haircut, playing with those cool black market upgrades. J.C was a likeable character, one that feels comfortable, Alex was like a HUD.
The first time i started DE, from the moment i saw the menu it felt right.
Strong characters, voice acting (play Dreamfall), i don't care about the graphics, they can be two pixel blocks with FFVII hands, i don't care, don't care about the music but would like to hear Alex Brandon's stuff again, RPG-ish system from DE is good, let's see, what else....
The opponents. Yes, DE had npc's that you get to know and care about, and respect or fear. Like the secretary, like Gunther, like that russian, like the rebel leader, like Paul.
In DEIW i couldn't care less who i got to take down, not even the faction leaders. But that french guy ticked me off, seeing how J.C saved his buttocks in the sewers that one time... all of Alex's enemies felt like 'Doom' monsters, all alike. And what was that about giving me a chance to kill J.C and Paul, were you serious? It was like...wrong. I didn't want to do it, nobody did, no fan would. J.C is the first thing that pops up in your head when you think about DE, hell, J.C is DE. Admit it, we were given a chance to waste J.C beacause you yourself couldn't force your own hand to do it, fearing how it would turn out. So you gave us the means, and gave yourself an alternative storyline. J.C shouldn't have even been in DEIW, if you ask me, not like that. To paraphrase Payne, 'Kiling him was like staring at the grave of DE'.
Supporting characters in DEIW were weak, Alex's peers from the academy, the goodie-two shoes whats-her-name and that merc omar sellout, only that redhead chick had some moxy, but i forgot all about her as well.
DEIW seemed like it was made out of cardboard and you were really trying hard not to go to far and rip through it's lack of supstance, DE you go through as it comes, not doubting.
Just drop the arcade style of DEIW, use RPG elements but not superficially as it has become a trend, invent flavoured characters, add some cyberpunk, noir elements instead of 'star wars' and let J.C rest in peace. Don't ressurect him for DE3, just don't. Leave it all behind, where it should be. Invent an alternative version of DEIW events.
DE3 is going to be hard only if you treat it like a job, play with it. Don't go for the masses, they are mindless, they have their 'Dooms' and 'Serious Sams', give your fans 'DE'.

GundamXXX
18th Feb 2008, 08:21
What to keep is fairly easy. Almost everything DX1 was made of only better now :P

The only thing Im scared of is GFX. I know GFX dont make the game but Id like to think of games as women. If they dont look good your usually not going to try (no offense to women but its the truth :p)
What Im scared for is the unrealistic GFX like Doom 3, UT3 and the likes.

Please dont make shiny bulky and round GFX... please? T_T

kenx
18th Feb 2008, 12:35
I agree on most points, but the universal ammo should stay. You shouldn't be playing the game and be effectively unarmed because your ammo doesn't "match" your gun . . . it's silly.


I was playing DX1 3 times and i haven't such situation

gamel1025
18th Feb 2008, 15:33
What to keep, and what to toss, is a tough and complex question.

One thing is certain, though --- it's CRITICAL that DX3 keep DX2's concept of "universal ammo". It feels so stupid to be effectively unarmed with your sniper rifle and pistol because you have nothing left but "assault rifle" ammo

I felt compelled to register on the forum just to refute this comment. Universal ammo was one of the worst ideas implemented in IW. The vast majority of players agree that it was a mistake. I can only assume that the reason for universal ammo was to encourage the player not to be stingy in his use of various weaponry, but in the end it had exactly the opposite effect (at least in my case). I went from conserving GEP rockets, 30.06 or HE ammo in Deus Ex to almost never using larger weaponry in IW because of the ridiculous ammo cost, which would leave me without ammo for any weapon. Moreover, the act of deciding which weapon to use for any given situation in an attempt to use ammo most efficiently is key to immersing the player in the game. Deus Ex's wealth of weapon and ammo types was one of the most enjoyable aspects of the game, not only because of the number of choices, but also because of the usefulness of the different choices in the right situations. Additionally, the use of the universal ammo system made it impossible for the discovery or receipt of ammo to be a rewarding event and eliminated another aspect of choice from the game. And what, above all else, was so great about the original Deus Ex? Choice.

Fortunately, because DX3 is purportedly a prequel, it's unlikely we'll have to worry about the return of universal ammo.

Lo Bruto
18th Feb 2008, 20:10
Guess this guy who goes by the name of Grox is one of the few who actually liked the concept of Universal ammo.

I just remember in one of my plays through DX1, picking up all the 7.62 ammo I could, but I didn't use the Assault Rifle... I just got rid of the my weapon of preference by that time, the Flamethrower for a short time, got a Assault Rifle from a dead guy and started using it during my escape from the NSF Generator Building ... giving hell (Give'em Hell, Denton!), later I retraced my steps and got my flamethrower back... It was a shame that my Rifle Skills were Untrained... I sucked... :D But it was fun...

This is one of the examples where the Universal Ammo can't manage to compare... and where the DX1 ammo system was so great... (And, the skill system too, if you don't use the damn Assault Rifle, why do you need to be lethally precise with it?)

djinni33
19th Feb 2008, 02:17
despite the Dx2-phobia in this community, let's keep a few concepts from IW, like

-bot domination
-elevator music
-the Omar
-faction choices, but make them more relevant
-more exotic places, like Cairo

Get rid of
- universal ammo (= p4wn everything in IW just using a SMG)
- all other obvious stupidities introduced in IW

New stuff:
- rain!
- more drugs
- monkeys and potato chips

rhalibus
19th Feb 2008, 03:17
Please everyone! Grox stated later that he was kidding about universal ammo; he was just playing devil's advocate. Although I've also been guilty of posting without reading the whole thread, esp. when it's this long...:)


despite the Dx2-phobia in this community, let's keep a few concepts from IW, like

-bot domination
-elevator music
-the Omar
-faction choices, but make them more relevant
-more exotic places, like Cairo

Get rid of
- universal ammo (= p4wn everything in IW just using a SMG)
- all other obvious stupidities introduced in IW

New stuff:
- rain!
- more drugs
- monkeys and potato chips

I also think that the ability to throw bodies and objects around in DX2 (esp. at NPCs) should be kept; but most everything else in DX2 should be disregarded.

Not to be blasphemous or anything, but after a few video card upgrades DX2 wasn't the worst game. I played through it twice and enjoyed it, although it dulled the fun knowing that all Eidos really had to have done was just make DX1 again with better physics and graphics...:(

Another point about skill points...Some people on the thread make the claim that a good reward system would be based on how you played the level (more lockpicks for stealth style, more LAMs for Rambo style). I respectfully disagree and this is why:

During my first run-through of DX, I completed some levels with stealth, some with conversation, some with swimming, and some going all out Rambo style. People are complex, and many (if not most) people might simply appreciate nothing more than a balanced set of style options for every level, with the exp. points allowing the player to choose their own skill perks. I actually had fun having to try unfamiliar skills and weapons when I ran out of my usual resources or choices...This situation actually increased the immersion and made the game more real.

Just a thought. :)

djinni33
19th Feb 2008, 15:49
Not to be blasphemous or anything, but after a few video card upgrades DX2 wasn't the worst game. I played through it twice and enjoyed it, although it dulled the fun knowing that all Eidos really had to have done was just make DX1 again with better physics and graphics...:(


Quite true... just recycling and improving old stuff may seem dull, but it saves a lot of unnecessary effort and worked bloody great on Baldur's Gate, Monkey Island, Longest Journey, etc...

Also: Throwing corpses at people = ultimate win :cool:

gamer0004
19th Feb 2008, 18:09
despite the Dx2-phobia in this community, let's keep a few concepts from IW, like

-bot domination
-elevator music
-the Omar
-faction choices, but make them more relevant
-more exotic places, like Cairo

Get rid of
- universal ammo (= p4wn everything in IW just using a SMG)
- all other obvious stupidities introduced in IW

New stuff:
- rain!
- more drugs
- monkeys and potato chips

I'd like rain, but no exotic places, please! Damn, Caïro sucked. Not only because the level design was unrealistic, but the DX atmosphere was completely lost.

The elevator music was downright briliant.

Angel/0A
19th Feb 2008, 21:37
The elevator music was downright briliant.
I'll love it more if it won't always signify another loading screen. ;)

Weather effects in general would be awesome, kinda like what they're bragging about for the next Tomb Raider game.

madeye
20th Feb 2008, 03:55
I'm not really a fan of the universal ammo. I agree it does simplify things but I think it actually adds to the game if you have to resort to a backup weapon because you've been favouring one weapon too much. Also, there were a few of times during DX2 that I was forced to use melee weapons simply because a couple of rocket launcher shots had wiped out the last of my ammo. (Also, I gather from your comment that you weren't a fan of the assault rifle either. A half to a whole clip to take out one peon was lame.)

I agree with you on universal ammo. What we can do is maybe add blackmarket areas where you can purchase ammo and weapons.

madeye
20th Feb 2008, 03:56
Also, get rid of DX2's quirky console UI. It was a real pain in the rear to use.

rhalibus
20th Feb 2008, 06:27
Also, get rid of DX2's quirky console UI. It was a real pain in the rear to use.

The main issue there is that in a first person shooter you need your peripheral vision--so anything on the extreme left or right of the screen will curtail your gameplay experience much more than the top or bottom.

Eidos wanted to make the UI seem as if it were scanned onto the player's eyeball; hence the circular shaped inventory.

I think the original DX with the "four corners" and bottom hotlist HUD was fine--as long as they keep the idea that it is an actual heads-up display projected onto the players vision, and not the "user friendly" style in DX2 (it looked like an interface for automatically printing out your own photos at some supermarket kiosk). Crysis has a pretty good HUD idea--it seems projected without interfering with the player's vision.

Lo Bruto
21st Feb 2008, 19:54
I agree with you on universal ammo. What we can do is maybe add blackmarket areas where you can purchase ammo and weapons.

Yes, the famed Hong Kong blackmarket would be cool. Weapons, ammo and Illegal augmentations...
Nice... very nice.

idlewire
22nd Feb 2008, 20:28
I know most of this has been said to death, but DX1 is what I've been trying to re-experience in video gaming for 8 years.

Hard Choices: Irreversible decisions is what we crave even if we don't realize it. Which way do I go? Which weapon should I use? What do I upgrade?
-No universal ammo.
-Broad skill tree and more augs than I could ever choose from.
-Multiple paths to every situation.

Environments: Loading kills the flow and immersion and immersion is everything.
-Make areas as large you can without loading.
+Give us text to read about the DX world during loading screens (newspapers?) **
+Do not use the 'boring loading area' to give us 'seamless environments with no loading'.
-Details don't have to be fancy, just numerous.
+Birds, rats, roaches = awesome!
+Uneven floors, roads that are bowed in the middle, grass growing through cracks, water in ditches and drains, loose garbage and papers, cans that roll in the breeze.
-People love a homebase and a setting that feels like their own. They want to come back to it to feel safe. It's even better when it becomes unsafe later on. I felt at home at the UNATCO and when it became hostile ground, it was a big deal. Returning to places in different states creates memories and adds alot.
-Hide as much as possible. I've bought DX1 about 3 times and love playing it every time for the things I'm familiar with but more for the new surprises that I find every time. Hide big and little things! I want people to discover whole side quests years after the game is out.
-Lots of 'z' action. There was nothing better than using the jumping skills to get to the billboard in Hong Kong, Jack's loft, or going through the skylight in Area 51.
-Let us pick up everything and take it with us between levels if we're holding it.

**I've always thought a universal load screen system in which any system or developer could access a set of stories or mini-games to keep us entertained while loading would be a good idea. Feed us a paragraph of Moby **** (or whatever) and let us finish the book over the course of 4 or 5 games.

Rewards: With multiple paths for advancement, there are more opportunities to reward the player.
-Skill points for exploration is must.
-Storyline and conversation is rewarding. *
-People talking is much more of reward than stuff to read. The ridiculous amount of spoken dialogue and characters makes DX1 feel huge. (even if some of the voice acting could be better, it was damn memorable)
edit1:-You damn well better reward me for not killing people, but make it very difficult. Something damn good for a no-kill run.

*Story stuff:
-I want to hear all about the Illuminati, AI, genetics and everything. 'The Singularity is Near' by Ray Kurzweil could add some interesting storyline and future technology stuff.
-What is the perfect government? How much freedom can you give people and still have a stable society? How much can you take away before they revolt?
-What about having children when people can live forever?
-What about a society where religion is out-lawed? (because of a past violent religious war or something)
-We want accessible conspiracy that reaches back in our past.
-Where is morality a grey choice?
-How do people who try to run the world through media deal with the ever-growing interconnectedness and the free flow of information through the web? Wikileak for example.

