PDA

View Full Version : EIDOS - For God's sake, please read!



JSDonald
29th Nov 2007, 14:59
Right, I've just heard about DX3 today. I've seen the trailer, watched the YouTube video analysis and signed up to this forum. I'm a lawyer, busy as hell and really don't have time to post around on forums most of the time. In fact, I rarely play PC games anymore (sadly).

To Eidos and the Devs

NONETHELESS, I want Eidos to listen. You guys have a chance to make an awesome game that will stand the test of time (and no doubt fill your coffers with lots of gold). Just do a search on Google and check out how excited people are about this (a lot of people, I might add). All I want to say is: Please, for the love of God, do not make the same mistakes that were made in Invisible War.

IW was awfully received. I played it and disliked it but what I hated was the overt rape of the brand that had taken place. The best things about the original Deus Ex were removed and an oversimplified piece of crap produced in its place masquerading as a sequel. People were not happy; sales were bad.

So, I implore you Eidos on behalf of every gamer (whether hardcore or casual) to make a good job this time. READ and ANALYSE what people write below and take it into account. Do a good job. Please.

To the Community

Guys, let's post ALL of the things that were wrong with IW so Eidos and the designers have a single point of reference to look up and research all the things that we hated. Keep it simple and keep it short.

Thank you.

Keir
29th Nov 2007, 15:06
Thank you for your post, and welcome to the forum.

We are looking and reading on all the forums.

StormFront
29th Nov 2007, 15:12
Thank you for your post, and welcome to the forum.

We are looking and reading on all the forums.

:scratch: Excuse my confusion but are you a Mod or a Dev? Just so I know....

Dave W
29th Nov 2007, 16:07
He's the community manager.

StormFront
29th Nov 2007, 16:48
He's the community manager.

Okay, he just sounded slightly "Dev" like with that comment. As I say, just curious...

Been to long since I was about on these boards (thus the new login), don't know who anyone is:)

Dave W
29th Nov 2007, 18:13
Basically, he's the guy that tells Montreal what people are saying on the forum.

spcutler
30th Nov 2007, 00:22
I think that all of the complaints about universal ammo, the removal of skill points, the small levels, the inventory system, and so on are valid criticisms of DX:IW. However, I don't think they're truly fundamental to why it was inferior to the first DX. Any one of these changes might have been all right in isolation, but the combination made for a game that was very disappointing compared to the first.

What really made the first DX game wonderful for me is that throughout the entire game, you were motivated to explore, to find novel solutions to problems, and so on. Even getting every skill point in the game didn't allow you to get a perfect character, so you tried your best. You couldn't upgrade every augmentation. You couldn't upgrade every weapon. So even late in the game, it was a real treat to find a previously unexplored region that gave you a nice bonus in something. And even on my tenth (or so) playthrough of the game, I'm still finding new things.

DX:IW, however, gave you an almost perfect character (full augs and weapon