FORGET MULTIPLAYER! IT'S AN RPG WITH GUNS.

additional notes:

DX2 was not a bad game really, just way too much to live up to.
Loved spiderbots and the Omar.
I like whoever's idea for the sound of the character scraping up against stuff like the wall and bushes.
Keep mantling and add a prone position for sniping and very small spaces.
Please don't do anything stupid like having in-game difficulty adjustability. Just like cheating in games, it ruins all the hard choices. We like adversity, but if you must, keep cheat codes hidden and difficult (or at least time consuming) like they traditionally are. If we get stuck and cheating is too easy, we'll use it rather than using ingenuity to come up with a clever solution, but the latter is the most fulfilling feeling in the world.
I'd like to be able to force-push people towards the end.
edit2: A severe NO on modularity. Best case, the story is spread over way to many years without enough closure between. Most likely case, expansions are canceled and we're left with half a game.
edit3: We are a froth-at-the-mouth fanbase. We would gladly setup mass advertising probably for free. Think of a creative Alternate Reality Game style viral marketing that takes advantage of us. We want this game to be good so badly and we will want other people to buy it if it shows any promise. We want this to be a success!

Or just remake DX1 with slightly better graphics and I'd buy it again.

gamer0004
23rd Feb 2008, 12:36
+Give us text to read about the DX world during loading screens (newspapers?)

Text to read during loading screens is bad for the immersion, because it feels like you are playing a game and not like you are there. They did it in DX:IW and I didn't really like it. It feels like a bad excuse for not putting in newspapers and books in a subtle way.

idlewire
23rd Feb 2008, 21:47
Text to read during loading screens is bad for the immersion, because it feels like you are playing a game and not like you are there. They did it in DX:IW and I didn't really like it. It feels like a bad excuse for not putting in newspapers and books in a subtle way.

You seriously feel less immersed because of text on a loading screen? Staring at a still picture with the word 'loading' keeps you more in character? I'd love for the character to pick up 'Jacob's Shadow' or something at the beginning of the game and work through it during loads. Do you just shut your eyes and hum the theme song real loud to keep your brain paused between maps? This sounds more hostile than I'm intending, but I really don't understand your complaint. How about a compromise: optional newspapers or books during loads?

Angel/0A
24th Feb 2008, 00:13
You seriously feel less immersed because of text on a loading screen? Staring at a still picture with the word 'loading' keeps you more in character? I'd love for the character to pick up 'Jacob's Shadow' or something at the beginning of the game and work through it during loads. Do you just shut your eyes and hum the theme song real loud to keep your brain paused between maps? This sounds more hostile than I'm intending, but I really don't understand your complaint. How about a compromise: optional newspapers or books during loads?

There'd have to be a library to choose from, not some random snippet of text, and I guess the ability to turn pages, but then again, I don't want loading times to be so long that I'm having to read something to pass the time. :P

Red
24th Feb 2008, 00:25
So... Am I the only one who would like the Loading screens to be as short as possible?!

I wouldn't like to have time to read one sentence let alone a paragraph from the newspaper during a loading screen! That's one of the things which made IW annoying. Long loading screens every 2 minutes.

Angel/0A
24th Feb 2008, 01:44
So... Am I the only one who would like the Loading screens to be as short as possible?!

I wouldn't like to have time to read one sentence let alone a paragraph from the newspaper during a loading screen! That's one of the things which made IW annoying. Long loading screens every 2 minutes.
That's basically what I was saying. :p

Xcom
24th Feb 2008, 02:25
So... Am I the only one who would like the Loading screens to be as short as possible?!

Apparently so.

Most of us don't want loading screens at all. :rasp:

idlewire
24th Feb 2008, 02:58
Short loading times! That's a brilliant idea! They really should of thought of that years ago. No wait! I got it! Let get rid of them ALL TOGETHER!

Look. As the amount of content gets larger, loading times are only going to get longer until we get gas powered optical and hard drives or crazy raid systems. Of course we want A, less load times B, less often but don't you realize they are freaking proportional to each other! Pick one. Unfortunately there _will_ be load times and you _will_ be bored ESPECIALLY if you want bigger maps, and that is basically what every other post on these forums is demanding (myself included). A long scrollable page that picks up where you left off, adds to the story and can be chosen would be ideal.

Xcom
24th Feb 2008, 03:35
I being optimistic because "streaming" (as opposed to pre-loading) is supposedly one of the strong points of Crystal's engine.

Since I don't believe there will be one giant, open world, there will probably be loading times between separate levels/missions, but those don't bother me as much. It's those loading zones which are structurally part of a single map (i.e: walk into a bar - load, walk into a hotel - load, etc) that annoy me, especially when you need to move back and forth a lot (like in IW).

GruntOwner
24th Feb 2008, 03:52
Universal ammo, though realistic with the implication of nano technology, was still a bad idea so for god's sake, hurry up and publish something saying that there's no way in hell you'll use it to stop people including myself mentioning it.
Bots: Bring back the DX1 monsters, not the sucky attempts at enemies from IW. If i saw a military bot, I sought any way around it, because their sheer firpower and endurance scared the **** out of me, whereas in IW they were just another enemy.
Those little details were great, how going through emails could reveal anything from how their family's doing without the ambrosia, to a full fledged report on psionics, which could be a great addition.
Story wise, I don't want to have to choose a path from the start, let me explore the world, become engrossed in the factions, implecations and past situations with a particular system before I go signing on, don't throw me in and only let me change at few and far between intervals, or never at all. I want to realize just how nutty the templars are, and lead a casual yet hasty retreat from their enclave shortly after lodging 10mm of lead in the back of their skull, returning to the illuminati seeking a chance to enlist, wandering for a while before another faction finally accepts me.
Character wise, badassery. I want a black leather trenchcoat, sunglasses, and a pistol to be the only weapon that I ever "need", just like DX1.
Speaking of weapons, SOME mods, like the silencer, or the welcome addition of the old duct tap/torch combo could be great on/off things to apply on the fly. Hell, make the pistol the ultimate display of my character, adding clip extensions and a self cocking hammer for automatic fire for the guntoating Rambonites, or a silenced, long barreled sniping carbine for the aspiring Genets among us. That pistol was my hand for the majority of the game.
The greande system needs to stay, simply because a grenade that I could use as a landmine was so much more freeing in combat, I could lay down a LAM on one coridor, whilst firing on another to avoid getting flanked, or I could just ambush their bot, rather than throwing it which has every possibility to miss, on account of grenades are damned inaccurate with me, so I could adjust them to my playing style.
Have serious choices with serious effects, killing A may leave point B with regularly patrolling guards, so talking to C to gain a sidequest that was only possible with A's elimination, despite it being a job from Q, would be more arkward, and depending on the subtlety of my execution, I may be able to simply walk past them as nobody saw me do it. Hell, Q might resign if A lives, resulting in a new boss and Q finding home with S's faction, if he even has one. I want a story which I can find myself thinking about when I'm not playing, contemplating my next move, or what might have been. If I'm in the slums, I want to hear the tale of how my actions inadvertantly caused the death of a mother, only realizing then just how bad an idea it was when I see the child's tears and incredibley well voice acted monologue, or to walk into a safehouse to the horror that my transmission to a mole led them to me, all because I neglected to cripple their communications when I had the chance.
The main problem with our many requests are this: every piece of evidende, and lord knows that's in short supply, suggests a prequal, from the date of the tollbooth to the obviously mech augmented child. This means mechanical augmentation, a time when the idea of nanites is a theory in production. You would find yourself in the role of Gunther or Anna, with augmentations being to blatent for infiltration, making social stealth an unaffordable luxury,a very special model, with augmentions considerabley lower key than most, or a human without augmentations. This might leave a choice, such as losing you arm at a certain time, and asked exectly how convincing you want the replacement to be, a tungsten gauntlet with incredible stregth, or a rubber/flash cloned tissue coated skeleton, with increased dexterity, capable of hacking like no organic counterpart, though just another hand in combat. Perhaps you could start off as a psi, with the mental recesses of your mind gifted with your manipulation of the universe pushed aside, in favour of hardwiring that shiny new leg that you picked up on your shopping trip through the free clinic's surgical theatre. The problem with Biomods as we know them is thus: without nano tech the biocells would be difficult, so having the system used in DX1 would be extremely difficult to justify, short of saying "sod off realism, we're having fun" (which I have no objection to, assuming you know where to draw the line) or it would need to be rewritten. frankly, if I were making a mechanical augmentation, I would make it self sustaining, let's face it, we're sinking $eleventy twelve million dollars on this thing, we're not gunna want to stop for gas along the way, but that would take away system which, from what I've read, seems to be very popular indeed. Personally I hated it, but that was only because my gamma was set so high it was impossible to see anything without the light eyes, so I always ran out. At this moment I realize just how much I've written and decide that It's best to end this now. Sorry about the length.

Red
24th Feb 2008, 09:47
Apparently so.

Most of us don't want loading screens at all. :rasp:


I being optimistic because "streaming" (as opposed to pre-loading) is supposedly one of the strong points of Crystal's engine.

Since I don't believe there will be one giant, open world, there will probably be loading times between separate levels/missions, but those don't bother me as much. It's those loading zones which are structurally part of a single map (i.e: walk into a bar - load, walk into a hotel - load, etc) that annoy me, especially when you need to move back and forth a lot (like in IW).

I totally agree. 5 words: Crystal Dinamics, Legacy of Kain.

2 second loading screen in the beginning and boom. No loading whatsoever during a play through a massive map.

Hm.... Since they are usindg CD engine, we might get something awesome after all :)

gamer0004
24th Feb 2008, 15:25
You seriously feel less immersed because of text on a loading screen?
Yes, I do. It feels more like someone is telling the story instead of you experiencing it.

Staring at a still picture with the word 'loading' keeps you more in character?
Yes, because I don't recognize that as something that's part of the game, just like the game menu.

I'd love for the character to pick up 'Jacob's Shadow' or something at the beginning of the game and work through it during loads.
That's not really bad, but I never read Jacob's Shadow much. Anyway, what I really wouldn't want it what they did in DX:IW.

payne
27th Feb 2008, 21:39
keep the huge story line

ironman_555
23rd Mar 2008, 23:07
I must say, the conversations in DX were absolutely critical to making the game memorable. i havnt played the game in a few years, but from memory i think i still remember my most favorite conversation from the game...

"What you what?
Charlie says you sell explosives.
Yeah? Well Charlie should mind his own business.
How much?
Woa woa woa, we aint talking firecrackers here understand? What I got comes from a guy at UNATCO, hardcore munitions and ****.
(^^ I cracked up hearing that the first time i played the game)
and i know at least some of you reading that will remember the scene in the brooklyn bridge station, looking for the mole tunnels.

And yeah, i agree with alot of whats already been said. Get rid of universal ammo, elaborate on the skills, yeah. Choice!!

Mand'alor The Unholy
23rd Mar 2008, 23:21
Yep. I must say that Universal Ammo was one of the worst ideas Eidos had with DX2. Still trying to wrap my mind around it. How the **** do you convert your 9mm ammo to fit in your 12 guage shotty anyway?
One of the major factors about DX1 I think they should keep is that while it was set in the future you could still relate to the world around you. It didn't look all futuristic and alien. Cars still looked like cars and trash cans like trash cans. It was the perfect mix between future and present time. It wasn't TOO futuristic.
Also, the conversations added immersion. I really had no qualms about the conversations in DX2 except for there weren't as many, but it was also a much smaller game. But the amount of different conversations and conversation options in DX1 amazes me. I have played through the game at least 40 different times and it seems that I find a new piece of a converation or a whole new one somewhere. My last time through I stumbled onto the conversation with Icarus via the phone in France. Of course, maybe I'm just not a social player and miss these things more than everyone else...

Azrepheal
23rd Mar 2008, 23:29
Yep. I must say that Universal Ammo was one of the worst ideas Eidos had with DX2. Still trying to wrap my mind around it. How the **** do you convert your 9mm ammo to fit in your 12 guage shotty anyway?

To be honest, the idea of Universal Ammo itself fits in fairly easily with the rest of the Deus Ex (nano-technology) world: each clip contains the atoms needed to assemble bullets, and they assemble each bullet from scratch depending on which gun youre using.

Not that I liked it, I thought it was a horrible part of the gameplay. But it would be a handy tool for other areas of the game. Dunno what exactly... somewhere where assorted things needed to be made quickly... weapons shop, perhaps? I dunno

c37579
27th Mar 2008, 21:12
Universal ammo, though realistic with the implication of nano technology, was....

....now. Sorry about the length.

this post=god

most of what you said is what i think most people are looking for from the game, the storyline that changes o how you play, the immersion, everything! if it is before DX then it all sound good, but if its after, as long as it isnt too sci fi, it should be great. i said most because reading through it there were a few things i didnt agree with 100% but not many and i forgot about them, and because the message is so long im not reading through it again to find 1 line i didnt like :P


Apparently so.

Most of us don't want loading screens at all. :rasp:

! exactly, but as long as they arent so close/long as IW's loading screens, i dont really mind

Dead-Eye
28th Mar 2008, 03:53
Keep Deus Ex:
--------------
*Based on the fact that this is a Deus Ex game, everything form the original should stay except for that listed under toss.

Toss Deus Ex:
-------------
*Aliens.

*Submarine mission (EVA and the moon base System shock mission sounded better)

*Bad Character animation. Most notably in combat.

*Dumb A.I. ("who's there!" stars at you for a second. "Oh My God!" starts firing and dancing randomly. You hide. "Guess he's gone!" acts like nothing ever happened because the AI had short term memory lose.)

*Unrealistic weapons. (Flamethrower, Rocket Luncher, Plasma Rifle are OK to keep. Get ride of assault rifle replace with MP5 or M16. Get ride of assault shotgun replace with USAS-12 shotgun, etc)

Keep Deus Ex: IW:
-----------------

*Rocket luncher.

*Passive bio-mods. (Who has time to even think about turning on Silent walk?)

*Rag doll physics. (killing people by throwing dead body's at them was fun)

*Hacking robots and controlling them.

*not needing a med bot to install Biomods.

*infer-red light (I can see you... but you can't see me.)

Toss Deus Ex: IW:
------RANT------

*Uninteresting, unconflicted, brain-dead Player characters.

*Uninteresting, unpersuasive, unlikeable characters. (Paul Denton was my favorite character in Deus Ex, but in Deus Ex 2... he just plan sucked. No longer was he the moralistic rebel fighter just trying to do the right thing. He became a bitter old, unlikeable, man.)

*Universal ammo. (If every gun has a nano-factory in it, ammo would not be a problem. I.E. Mass Effect.)

*A world set in such a paradox from our own that one can't find similarity's of their own world in it at all and can't even for one second relate the world with the words "Cyber Punk".

*Art direction.

*Load times, bugs, and all troughs things that were the product of a rushed game.

*boring pointless missions.

*Bad music.

*No Credits after beating the game.

*Plot lines that seemed more to convey how the project manager felt about a topic and how he would solve it rather then centering it around what the player would do in that situation.

*reused endgame's,


Refections:
----------

Deus Ex was a master peace, Inviable War was crap...or Warrens retry at a work of Art. Just make Deus Ex 3 not IW 2.

GruntOwner
28th Mar 2008, 12:37
-----------------

*Rocket luncher.

*not needing a med bot to install Biomods.


These things I'm afraid that I have to disagree with. The IW rocket launcher was, well, sucky. It did almost no damage and I went from "hmm, rocket launcher, given what the gep gun did this is gonna be a frakkin' god weapon" to "WTF?!? WHEN DID I START PLAYING QUAKE 3?!?" and the requirement of a medbot made it all so satisfting. If I had picked up a new biomod I would think "Oh boy, I wonder which of the options I'll take? They're both sooo good, and now that I've found a medbot nearby, which in itself makes me ecstatic at just how lucky I am, I get to make a character affecting choice having actually put a degree of effort into it" as oppose to "wow, a biomod, this or this? I think I'll take this. Well, that was quick, kinda like finding a much sought after weapon only in the way that would happen in a normal FPS." It added a whole new thing to have a sense of achievement about, especially if you had to run through a dangerous area to get to one.

c37579
28th Mar 2008, 13:56
These things I'm afraid that I have to disagree with. The IW rocket launcher was, well, sucky. It did almost no damage and I went from "hmm, rocket launcher, given what the gep gun did this is gonna be a frakkin' god weapon" to "WTF?!? WHEN DID I START PLAYING QUAKE 3?!?" and the requirement of a medbot made it all so satisfting. If I had picked up a new biomod I would think "Oh boy, I wonder which of the options I'll take? They're both sooo good, and now that I've found a medbot nearby, which in itself makes me ecstatic at just how lucky I am, I get to make a character affecting choice having actually put a degree of effort into it" as oppose to "wow, a biomod, this or this? I think I'll take this. Well, that was quick, kinda like finding a much sought after weapon only in the way that would happen in a normal FPS." It added a whole new thing to have a sense of achievement about, especially if you had to run through a dangerous area to get to one.

once again i agree, your post sounded great, but i didnt like the rocket launcher

and as for the biomods, make less of them available, but more options, so you can have 9-10 like in DX, but you cant get them all to level 4 half way through like the second DX, and make it so you need a medbot, makes them more useful

and also keep the black market biomods, but make them better, great idea, bad execution

Dead-Eye
29th Mar 2008, 09:21
The rocket luncher had some good Ideas in IW. It would have been better if it had been refined more. The Gep gun had a bit of a logical bomb "Suddenly I'm finding it hard to walk fast because I pulled this weapon off my back and am holding it in my hand, Although I was jumping on roof tops just fine before I pulled the weapon out." I can understand some movement constraints but more in the area of looking around with the Gep gun, not with walking speed.

The Alt-fire for the IW rocket luncher was fun, but then again that might have been the result of crappy AI.

Personally its one of the few things I would like to see them Refine in Deus Ex 3 for Deus Ex 2. Maybe add a little more power but make ammo for it hard to find.

I'll list the changes that I think should be made to the IW rocket Luncher:
*Hard to find ammo.
*More power (One rocket should kill an armored knight templar)
*Heat seeking functionality for non alt-fire attacks.
*New Ammo type: EMP rockets.
*New Ammo type: Mines.
*New Ammo type: Nanotube wire rockets. (Perfect assassin weapon: Shot one with alt-fire fly around the room for 30 seconds and stealth kill everything you touch with an imposable to see, self propelling, ball of 1 nanometer thick wire. After 30 seconds the rocket loses energy and dissipates)

GruntOwner
29th Mar 2008, 09:43
One Rocket should take down a bot, never mind a templar. Franklly, that was my only real objection apart from the lack of primary homing. And the blast radius was just, well, not worthy.

gamer0004
29th Mar 2008, 10:44
Keep Deus Ex:
--------------

Toss Deus Ex:
-------------
*Aliens.

*Submarine mission (EVA and the moon base System shock mission sounded better)

*Unrealistic weapons. (Flamethrower, Rocket Luncher, Plasma Rifle are OK to keep. Get ride of assault rifle replace with MP5 or M16. Get ride of assault shotgun replace with USAS-12 shotgun, etc)

I do not agree. The submarine mission was awesome, the aliens were fine (it was weel implemented) and the weapons weren't really unrealistic.
The assault rifle was fine. You have to get the idea.
The USA have big economical problems in 2052. Handing out M16's to everyone for combat in cities is way too expensive. You could better take an assault rifle: reliable and firing many rounds in a short time. Not very accurate but they don't need to. The only problem is that the assault rifle dealt too little damage.

Vasarto
8th Apr 2008, 02:37
I'm not really a fan of the universal ammo. I agree it does simplify things but I think it actually adds to the game if you have to resort to a backup weapon because you've been favouring one weapon too much. Also, there were a few of times during DX2 that I was forced to use melee weapons simply because a couple of rocket launcher shots had wiped out the last of my ammo. (Also, I gather from your comment that you weren't a fan of the assault rifle either. A half to a whole clip to take out one peon was lame.)

Yes exactly. Get rid of The universal ammo and Keep everything that made
DX1 a great game. Get rid of the synthetic heart,Aqualung and That Aug that increased an aug past its limits...eccept if it was at its max already.
As those are the most useless augs and all. Keep everything else though.

INCLUDING JC AND PAUL DENTON...If its a Prequal than keep Paul as the main character.

chloroform42
9th Apr 2008, 01:51
What to keep:
Obviously, the great, deep, branched, philosophical story of DX1.

And its great atmosphere, which was a combination of the music, the artistic style -- urban/dark/futuristic/kind of industrial/technological; the cohesion of the story, characters, and environments, and probably some other things. So keep all that.

The locational damage system was awesome and is something that seems to have been mostly abandoned in other games except in that headshots or chest shots do more damage.

The choice-based gameplay (even if the choices weren't that impactful, at least more than DX2), RPG-elements of skill points and upgrades, and multiple endings. DX2 made the division of the factions too clear cut -- moral ambiguity and the overlapping of goals or methods was part of what made it awesome in 1, made you choose your allegiances too early, and made your choice basically pointless. Games that give you three ways to do the same thing (like the different classes in Mass Effect, a lot of DX2, and most other games) isn't anywhere near as good as truly different consequences. Also, the psychological impact and fun involved in actually affecting a game world in a meaningful (story/character/environment-affected) way is intense. Keep that DX1 style.



What not to keep:
I'm ambivalent about universal ammo from DX2. It made it easier but was unrealistic and whether something being realistic adds to or detracts from the fun is too tough to decide.

The AI in both games was bad to the point where there was no challenge in either game without being annoying. The only way to get a sense of power and development in a character and a challenge without being annoying is to have well developed AI strategies, not just doing less damage and taking more or other cheap ****.

The weapons were pretty good in each game in terms of concept, but neither executed them that well. Hacking and using robots and security systems was fun but should probably be harder or rarer. Actually using computers, even with unreal GUIs like in the PC version of DX1 really added something to the immersiveness.

The aliens in DX1 were kind of tacky but well implemented I thought, so that's a toss up.

Bluntness in story, characters, goals. You shouldn't have to be completely sure about everything you do, and things shouldn't have to be bluntly right or wrong or obviously suspicious like in most games. Another amazing part of DX1 and not DX2 was how all sides of the conflict were similarly identifiable, and your personal opinions really mattered in which sides you liked more. UNATCO wasn't completely good or evil, or their goodness or evilness wasn't completely useless, or they were the best of the options, same with all of them. Every sect in DX2 was either clearly right/good or wrong/bad, then you found out something new and didn't "question your allegiance" so much as completely switch. DX1 starts you out believing in your mission, wondering why Paul was so weird, and having no sympathy for the rebels. Then you find new things out and it just levels the field -- both sides have good and bad points. You could still go with UNATCO for a while or prefer the rebels. It was really up to you, even if it had little effect overall.

These are just some of the things, but they are (mostly) key issues that need to be replicated or fixed. DX2's main advancements were just technical: ease of use, better graphics (being newer), and "more" options but not better. If DX3 could capture the incredible parts of 1 (I say, story and atmosphere which stems from the story and artistic design), the rest should fall in place much more easily.

dani
10th Apr 2008, 20:40
We always loved original Deus Ex. I played it many times over and over again and every time I found something new and interesting.
Please, call the new game Deus Ex 2, because it was never released to us. It was released for the stupid and primitive X Box owners, but not for the real fans (Yes, you are stupid if you buy something from Microsoft). We don’t know Invisible War. We don’t want to know. We did never like it and we will never accept something like that again.
It would be very nice if Deus Ex 2 (the real one) will be also available on the Linux platform. And the most important thing: Do not change anything!!! Do not screw it this time or we will never buy the game!

gamer0004
11th Apr 2008, 13:41
(Yes, you are stupid if you buy something from Microsoft).

So you're going to run DX3 on what? Your imagination? :mad2:

Tracer Tong
11th Apr 2008, 17:51
So you're going to run DX3 on what? Your imagination? :mad2:

Seconded. Don't post baseless claims of UNIX vs Windows flame-wars here. This is not the place.


I also think that the generic assault rifle was a good idea. This is NOT an FPS and should not turn out to be one. I never liked games which required me to tell the difference between an AK-47, an MP5, and M16. They're just the same - Automatic assault rifles.

gamer0004
12th Apr 2008, 10:46
Seconded. Don't post baseless claims of UNIX vs Windows flame-wars here. This is not the place.


I also think that the generic assault rifle was a good idea. This is NOT an FPS and should not turn out to be one. I never liked games which required me to tell the difference between an AK-47, an MP5, and M16. They're just the same - Automatic assault rifles.

Er, the M16 and the AK-47 are really differnt guns... But anyway, I don't need too many assault guns either.

guardian130270
13th Apr 2008, 19:49
I think the main reason there was such a dislike for the assault rifle was, as it has been mentioned, the rifle took so much to do so little. Even with a maxed out skill and fully modified rifle it still took half a clip to take down even the most basic of the bad guys; assuming you were able to keep the gun on target the whole time.

The real point of the assault rifle was the 20mm shell launcher, THAT I loved. As far as an assault rifle goes, Gamer0004 is right about assault rifles being different (M-16 vs AK-47 being the most classic example) but in the end the only factor that usually translates into games is damage. If there is one put into DX3 then it would have to be beefed up a little bit to make it worth having. Otherwise just re-introduce the 20mm launcher as a stand alone weapon (with the same level of rare ammo as in DX1). Good example: http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl13-e.htm

Minor counter-point to Tracer Tong's comment above; DX1 is a FPS but one with customizable elements. It is these elements, along with its free-form approach to level construction, that I think helped put DX1 in front of other shooters into the realm of "greatest game".

It is not a RPG as many like to think as that term implies that the choices you make have an effect on the situations in the game.

GruntOwner
13th Apr 2008, 21:38
I don't know where you were aiming, but a single burst from a mastered, modded assault rifle would kill any non augmented/transgenics for me at short/medium range. And that was realistic. Half a clip on MJ12 commandos I can vouch for, and a whole clip+ for greasels, but everyone else dropped like flies. As for a stand alone GL, that just seems a bit too limiting, even though it isn't, it just seems that a whole individual weapon to fit such a small role would be a bat non DXy. The GEP and LAW could get away with it on account of that much firepower being necerssary quite often without stealth, and nothing else would do the trick, but a grenade launcher seems a bit too... Little to bother making a whole weapon for. I do agree it needed to be beefed up a fair bit, and as a general rule any weapon should OSK with a headshot.

Blade_hunter
13th Apr 2008, 22:55
keep from DX 1

-Charismatic characters
-Customizable character
-The skills and the skill bonus system (accomplish a task and explore give experience)
-The Fictionnal, but semi realistic weapons
-The weapon upgrade
-The multiple ammo system
-The RPG inventory
-The interractivity (objects people and the story)
-The Fun
-The large levels
-The aiming
-The vehicles (black chppers, metro, submarine, boats)
-The Biomods !
-The mutants
-The multiplayer

Toss

-The fact that the AI can't use the ladders and can't jump over a little crate
-The linearity
-The invulnerable characters
-The closed doors (the doors without rooms not all but most of them exploration !)
-The quality of some buildings (the size of some windows are so small compared to our size (In hell's kitchen the paul's appartment window is bigger than the others)
-The quality of the explosions

Keep from DX 2

-The difference between some weapons
-The difference between some biomods (legal not legal)
-The physics
-Some special weapons items (weapon mods)
-The factions

Toss

-Universal ammo
-The AI
-The aiming
-The fact we can't kill with an head shot withe the pistol
-The multitools (they are universal :( )
-The tiny levels
-The FPS inventory
-The HUD
-The Unrealistic weapons (we never see a reaload sequence)
-The console gameplay

gamer0004
14th Apr 2008, 16:26
I don't know where you were aiming, but a single burst from a mastered, modded assault rifle would kill any non augmented/transgenics for me at short/medium range. And that was realistic. Half a clip on MJ12 commandos I can vouch for, and a whole clip+ for greasels, but everyone else dropped like flies. As for a stand alone GL, that just seems a bit too limiting, even though it isn't, it just seems that a whole individual weapon to fit such a small role would be a bat non DXy. The GEP and LAW could get away with it on account of that much firepower being necerssary quite often without stealth, and nothing else would do the trick, but a grenade launcher seems a bit too... Little to bother making a whole weapon for. I do agree it needed to be beefed up a fair bit, and as a general rule any weapon should OSK with a headshot.

My tactic was the same as yours, I guess: run to the enemy and take them out with one burst to the head. At long or medium range it wasn't accurate enough, not even modded, so you had to come really close. But still it took SIX bullets to kill a normal enemy! Never mind commando's, if you didn't shoot them in the head but just at their body it took like 2 clips. I always use the assault rifle, but it was underpowered.

GruntOwner
14th Apr 2008, 17:28
Granted it was horribly underpowered but at least it looked good. DX3 should make it a good weapon for damage and range, hampered by the issue of it's blatantcy and ROF resluting in you forgetting about ammo, becasue if it was able to overshadow the pistol imediately, then it might feel a bit too dumb-FPSy. Invulnerable NPCs I have to say keep, because the alternative is either not meeting them in person or the unavoidable conversation concerning weapon deactivation. Also, keep the weapon stats, becuase I'm going to appreciate a weapon alot more if I can see the difference in damage rather than reading "this weapon is a bit better than factory standard".

Descendant of the Dentons
15th Apr 2008, 00:49
Let's start with the first Deus Ex:

1. Keep the framerate at 60fps! (Number 1 Priority)
2. As some have said, things that you can read, such as newspapers, data cubes.
3. Manually inputting passwords, passcodes, etc. into computers and keypads.
4. Engaging storyline (THAT GOES WITHOUT SAYING!).
5. Ammo unique to the weapon.
6. The option to make biomods permanent before you start the game.
7. Weapon upgrade packs.
8. Skill points from exploring places (DUH!).


Deus Ex: Invisible War:
1. Automatic password & passcode entry (option can be toggled on or off for those who didn't like putting in the codes from the first game and the choice is permanent when you begin playing).
2. The option to make biomods switchable as you play the game (it can add to some insane strategy and allow you to get to secret places and places that are vital to the story, but also be permanent once you begin playing).
3. Engaging storyline (yes, even IW had that IMHO).
4. Secondary fire for the weapons and weapon enhancements

New Things to Bring In to Deus Ex 3:
1. Acquire skill points from the people in the game and have them train you in skills (a la, Oblivion and Morrowind).
2. If you're going to throw in stealth, place a major emphasis on it, but don't make it too much like Splinter Cell or Metal Gear Solid. It would also be nice to do double damage to someone when sneaking up behind them (a la, Oblivion).
3. Engaging storyline (another DUH!).
4. Make the Realistic difficulty truly realistic like Splinter Cell, but not like Metal Gear Solid.
5. A familiar Denton MUST be in the game and have the option to play as a Denton. Any Denton in the game MUST play an important role in the story.

Well, there's my input for what I want to see in the game. As you can see, I took what I liked from both games and came up with some things I want to see in part three. Here's hoping!

pHdeus
15th Apr 2008, 00:59
Does a single lock pick really have to be shipped in a giant crate?

.... Could drawers be opened once again?

......... And perhaps to swim?

Gary_Savage
16th Apr 2008, 19:15
Also, keep the weapon stats, becuase I'm going to appreciate a weapon alot more if I can see the difference in damage rather than reading "this weapon is a bit better than factory standard".

Yes, I agree with that. I like to see the incremental improvements to my weapons, as I put in the different upgrades.

Voltaire
16th Apr 2008, 19:52
Keep:
- Immersion, start to finish. In storyline, gameplay and sub-plots (the notes between the never seen Erin, Decker and Young in DX1? - genius)
- Diversity, with another way to play the game always at the ready. If I don't want to pay entry fee on a parisian nightclub, I WILL break your window, pepper spray you and steal your nightly takings and key to the door!
- 5* character work, with a personality for each and every NPC. Can you think of a DX1 character AT ALL who you didn't believe had a story to tell?
- Weapon specifications, detailed and informative. When Carter handed me a new pistol that did half the damage of my original, I threw it back at the plexiglass between us. Who needs inferior "stealth" firearms if darts and batons do the trick?

Toss:
- Relatively small feedback on huge choices made during gameplay. Despite my efforts during my 2nd playthrough to Stay at UNATCO, fighting NSF goons to the death I just couldn't :( j'etais sans choix. There's only one real branching point, and that's just not life is it?
- Stupid, stupid "friendly" AI. Seriously. If my own troops box me in at Battery Park, and then keep telling me there's a freakin' hostage situation, they deserve as much tasering as they get from ME.

Gary_Savage
22nd Apr 2008, 01:28
Hey, anyone notice that if, in DX1's first mission, you told the NSF leader that you would send him to the people in a body bag, but chose to run away before he got to finish you off, then only Paul would reprimand you, whereas Harley Filben would than you for keeping him alive? Paul would reprimand you not for killing (since you ran away), but for not getting any useful intelligence from the leader

Now, onto my point, I would like DX3 to change the situation, depending on whether or not I got any intelligence, in a mission like that. It was a little disappointing, in DX1, when Paul would know where to take his team regardless of the intelligence that I got (which wasn't even relevant to Paul's mission -- that being another of my gripes). I would at least want the intelligence to dictate the number of casualties on Paul's team, which would cause the people at UNATCO to either like me, or to hate me.

smash016
25th Apr 2008, 13:01
Although DX1 is superior to its successor, I still feel some elements from IW should be retained. I can't stress enough how many DX1 fanatics miss certain qualities of IW.

What to retain from IW:
- Atmosphere, IW's biggest accomplishment. I've never played an FPS before that was so immersive in terms of atmosphere, and that's also my only serious complaint about DX1: from an emotional perspective, the world in DX just seemed so cold, which was mostly caused by...
- Level design. Esthetically the maps in DX1 were uninspired. You're just walking around in your average military bases and sewer systems. Considering the revolutionary capabilities of the Unreal engine at the time, it was sad to see how little use the developers made of those. Everything looked bleak and rooms all too often were void of any decoration. Fortunately the levels were downright awesome in terms of gameplay.
- Musical score. To me the ambient motion-picture-esque tracks of IW were more supportive of the game's overall touch. The songs in DX1, besides sounding too Atari-like, were too melody-oriented, which reminded you of the fact you were just playing a computer game. IW's music never occurred to you yet was constantly there to add to the experience.
- Voice acting. The Chinese and French accents were awful in DX1. Either use natives or no accents at all. Remember that part in HK Canals where that bartender gets all philosophical on you? I just chuckled.
- NG Resonance! I'm an absolute fan of cyberpunk and specifically Phillip K. Dik's work. NG just walked out of Blade Runner. This silly advertisement that's actually an AI spying on you. I just loved that.

What to re-insert:
- That PDA-kinda-HUD, keeping track of every single detail in the world. I really missed that in IW.
- Separate ammo. I just felt so good loading your shotgun with Sabots, when you ran into a spider bot for instance.
- For some reason I didn't really miss the skill system in IW. After all it's a shooter, not an RPG. Being rewarded with biomods/augs or weapons felt better, and managing skills in terms of numbers isn't quite realistic, especially in a sim like Deus Ex. I think a more elaborate version of the aug system would be more appropriate. It has practically the same effect as skills while being more realistic.
- Needless to say: the play length of DX1.

Absolute don'ts:
- Dynamic storyline - it's just not feasible until true AI is realized. No matter how, you'll restrict yourself in storywriting because of all the possibilities you have to take into account. Total linearity is far better than cripple dynamics.
- Forced insertion of characters. Don't reintroduce JC for the sake of it. All in all I think it would be better to create a new subuniverse within the DX world, with new characters. I think references to what happened in DX1 en IW would be better. Revisiting of certain locations would be nice though, as in JC's sanctuary in IW. I just felt that JC, Paul, Tong, Chad made cameo's in IW without really adding something to the game, Well, save JC, his role was pivotal, although somehow he seemed like a different guy.

Is there any certainty yet as to whether the game will be a prequel? I can't make up my mind about it. Background info is always useful, but at the same time it would sort of halt the progression of the human race that DX is so concerned with.

minus0ne
25th Apr 2008, 14:48
- For some reason I didn't really miss the skill system in IW. After all it's a shooter, not an RPG.
Deus Ex is just as much a shooter as it is an RPG. And since some people finish the game without firing a single shot, I'd be more careful calling it an FPS than an RPG.

Being rewarded with biomods/augs or weapons felt better, and managing skills in terms of numbers isn't quite realistic, especially in a sim like Deus Ex. I think a more elaborate version of the aug system would be more appropriate. It has practically the same effect as skills while being more realistic.
Deus Ex is not a sim, not anything resembling it. If you want a sim then go play a Tom Clancy franchise. DX not only rewarded XP for advancing, but also weapons and biomods (did you actually play DX or just IW?). IW had nowhere near the depth of DX's combined skill and augs system (in fact it was pretty retarded and made no sense whatsoever, killing immersion).

Voltaire
25th Apr 2008, 15:04
@Smash016: Lots of points here, some of which I'm in agreement with, but maybe not others:

:thumbsup: Multiple ammo types - really pivotal to the games believability
:thumbsup: DX1 play length - the game was immense, and gripping pretty much throughout (although I personally hated the Paris levels :( )
:thumbsup: Revisiting the occasional pre-visited location. Rarely though, and not just carbon copies from DX1/IW either. I think it would be cool to visit a bombed out Hong Kong, for example, or a newly-founded UNATCO HQ.

:eek: Lack of skills menu - the skills menu, combined with the augs, just made the game ultimately more replayable, time after time.
:eek: "Bleak" DX1 level designs - the world of DX1 was a dystopia, and so pretty much had to be bleak and "empty" to show what a depressing hell-hole this world might become.
:eek: Classification of the game - It's not a classical RPG, but it's not a shooter by any stretch of the imagination. The game can be done and dusted without the use of weapons! It's not a "sim" either. Has anyone here seen the film "Big"? In it, Tom Hanks' character suggests creating novels (well, comics) with open-ended decisions for the reader to make. This seems a really good definition of what the DX series is. If the game degenerates into "total linearity", the Eidos Montreal HQ would burn to the ground :D

Now that's just my two pence (yes, British through and through), but I reckon I represent a fair few fans here.

Oh, and I appreciate that you start your post with a disclaimer saying that IW was inferior to DX, and that you are at least trying to have an open mind about IW's good points :)

Blade_hunter
25th Apr 2008, 17:56
We have some variety of thinks, and some players think even today DX is only one genre like RPG or FPS game because the game have main features of these games, the second game is more FPS than it's prequel even if the weapons are unrealistic and acts like some UT weapons sometimes

DX 2 RL = Unreal redeemer (with less power)
Mako pistol = UT enforcer (with an other alternate fire)
SMG = UT assault rifle (with an other grenade)
Sniper rifle = UT Sniper rifle
Flamethrower = SOF 1 Flamethrower

the others have functions and the only real good news about weapons are mods like the glass destabilizer or the EMP converter, but it can be changed to an other ammo type ... This is better than convert a weapon for these function ...

DX have only some realm points;
DX is more close to SS2 or STALKER than other games...

Tracer Tong
25th Apr 2008, 18:49
I would also have to say something about the style of the UI that bothers me, but I just can't put my finger on it. Maybe you people can help:

In DX1 the UI was sharp and the buttons were visible, including informative text which felt like you ARE JC. The inventory/skills/augs/whatnot menu was just a frame in the world, rather than completely blackening your screen in DXIW. Also, in DXIW the buttons were very huge, elliptic, and not understandable. I didn't like it. Plus, I think that the DX:IW brightness was very low and the colors were very black. IMO it is a simple misunderstanding of the development team on Warren's command: "Make the DX2 world DARK" :lmao:

I can't describe that sharpness of the DX1 UI against the blurry DXIW UI, can you help me?

What I also liked is the UI customizable skin colors. Every time I played DX I chose another skin color, and it actually changes the game and my actions!

Blade_hunter
26th Apr 2008, 08:59
I never understand why they make that console HUD instead of the hud we've seen on the first screenshots, but even I compare the new and the old screenshots, I can see less Biomods and less weapon slots than the first game, but the HUD style is much better than the IW HUD.

I don't know if it's better to keep some DX 2 Biomod acting or better to stay at the DX 1 state, because if we can use the DX 2 system some biomods are more simple to use than the DX 1 biomods and doesn't need to be activated because they activate themselves automatically.

If we use some DX 2 system we can put most biomods in automatic mode, and we can use more biomods than DX 1 at the same time and use less controls like DX 2.

The only problem is the fact of the ease to use a biomod ...

HeliosHasSpoken2052
30th Apr 2008, 06:35
Eliminate Universal Ammo- This is perhaps the most idiotic game concept ever conceived. What the hell were the developers thinking when they implemented this in DX2? Defies all logic and reason and contributed to the "dumbing down" of Invisible War. Let's never see it again in the series.

More Realistic Violence- Adds a much needed sense of immersion, but it doesn't have to be on the same level of gratuity as the Soldier of Fortune games. When I shoot somebody with a shotgun and their body flies back against a wall and they slide down, I want to see blood stains. Deus Ex: Invisible War was virtually bloodless. Damage modeling would be nice, visible bullet/slash wounds and increased environmental destruction. If a grenade or rocket kills an enemy, they should be blown to pieces as they actually would in real life. Things like that would greatly add to the realism aspects of the game.

Improved Physics Engine- The physics in DX2 were spotty, at best. A slight bump into a large crate sends it flying across a room, but when you attempt to lift it, it's "too heavy." Pretty ridiculous. Also, there doesn't need to be anymore cartwheeling by enemies when they're shot in the head with a sniper rifle. Objects and people need to have appropriate mass and density.

Skill Point System- I missed the skill points alot in the sequel. They were fun to use and they gave a great sense of accomplishment and depth to the original Deus Ex. Another example of "dumbing down" Invisible War. Skill points need to come back in Deus Ex 3. They're a wonderful part of gameplay.

Expansive Environments- DX1 had some very impressive and interesting levels that were considerably large in size (i.e. Liberty Island, Brooklyn Naval Shipyard, Streets of Paris...). DX2, on the other hand, consisted of claustrophobic level design where environments were disappointingly small and there was little exploration. DX3 needs to bring back the bigger level design and fully utilize exploration.

Intriguing New Characters- Luminon Saman in Invisible War was one of the most interesting characters of the game IMO because of his twisted, philisophically oriented personality and sinister nature. Otherwise, too many other characters, such as Billie Adams, Donna Morgan and Sid Black were not fleshed out enough, rendering them as fairly bland, one-dimensional characters. ALL of the characters in Deus Ex were fascinating. DX3 should showcase characters with resolve, interesting backstories, passion and potential unpredictability.

Well, that's all I can think of right now.

Gary_Savage
30th Apr 2008, 13:42
TOSS: I don't know if this has been suggested, but in DX1, when you jumped into water, no matter how high you jumped from, you always reached just below the water surface.

In DX3, I would like to see the PC go some depth into the water, depending how how high he/she jumped from, perhaps even taking some damage, if he/she hit the bottom hard enough, just like a jump onto dry land (only, more forgiving, since the water would buoy the PC). If resources permit, then I would like to see some of the air knocked out of the player's lungs, as a penalty for hitting the bottom too hard. As the PC's swimming skills improve, I would like the PC to drop less and less deep into the water, for jumping down from the same height (resources allowing). Also, I would like to see the damage penalty (and the penalty of having some air knocked out of the PC's lungs) for hitting the bottom, under the water, go down as the player's 'jumping skills'/'physical abilities skills'/'jumping aug' get upgraded; again, resources allowing.

These things won't make or break the game, but they will be a nice touch, especially for those of us who like water; yes, sometimes I imagine my PC to be like a former Navy SEAL.

FelixP
1st May 2008, 02:00
While truly dynamic, nonlinear gameplay is probably not feasible with today's technology, the developers could easily build a game where there is the *illusion* of nonlinearity. The player would still have the freedom to travel freely between locations, converse with NPCs, and so on, but still be restricted in terms of overall plot development. Examples: Oblivion, Fallout 1/2, Knights of the Old Republic (sort of), etc.

Gunther Hermann
2nd May 2008, 13:56
Although DX1 is superior to its successor, I still feel some elements from IW should be retained. I can't stress enough how many DX1 fanatics miss certain qualities of IW.

What to retain from IW:
- Atmosphere, IW's biggest accomplishment. I've never played an FPS before that was so immersive in terms of atmosphere, and that's also my only serious complaint about DX1: from an emotional perspective, the world in DX just seemed so cold, which was mostly caused by...
- Level design. Esthetically the maps in DX1 were uninspired. You're just walking around in your average military bases and sewer systems. Considering the revolutionary capabilities of the Unreal engine at the time, it was sad to see how little use the developers made of those. Everything looked bleak and rooms all too often were void of any decoration. Fortunately the levels were downright awesome in terms of gameplay.
- Musical score. To me the ambient motion-picture-esque tracks of IW were more supportive of the game's overall touch. The songs in DX1, besides sounding too Atari-like, were too melody-oriented, which reminded you of the fact you were just playing a computer game. IW's music never occurred to you yet was constantly there to add to the experience.
- Voice acting. The Chinese and French accents were awful in DX1. Either use natives or no accents at all. Remember that part in HK Canals where that bartender gets all philosophical on you? I just chuckled.
- NG Resonance! I'm an absolute fan of cyberpunk and specifically Phillip K. Dik's work. NG just walked out of Blade Runner. This silly advertisement that's actually an AI spying on you. I just loved that.

What to re-insert:
- That PDA-kinda-HUD, keeping track of every single detail in the world. I really missed that in IW.
- Separate ammo. I just felt so good loading your shotgun with Sabots, when you ran into a spider bot for instance.
- For some reason I didn't really miss the skill system in IW. After all it's a shooter, not an RPG. Being rewarded with biomods/augs or weapons felt better, and managing skills in terms of numbers isn't quite realistic, especially in a sim like Deus Ex. I think a more elaborate version of the aug system would be more appropriate. It has practically the same effect as skills while being more realistic.
- Needless to say: the play length of DX1.

Absolute don'ts:
- Dynamic storyline - it's just not feasible until true AI is realized. No matter how, you'll restrict yourself in storywriting because of all the possibilities you have to take into account. Total linearity is far better than cripple dynamics.
- Forced insertion of characters. Don't reintroduce JC for the sake of it. All in all I think it would be better to create a new subuniverse within the DX world, with new characters. I think references to what happened in DX1 en IW would be better. Revisiting of certain locations would be nice though, as in JC's sanctuary in IW. I just felt that JC, Paul, Tong, Chad made cameo's in IW without really adding something to the game, Well, save JC, his role was pivotal, although somehow he seemed like a different guy.

Is there any certainty yet as to whether the game will be a prequel? I can't make up my mind about it. Background info is always useful, but at the same time it would sort of halt the progression of the human race that DX is so concerned with.
I really disagree with most of what you said. Being a huge DX1 fan i feel a need to atleast say something so when DX3 comes out and if it is a failure i know atleast i did say something before hand.

Anyway, the atmosphere was great in DX, you say it was "cold"...i guess that is a way to put it, i loved that feeling though, it was unique and i think that atmopshere was great.

level design was great, i never thought they were bleak...it worked perfectly in most cases with the "cold" atmsopshere of the game. Given that most of the time you went down back streets and less desireable areas of cities you visit it all worked togethor very well.

The soundtrack in DX1 was amazing i think, best in any FPS game i've ever played and i certainly hope they get the same people who made it to do the soundtrack for DX3.

I guess i should say that as far as i am concerned DX2 never happened. It was quite possibley the worst game created (other than super man 64). I try to imagine it wasn't created it was so bad and it really disgraces the DX name. There is absolutely nothing about it that i would suggest they re-use in DX3.

I do especialy hope they never ever even contemplate the universal ammo system for DX3 though...

So long as they stay away from consoles though most of the mistakes wont be repeated. The tiney levels were a result of the crappy consoles the game was made to run on. I dont care if these new consoles are "next gen" we have seen what happens to games when they are developed with consoles in mind...

So bassicaly i think they should either keep everything from DX1 and build upon it and toss everything from DX2 or they should maybe keep only some key features from DX1 and work on new stuff for DX3.

I know it is too much to hope they can repeat the success of DX1, but it isn't too much to hope that they dont repeat the mistake that was DX2.

jcp28
2nd May 2008, 23:00
Anyway, the atmosphere was great in DX, you say it was "cold"...i guess that is a way to put it, i loved that feeling though, it was unique and i think that atmopshere was great.

level design was great, i never thought they were bleak...it worked perfectly in most cases with the "cold" atmsopshere of the game. Given that most of the time you went down back streets and less desireable areas of cities you visit it all worked togethor very well.

The soundtrack in DX1 was amazing i think, best in any FPS game i've ever played and i certainly hope they get the same people who made it to do the soundtrack for DX3.

Just what I would have told this guy here. I agree that the level design could have been more inspired, but you have to look at it in the context of what they were. Sure, China, and maybe France could have had a slightly better variety of motifs, but Deus Ex had many minor flaws even upon release. But like the last poster said, the game overall more than made up for that.

Not to mention the soundtrack. It was always appropriate, especially in areas that tended to fit the game's overall themes of dystopia, like Paris.



I It was quite possibley the worst game created (other than Superman 64)
So long as they stay away from consoles though most of the mistakes wont be repeated. The tiney levels were a result of the crappy consoles the game was made to run on.

The controls on that game were beyond god-awful, I think I broke my controller. But I must disagree with you when it comes to the tiny levels in DX2 being the result of it being released on xbox. The graphics processor had been poorly utilized, so ion storm figured to try to shrink the levels(the same thing happened with Thief III, which was somewhat better)



I know it is too much to hope they can repeat the success of DX1, but it isn't too much to hope that they dont repeat the mistake that was DX2.


I'm really not sure if Eidos Montreal is up to it. For all we know, they could have been just one more studio created by Eidos which just got slapped with this game. But I hope they don't make the same mistakes either. But given "marketing realities", a game as deep as DX 1 seems less likely.:(

jamesthefishy
23rd Jun 2008, 05:20
What to keep from Deus Ex 2, I liked that you had other trainees who went from Tarsus to other organizations like you. Made me feel like I wasn't alone even through I was fighting them at the time. I also like the idea of trading information but trading it with a holo-singer stripper lady made me feel stupid. I'd rather have side missions to trade information with actual people other then just some flirty fake bimbo. I liked how she turned out to be a big... b...ad person when you meet her. I also liked the black market and the omar but you should have a choice to go into ANY faction/group. Not just make a little extra ending for the omar but I wanted omar missions and everything. One last thing, I would love to see seattle, washington be used again.

What to drop from Deux Ex 2, I hated the universal ammo. All the weapons I would completely drop and redo.

Keep - DS 1, besides the weapons I would keep everything but show that things have changed a LOT since then, maybe kill off paul, he always seemed pointless to me. He was going to die anyways... Or the game will feel like you could have gone from one to three without missing a beat. Then again you want to feel emotionally close to this charactor so show him getting killed. Or at least the end result of what ending happened. I hated not seeing what REALLY happened to have JC sucked. I mean I played the first one but from what I picked up is that 2 or more endings happened. I would also like to see some old people be brought back or at least their off spring like sam carter, alex Jacobson, Ford Schick (IAMWARREN!) :P, Come guys have some fun like you did before.

Drop - DS 1, The bomb shell that was the order for gunther containing the skul-gun. I would love to see more of stuff like that dropped on us... I think it would be funny if anna and gunther had a kid all this time and now wants to kill JC

New Stuff To Add:
Allow the charactor to be double sided. So you could be for the WTO and the Order without having the leaders know. It would make missions intenser.
More stuff to hack and make hacking harder. Also assassination missions stuff like that. I feel a really big wish to have a cloak and dagger part of this game but when you do, there is no final kill target in most missions that you can just sneak up and shoot in the back of the head. I'd mostly wanna see you wake up in the middle of no wear... I always felt that these games mostly favored sides like WTO and taris because you start there. I'd like to see no connections to any faction. Image you wake up in a field with nothing to remember, completely nothing. No name, nothing, you have a pistol and a knife. 7 shots in the pistol, thats all. You walk up over a hill and see a HUGE city, or at least at first thats what you think. The city is in ruins, most buildings are hardly standing. You watch as one slowly collapses, people fall out still shooting at others. Thats when the game starts, you go into the city and try to side with one faction without getting killed. That should have been the chicago destruction in the beginning of the first one, that is what I was expecting.

What to never do: Please I have seen this a happen to a lot of other games... Don't let the graphics of the game corrupt the story line. Bioshock would have been good if they kept the story together better. I beg of you, just get a good story line. No one cares about graphics as much as they do a good story line.

dbgtwill1
21st Jul 2008, 05:21
hints of corruption was the mod DXeXodus was looking for:lmao:

CarloGervasi
22nd Jul 2008, 16:37
Things to Keep From Deus Ex
- The "real world plus some currently planned technology" setting. This made Deus Ex special to me. The more fantastical elements you introduce, the less immersive and more "game-like" the world begins to feel, and the more Deus Ex 3 will begin to blend in with the background noise of the one hundred other too-futuristic games out there. Running around Hell's Kitchen beats the hell out of a WTO enclave any day of the week.

- The focus on immersion. Deus Ex was an experience, and Invisible War just felt like a video game. It might be kind of hard to explain what I mean here.

In Invisible War, characters don't feel like characters, or people. They feel like vending machines. It's exceedingly rare to find a character that you can converse with that isn't there to sell you an item, give you a key, or otherwise provide some other obviously game-related information. Same with the books, and data cubes, they were all game-related stuff, they only existed to dispense some kind of information to the player.

By contrast, Deus Ex was dripping with atmosphere and immersion because it didn't take this route. 90% of the emails are just there to provide back story. There is never a point in the game where I need to know that Alex Jacobson has been in contact with the Oracle AI asking it what MJ12 is in exchange for giving up SH-187 information. It's just there for me to find. There is never a point in the game where I need to know that my regeneration augmentation uses programmable polymerase in it's function. I never need to know that my nanites can metabolize the contents of a medkit. All that information is just there, to provide back story, to give the impression of a world spinning around you. It gives the impression that you aren't playing a game, going from A to B to C like a rat in a maze, but are instead a person inhabiting a living world.

More than anything else, Deus Ex 3 needs to nail that feeling if they want to return to the quality and critical prestige of the first game.

- Return to the complexity of the first game. The inventory system, the "leg/arm/torso/head" health system, the skills, the augmentations, all combined to allow for a complex, nuanced, highly customizable experience. By contrast, in Invisible War, the combat of the game is much less interesting due to the "one shot anywhere is as good as another shot anywhere else" style health system, and the complexity of character customization is kiddie-pool shallow thanks to our only option being what biomods we want to use, most of those serving similar functions.

Things to Keep From Invisible War

SubTonic20
22nd Jul 2008, 19:36
The #1 thing that absolutely must be kept is the stealth. And I'm not talking about the really craptastic stealth from DX2, but the fun yet unrealistic stealth from the first game. If DX3's stealth is either bad or non-existent, I will be skipping over this game entirely.

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 09:57
Deus Ex 2: Keep:

1> Nothing. Too many bad changes, too little space.

Sooooooooooooooooooooooo true. :)

Would fill a post to past the 10,000 character limit to name all that's wrong in DX:IW (and why it doesn't need to be in DX3).

Hallmark of DX is it's replayability. Play it as a run+gun one time; play cloak+dagger style the next. You controlled the way you played, not the game itself.

Why the game can be played nearly 10 years from it's release. The only wanting side of DX today is the graphics/3D models (but Eidos wouldn't just redo the graphics and give us a updated DX. No, we may get DX:IW Redux, instead).

Romeo
23rd Jul 2008, 14:47
The #1 thing that absolutely must be kept is the stealth. And I'm not talking about the really craptastic stealth from DX2, but the fun yet unrealistic stealth from the first game. If DX3's stealth is either bad or non-existent, I will be skipping over this game entirely.

So are you looking for more of a Velvet Assassin system as compared to a Splinter Cell one?

guardian130270
23rd Jul 2008, 21:04
Replying to SubTonic20's comment about stealth. Personally I had no use for the Stealth skills/augments. Oh, there was plenty of avoiding and staying out of sight but I never used the actual "stealth" components of the game. That being said, keep the stealth aspects because it gives a players options on how s/he wants to play.

As I have said several times before, part of what made DX 1 so great was the number of different ways you could things. Almost every level had at least two physical ways of approaching it; add in play style differences (stealth, blasting your way in, semi-stealth with silenced weapons, etc.) you have a highly replayable game.

Remember, variety is the spice of life (and video game replayability :). DX 1's story and atmosphere made you want to replay, level design allowed you to replay without getting bored.

Penwar
23rd Jul 2008, 21:34
Hi all,
first post and all just saying helo

Got a bunch of ideas that would be nice for me to see in the new game

1) KEEP IT GROWN UP - DX1 was brilliantly good at being grown up. Intellectual discussions and rhetoric thrown about all over the place, philosophical standpoints examined all made for realy clever, and interesting universe... and I as a mear 15/16 YO at the time understood very little but it added to the replay value to play it even 6/7 years on when i've learnt so much more, keeps it interesting for all ages and dosnt dumb it down.
IW tried to do this while still trying to make it margenly understandable to all, and it didnt work as well.

2) KEEP UNIVERSAL AMMO (if its a sequel) - Crazy idea but, if the game is set after IW why not Keep the Universle Ammo on some guns and not on others

The UA concept makes use of the whole Nanite powered universe, with an "Ammo" block being nothing but a bunch for x many nanites and i think this plays well with the DX universe
however i do agree it make the game less imsersive to us now as its feels like a cop-out game play technique. How about having some guns that will use the UA, and others that wont.
i.e.
Basic Pistal, SMG and Shotgun require universal NAmmo [ooh aint i clever] whereas Specialist shotguns, high caliber SMGs, Rocket Launchers, Dart guns ect each require there own ammo.

Or/as well it could be incopreated as a small back story element

eg, All balistics made by Maco Balistics (for example) can all use NAmmo but wepons made by other companies require specialist own ammo

3) BRING BACK INVENTORY/PDI INTERFACE - It was perfect, having a inventory you can play tetras in is infuriatingly good fun, making ur own notes was good fun too (although id like an option where i was forced to make my own... a hardcore detective way of playing that no auto notes were made [kills inner myst fan)

4) MORE BIOMODS, MORE SENSIBLE BIOMOD APPLICATION, LESS AVAILABILITY OF MODS - one of the WORST aspects of IW for me was the biomods, so very few of them and they practically fell out of the sky in front of you. By the time you leave Seatle you are already a fully kitted out have already got the spy drone and by then the game is won. Id like to see more types and clever applications - up to the creative teams - and make them rairer - go back to the first games system of getting 2 or 3 options for em and dont make everything avalalble at once.

5) BRING BACK SKILL LEVELS AND XP - Enough said - hacking should be a skill... not a mod, but im not adverse to hacking improvement mods

6) "FREE ROMPING"? - as a fallout fan i love my free romping ability's but i cant see how it could be implemented in a DX3 - Maby incorporate global free roming as it is today - EXPENSIVE! let there be a free poilet there when its vitle to move onto the next stage but let the player pay for trips and bounce around citys if they've got the cash, but no endless traipsing on foot and NO random encounters

7) VOICE ACTORS - Please get some good ones... there are some in both DX and IW that are so wooden it hurts - not as bad as in oblivion thoe hehehe

8) STORY STORY STORY STORY STORY - screw multiple endings, fantastic Graphics, awsom explosions, nail bighting firefights! I WANT STORY. a realy deep interesting one that draws me in and makes me realy caire - im sure this is a total must for everyone, developers and gamers alike... but i just thought id mention it.

9) HUMANITY - both DX 1 and 2 have been set in masive cites full of people... although they arnt are they. theres nobody around. Take a leaf out of Hitmans books and use some realy dense crowdscapes. I want my actions to affect the whole world... and i want to see it affected.

thankye for reading my ramblings now;
You have your instructions (9 Pages of em), now PROGRAM!!!!!

Cr4sh
23rd Jul 2008, 22:03
- Voice acting. The Chinese and French accents were awful in DX1

I just can speak for Germans - Gunter Hermans speech was horrible and only good for laughs here in Germany. Maybe someone who spoke his first words in English just a week ago would do it that way, but surely no person that grew up in the age of internet and songs with english texts...

OT: I also find it very funny to hear comments spoken in german in i.e. 2nd WW shooters and having an english subtitle - COH is just very funny about that, also with half-english half-german comments like "I want a Gewehr in every Fenster!" (Gewehr=rifle, Fenster=window)

btw i.e. meant 'for example' didn't it? its a long time since i last wrote in english ^^

GruntOwner
24th Jul 2008, 10:05
btw i.e. meant 'for example' didn't it? its a long time since i last wrote in english ^^
Imediate (sp?) example I think, but same principle. OK, I really can't spell in the morining. But I know what you mean, some of the english characters in games are just plain wrong, made worse in CoD4 by the fact that the subtitles actually spell it "leftenent", quotation marks included, and despite all that effort they still screw up about 20 other words.

Kevyne-Shandris
24th Jul 2008, 14:53
CoD4 by the fact that the subtitles actually spell it "leftenent", quotation marks included

Can see how it's spelled that way, as the British military says it like that. Where Americans stress the "Lou", and never pronouce the "Left" (especially true in the Royal Navy).

Interesting reading how Germans in WWII could tell if an American was in their ranks as a spy. In the American military foot drill, the "m" is missing in "Forward, March" and replaced by a harder (but easier to enounce) "h". Keen ears can tell the difference. ;)

seek
1st Aug 2008, 14:32
Hi @ all, this is my first post.
Have read through almost 90% of the posts till now, some i would sign, others made me going into a frenzy.
Now i AM a huge DX Fan and it is my all time favourite, with SS2 right back after it and other diamonds like thief 1-3 etc.
Now what i will add to this discussion may sound like i defend DX, but all i do is open ur eyes or just let u think about some things a bit more, because some ppl say something in their way, which may be their opinion but i also read some confusing things or even bull**** ( sorry for those expressions, but i'm in an enrage!)
I'll pick up some things, cuz i cant really remember and give comments about every note etc.
Someone said the world in DX felt cold, too cold for him, or that there arent enough people on the streets.
The Grey Death is around, ppl die and in addition terrible wars are fought on the streets ( like Unatco vs NSF near the hospital in Hell's Kitchen)
So should the ppl go out and make some party in the streets?
Hell that is the feeling that this game is about, if u want some colours, you should maybe try Bioshock.
I can admit that maybe in zones like Hong Kong Market there are few people around, but still you got lots of details, the two in the Restaurant complaining about rats, the drug dealer with another guy in the alley, the woman on the ship, the vendors at almost each second shop etc.
Next point is the thing with ammunition.
As a hardcore DX Fan i better NOT let out my opinion about UA from DX:IW, else i might get banned.
But comments like someone had not enough ammo of his fav. weapon in DX.
I think u played each mission like: Go to Primary Target, shoot each enemy on the way down, complain about your low ammunition, go to next level.
There are damn lots of hidden rooms and stuff to find ammo, and also keeping the whole game with just one weapon is
1. Impossible, if the balance is correct
2. Maybe possible in Serious Sam, try that one if u want ammunition
3. NOT meant to be, because the game wants u to think, improvise, reconsider etc.
There is as some already said even too much of ammunition, you are full with some kind already by half of the game but in my case they belonged to weapons i never use like assault rifle (preferred sniper) or something else.
Theres also one thing about for example lockpicks and multitools, sure you can run out of them very easily, but me for example, i had both full stacked at about 4th level or something like that.
BUT: It is NOT the case that there are too much of them, its just, i picked EVERYthing up till there, i went to each hidden room, i used codes for locked doors to save multitools, i used every explosive crate to save ressources.
Example ?
In Liberty Island i opened a crate and killed the bot with 1 pistol shot
i opened the sunken ship with another explosive crate.
Battery Park: remember the hostage-taking in the subway? remeber the explosive crates there, which used to cause chain-reaction with the boobytrap there?
now think what i've done with ALL of them.
God i love the way you can handle things in DX, just unique.

The post is getting huge and less attractive to be read by someone so i'll search some finish.
It sure sounds easy to say: take 99% of DX oder and toss 99% of DX:IW
to create a good game.
For Eidos it must be horrible to have the decision either appeal to the mass, which plays Doom, Crysis, Far Cry DX:IW and other Serious Sam-like games, or appeal to the hardcore ones, the fanbase which glorifies DX, SS2 and others.
I do NOT want to make the games appear inferior to DX, even for me they are.
I DO want to clarify that these are some complete different genres.
DX is e.g. Action-RPG and afaik it is even today the best in its genre ( not just for the hardcore fans, but i read it somewhere, because its some exotic genre if u compare it to genres like Action, FPS etc.)
If some of u liked DX:IW then i got something to say to u:
It is ok, i tolerate everything, ppl liking music others than mine etc.
(what else is left but to accept and tolerate the opinions of others if u glorify DX, listen to trance etc. whilst the mass plays CS listens to metal, rock whatever?) but to be honest, DX:IW is for me almost another genre and if u try to give ideas for making DX3 and u say they should keep things like UA from DX:IW u can also tell them just to make another game.
DX:IW is more Bioshock than it is DX in my opinion and the developers surely didnt want to make DX:IW as it is in the current state and say its a sequel to DX, because u really notice, DX was the way the developer wanted it to be because of all the love and details on it, DX:IW was made for the mass, nothing else.
Blame me, flame me, hate me but it is as it is.
I just wanted the developers of DX3 to remember that even if DX:IW was sold more often than DX, the public, the magazines, etc etc. say something different than those numbers, which are about money but not about fame, popularity etc.

I'll end here, maybe i wrote some sh** too in that post but im sure it has some good and reasonable points in it.

nevertheless im out

p.s. im everything but an enemy of ppl who glorify DX:IW, but i could run amok everytime i hear that DX:IW is better than DX because of x,x,x,x.
OK then Doom is for you also better than DX and Crysis and Splinter Cell are also better. THEN FOR GODS SAKE play those games and leave DX where it is, as it appeals to completely other people than these games do. If u liked DX:IW more than DX than u havent understood what DX is about, u are too much into the new generation, where games require less brain but a mouse which has 2k dpi to aim those hundreds of monsters.
How i can say that?
Ive read a lot of forums about DX opinions and also SS2.
Some ppl stated that some level were just too heavy, or the beginning of SS2, where a weapon just breaks and u cant repair it, made many ppl just leave that game aside, without giving it one more try. While DX is made even more accessible to the mass than SS2 is, which is to be honest for hardcore ppl which like the challenge. (Even in whole DX wins in my opinion, just because SS2 is about creating another atmosphere than DX does, but i prefer DX one)
I dont say that everyone who dislikes DX has no brain, but its just hard to explain what this game means to me or to others.
Just excuse me for that load of text.

timborg
3rd Aug 2008, 04:59
reput in dx1 health system and the aug system where you have to use the med bot to place augs

Bahmo
7th Aug 2008, 06:59
Assuming We're Speaking only of IW:

Keep:
*Fourthwall-proof, implied passwords/codes. I'm a big fan of backing up files, but when someone saves a game, goes on a somewhat expensive quest to some vital information, writes it down, and then reloads his game, that is cheating. Sorry; it just is.
*The Bot-Domination mod.

Toss:
*Universal ammo. It's a stupid, unrealistic concept that, contrary to what some say, hardly simplifies the game, because originally, someone could pick up and use ammo without having to research exactly what gun it went to, since loading was automatic. If anything, it makes the gameplay even more of a headache, because it's too easy to waste all of the ammo on one particularly-costly weapon, although to be fair, part of that was also the overall conservative supply of ammo, period, in IW. ABSOLUTELY never do that again.
*The harm (and lack of buzz) done to players by drinking alcohol. One of the biggest charms of the original Deus Ex was the humor that came from often having to get your character plastered in order to heal.

Other than those two, I have little to call for removing, but I think a lot of the problem with IW was that it tossed a lot that didn't deserve it. Hence,
Bring Back:
*Skill points. They are completely separate abilities from augs.
*Bigger environments. Unrealistically designing cities that look more like malls is lame.
*Separation of lockpicks and multitools. Sometimes, complicating things is good.
*Swimming. Deus Ex featured more water play than any other shooter I know of, and IW's choice to not repeat that is regrettable.

urban_queen41
10th Aug 2008, 07:48
Interesting points about the desire for dynamic storylines. Personally, I don't like the idea too much- basically because canon would be entirely out the window, making discussions like some of those on this forum useless thanks to the millions of different possible plot threads. I really did like the fact that choices in DX1 were restricted to a degree. The decisions of who to kill and when, who to let die and who to save, still all tied up neatly in the end while still allowing the character to feel some sense of control of the world around them. There was, in my opinion, a nice balance of free choice and actual proper plot.

Fen
10th Aug 2008, 09:36
Assuming We're Speaking only of IW:
Keep:
*Fourthwall-proof, implied passwords/codes. I'm a big fan of backing up files, but when someone saves a game, goes on a somewhat expensive quest to some vital information, writes it down, and then reloads his game, that is cheating. Sorry; it just is.


I agree that its cheap as all hell to do that, but at the same time, I like the immersion that having to put in codes yourself adds, rather than just clicking on a number pad and having the game input for you. If people want to cheat, theres not much we can do about it anyways.

I would like to see a little menu when you start the game that would allow you to put restrictions on your character.
A few examples would be.
-No saving in combat
-1 save per area
-Automatic deletion of save files if character dies (for the crazy people :P)

This way, we could remove the temptation of abusing glitches in the game. Or realoading saves etc. But not everyone would be bound to those rules. People could choose what rules they want to be bound to.

Vadim Verenich
13th Aug 2008, 19:55
I think you should keep from DXIW replaceable augs and distinction between official/black market augs. But it would be very positive and creative to elaborate on more creative scheme (someting in Bioshock's veins). It would be nice to re-insert a separate skill system, since skill system could easily compensate augs malfunctions."Black market" or illegal augs could provide additional powerful features, meanwhile decreasing some skills (in order to mantain a balnce between skills and augs).

I will vote for advanced vision aug with 4 modes: distant, infrared, ultraviolet and rentgen vision.

El_Bel
14th Aug 2008, 00:00
I dont have a problem with switching augs. But i think we need the distinction between Augmentation canister and Augmentation Upgrade canister. Upgrade canisters should not be enough to max out all augs. And if a player chooses to replace an aug, well he ends up with less upgrades, because he looses the ones that were with the old Aug.

With mechanical augmentations i cant find a reason why we cant change them. It's a mechanical process and anybody who can install them can uninstall them as well.

jcp28
14th Aug 2008, 02:51
Both good ideas. Keep it coming! But implementation is the key.

Fen
14th Aug 2008, 11:28
Dont tell the player what augs are available until he finds them. In DX2, you basically could open up ure Augs menu and look at all the different augs you could choose from throughout the game.

In DX1, you knew how many augs you were going to have in total, but you didnt know what you were going to get until you found the augmentation canister. This added to the excitement when seeking out and finding new augmentation canisters.

In DX3, I would like them to take it a little bit further than that. Instead of an Augmentation canister coding for an area of the body, the augmentation canister would only code for 1 upgrade. So you would find for example a muscle strength aug and you wouldnt know if there was 3 other augs that might fill that same slot. If Aug choices were permanent, then it would be a big choice to install that mod without knowledge of what else is out there. Maybe you could replace an arm with a mechanical aug, but not go back. So if you installed an arm bio-mod, then found another arm bio-mod, you couldnt switch, but if you found an arm mechanomod, then you could lop that arm off and go ahead.

Also, there could be ways in game to find out about augs. Augmentation Monthly magazine or something might be a good read to hear about new augs that have just come on the market, and which company might have one lying around for you to 'borrow' :p

gamer0004
14th Aug 2008, 11:37
That would just be annoying.

DXeXodus
15th Aug 2008, 04:46
I agree with Fen. One should not be aware of all the mods in the game. The way DX1 did it was great. One really needed to think about what you were doing before you installed an aug and how it related to your play style.

And I'm all for magazines and newspapers in the game. The more the merrier.

outcast
15th Aug 2008, 10:46
There isn't much left to comment on that hasn't already been said, so I will make this plea:

Please for the love of god don't cripple the game with DRM. Contrary to what the people at Starforce say, it doesn't hurt pirates at all, instead it hurts paying customers because pirates almost always have ways to circumvent it. Don't punish your customers, they deserve better. Here's an example: Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords was released with minimum copy protection, just a serial number to activate the product. Yet, the game sold very well in spite of coming from a very small publisher. If they had tried to include copy protection (such as starforce), it would have cost them more because they would have to spend extra money on licensing fees that could have been spent on the game itself. Thankfully they wisely decided against this.

I legally own very few games, and Deus Ex 1 is among them (but DX2 isn't, because it was not good), now why is this? Because games are expensive and I don't have a lot of money to spend on them, so I only buy games that are very good. Most games on the market are mediocre, and just not worth $50. The point is, if your game is good it will sell itself.

El_Bel
15th Aug 2008, 11:09
I agree with Fen. One should not be aware of all the mods in the game. The way DX1 did it was great. One really needed to think about what you were doing before you installed an aug and how it related to your play style.

DX1 told you what augs you could install later. One book in Jaime Reyes office, one on Tong...


And I'm all for magazines and newspapers in the game. The more the merrier.

Me too!!! But I think it is a lot of work to let the developers make them all by themselves. Maybe we could help :rolleyes: And then they could choose the ones that fit the game and put them in. :whistle:

The above post should make a thread of its own i think. ^

gamer0004
15th Aug 2008, 12:10
There isn't much left to comment on that hasn't already been said, so I will make this plea:

Please for the love of god don't cripple the game with DRM. Contrary to what the people at Starforce say, it doesn't hurt pirates at all, instead it hurts paying customers because pirates almost always have ways to circumvent it. Don't punish your customers, they deserve better. Here's an example: Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords was released with minimum copy protection, just a serial number to activate the product. Yet, the game sold very well in spite of coming from a very small publisher. If they had tried to include copy protection (such as starforce), it would have cost them more because they would have to spend extra money on licensing fees that could have been spent on the game itself. Thankfully they wisely decided against this.

I legally own very few games, and Deus Ex 1 is among them (but DX2 isn't, because it was not good), now why is this? Because games are expensive and I don't have a lot of money to spend on them, so I only buy games that are very good. Most games on the market are mediocre, and just not worth $50. The point is, if your game is good it will sell itself.

I completely agree.
The problem is that publishers still don't understand copy protection doesn't work.
There are two types of people (seriously, I've never met anyone who didn't belong to either of these): 1. people who have played some or a lot of illegal games. To these guys copy protection simply doesn't work. They'll always get the game to work.
2. People who have never used any such thing as cracks or images. I can still remember really well some people who said "Sorry, I can't copy the game for you [which is not necessarily me!], it's protected." A simple crack will suffice, but they've never heard of that or think all this illegal stuff is too dangerous.
Seriousley, get the same protection of DX. Yes, pirates only have to download a crack, but they'll always find a way anyway.
With such simple protection the buyers won't be pushed off. I haven't bought some games because of problems with security. All this stuff is costing them money, but they keep blaming the "pirates".
It's the same with Windows. You have to activate (which in the beginning caused problems if you had to reinstall windows after a crash or something like that). Okay, no problem (unless you had to reinstall). But then. I had to download the new updates for IE so I visit their website and dowload them. Well, I tried to. Microsoft had come up with a new system to check whether or not your Windows was legal. And, of course, it didn't work. So I had a problem once again. It couldn't install the program which had to check my windows. Only after a month or so it worked.
Anyway, if you have to run these programs if you want to download patches, what's the activation for?
My friend, on the other hand, had simply downloaded an illegal version. When I told him about the crappy microsoft protection he said: "Strange. I've got an illegal version and I was able to download all updates without problems
So, I've decided that I'm never going to buy a legal windows anymore. I don't like to do that, but they're kind of forcing me to. And that in combination with new OSs getting worse and worse, disavowing what Windows is (was) all about: not being Apple. I don't want a simplified or organised OS!!! For instance: I was in Austria in an Apple store. I tried their OS because I was sick of Windows. In the top bar an option said "safari". Knowing that safari is their browser, I clicked on it and looked for the option "start safari". It wasn't there (it seems that in some it does though)! Look, I understand that the buttons to start programs are at the bottom, but if I see "safari" I want to be able to open it there! It's way more logical. Anyway, Microsoft is trying to copy that, but onfortunatly not only are they trying to copy a system that I don't want in the first place (which is the reason I am using Windows) they're screwing it up. The result is Windows Vista. I've used it and it was awful. I liked 98 better than XP (in terms of using the OS, of course XP is much better for sexurity reasons and such), but even XP is a hell of a lot better than Vista. Actually, in contrast with XP versus 98, Vista offers absolutely no advantages to XP except for a new GUI I don't like.

Well, as I was saying :nut: , publishers have to offer more with the legal copy than an illegal one. Downloading games can be quite a pain in the ass (versions that don't work, slow downloading etc.) so what they have to offer is something that works like a charm. Just press the install button (and some "next" buttons of course) and it works. Nothing more, nothing less. Then they have to offer a good-looking manual and case, and the manual font shouldn't be so small it's almost impossible to read. Right now though, they're only offering disadvantages so they're selling less. It's very simple.

DXeXodus
18th Aug 2008, 04:14
DX1 told you what augs you could install later. One book in Jaime Reyes office, one on Tong...

I realise that, but it wasn't in your face like IW. You actually had to find the book, the information wasn't right there in your biomod screen.

TrickyVein
18th Aug 2008, 12:53
This is a long thread. I have not read through all of it. Forgive me if this has been said already.
Deus Ex 2 relied too heavily on the first game. This is where I think it fell short and collapsed. Instead of developing its own unique storyline it brought back "senescent old fools (from the quote files)" like Tracer Tong, Paul, and turned JC Denton into a demigod. The final level, for Christ's sake, was liberty island - more Cairo and Seattle please. DX2 had much going for it, but didn't know where to take it, so I say this: If there is to be a Deus Ex 3, I'd like to see another bestseller in its own right, one with its own characters and story - it's been almost a decade - lets see some fresh ground broken.

Plaque
19th Aug 2008, 00:43
1) Do not force any "message" or morality on players (like DX2IW did - the templars...). Rather present a complicated world full of paradoxes, desperation, betrayal and paranoia with people trying to live their lives in it. It would result in better statement about humanity than creating a silly bunch of one-dimensional fanatics playing nazis.

2) In DX1 no one is overacting. When you listen to all those messages coming through your uplink, everyone is calm and believable in their expressions.

3) Hidden agendas ! - Smuggler. Dead mechanic in illuminati compound. DeBeers in a freezer. Shady graveyard gatekeeper with hidden transmitter behind shelf. Joe Greene - journalist that is in fact a spy.... Yes, please let the players find out themselves - or let them walk by carelessly - they'll find out in second or third or fourth playthrough...

4) Moments of calm, moments of tranquility. Areas like UNATCO base in the beginning of DX1, paris Chateau or NY graveyard before MJ12 attack... it is great to stop the action for a while and let the player play detective - without disturbing killings.

5) NORMAL PEOPLE. Kid who tries to get into mob. Kid who wants chocolate. Singing bums. Secretary who steals stuff from UNATCO and gives it to her love. Mole people. Just normal people doing normal things. No weirdos, no heroes.

6) Hide things. The joy of finding a secret keypad, secret doors, secret flat, secret ammo - is much greater, when it is really hard to find it.

7) Variety of enemies - from dogs and creatures, through former friends, through augmented superhumans, to giant mechs. This variety makes each encounter a different game. Yes, there should be some specialities like stalking chinese servant maid ready to place bullets if you step into wrong room.

8) Variety of ways, how to dispose of enemies. Let them live their death. I will make a little comparison:

In CRYSIS you can:
- kill enemies with weapons.

In DX1 you can:
- electrocute them.
- set them on fire
- let them cough on gas
- poison them with darts
- force one against another (scramblers)
- let their turrets kill them
- set traps
- tell them a KILLPHRASE
- scatter them to pieces with explosives
- kill them with loud weapons

- kill them silent.
- not kill them at all.

9) NO NAIVITIES and stupidities - like friendly helping ALIENS or coffee companies in DX2IW. Allowing kitsch like this can murder all your hard work.

I WISH DX3 DEVELOPERS THE BEST LUCK !!!! :rolleyes: :thumbsup:
please let me know what you think

ewanlaing
19th Aug 2008, 22:45
This is a long thread. I have not read through all of it. Forgive me if this has been said already.
Deus Ex 2 relied too heavily on the first game. This is where I think it fell short and collapsed. Instead of developing its own unique storyline it brought back "senescent old fools (from the quote files)" like Tracer Tong, Paul, and turned JC Denton into a demigod. The final level, for Christ's sake, was liberty island - more Cairo and Seattle please. DX2 had much going for it, but didn't know where to take it, so I say this: If there is to be a Deus Ex 3, I'd like to see another bestseller in its own right, one with its own characters and story - it's been almost a decade - lets see some fresh ground broken.
EXCELLENT point. There were just slightly too many old faces popping up in dx 2.

foxberg
20th Aug 2008, 14:19
Most important to me is the space (as a territory), I hate to be constrained into the narrow boundaries - can go too far left, too far right, etc. I would love to have some hidden areas on the far outskirts of the levels. Areas where no one would normally deviate to. All the secrets and secret areas should not be revealed to gamers for at least a year. And no cheat codes, please!

gamer0004
20th Aug 2008, 17:23
Most important to me is the space (as a territory), I hate to be constrained into the narrow boundaries - can go too far left, too far right, etc. I would love to have some hidden areas on the far outskirts of the levels. Areas where no one would normally deviate to. All the secrets and secret areas should not be revealed to gamers for at least a year. And no cheat codes, please!

I love cheat systems as in DX or Morrowind. Especially in Morrowind it has helped me innumerable times when I had killed an NPC that was crucial to the plot (but without the game actually telling me that when I had killed him). It's cool to change all kinds of stats and to see what happens. I never cheat on a serious runthrough, but sometimes I just feel like messing about.
And if there will be an SDK, then there's no use for not revealing all secret passages and secret areas because people can simply see it ;)

foxberg
20th Aug 2008, 19:06
And if there will be an SDK, then there's no use for not revealing all secret passages and secret areas because people can simply see it ;)

They should wait with SDK as well. At least for a year. The more mystery the game would remain the more attractive it would be for the long run. The day all the secrets are revealed there would be nothing left to explore, no more sleepless nights for many...

Red
21st Aug 2008, 08:22
Cheats are mandatory for debugging purposes. It only depends whether they are hardcoded or not (removable/not). In most cases it's not worth the effort to exclude them in the end from the final product.

Bahmo
21st Aug 2008, 15:45
I agree that its cheap as all hell to do that, but at the same time, I like the immersion that having to put in codes yourself adds, rather than just clicking on a number pad and having the game input for you. If people want to cheat, theres not much we can do about it anyways.

I would like to see a little menu when you start the game that would allow you to put restrictions on your character.
A few examples would be.
-No saving in combat
-1 save per area
-Automatic deletion of save files if character dies (for the crazy people :P)

This way, we could remove the temptation of abusing glitches in the game. Or realoading saves etc. But not everyone would be bound to those rules. People could choose what rules they want to be bound to.

That solution may well cause as many problems as it solves. I know there would be some guys who felt macho and would start the game with handicaps, only to later wish they could back up their files more often. It's also a fairly redundant solution; if someone doesn't have enough willpower to keep from backing up their files, then they probably don't have enough to put on a handicap at the beginning.

Perhaps a better idea is to have the codes be randomly-generated each time you reload the game. That could easily be done, and it would solve the problem.

gamer0004
21st Aug 2008, 17:00
I'd like it if they included grenade climbing again in DX3. Okay, it was very unrealistic in DX but it could be implemented in a realistic way. The LAMs offer enough grip to use them to climb up walls. They'd just have to come up with a system that you had to have two grenades to climb up: one to hang from, the other to stand on. Then stick the third to the wall and grab the first one again. Of course, thoe LAMs wouldn't be sticky but suck themselves vacuum onto the wall, because else it would be impossible to pull this off (people tend to forget that... if something is sticky enough to hang from then it iscertainly to sticky to pull it off the wall).

TrickyVein
21st Aug 2008, 22:46
grenade climbing? wtf? that wasn't intentional - it's how the unreal engine worked with player collision, the same way you could run on railings - it wouldn't make any sense to take a step backwards in time to an inferior game engine from almost a decade ago - it's almost impossible to predict whatever flukes there will be in the new system design. This is foolishness.

gamer0004
22nd Aug 2008, 05:25
This is foolishness.

Lolz. You don't really get what I was on about. I know it wasn't intented. But the idea is pretty cool and very plausable. They should adjust it (like I said, you have to have at least 2 LAMs on the wall at the same time so you can stand on one of them and hang on the other). Please reread my post ;)

TrickyVein
24th Aug 2008, 17:01
Lolz. You don't really get what I was on about. I know it wasn't intented. But the idea is pretty cool and very plausable. They should adjust it (like I said, you have to have at least 2 LAMs on the wall at the same time so you can stand on one of them and hang on the other). Please reread my post ;)

ok - climbing precariously on explosive material sounds more like a monty python skit then a serious endeavor in an action adventure title - why bother with grenades? make another climbing tool specifically for climbing like claws or giant ass suction cups, a grappling gun - but grenades? wouldn't a spotter just have a great time blowing you to hell on those awesome and plausible sticky mines?

Absentia
24th Aug 2008, 17:27
ok - climbing precariously on explosive material sounds more like a monty python skit then a serious endeavor in an action adventure title

Agreed. It's a fun little gimmick, lets keep it that way.


I think you should keep from DXIW replaceable augs and distinction between official/black market augs.

I hated the black market canisters tbh. Well, I really like the idea of unofficial augmentations, but I hated how the black market ones were just exactly the same, only red, it just felt really arcadey and simplified. Theres not going to be a black-and-white "official" and "unofficial" distinction as simple as blue or red. In that manner, even the unnoficial one seems like its part of its own range.
Also, I prefer the idea of having to get your augs installed at a station. For DX3, maybe you go to a medical station to install an aug, then the screen blacks out and you "wake up" again, this time with the aug installed. Things like that can add to the immersion.

I think canisters should be the same, but the difference would be who you see to get the operation done. You bring a canister to your corporate employer's medical department to see a friendly face like Jaime Reyes, you'll get different augmentation options than if you took one to a crack dealer-turned budding neurosurgeon in a street corner.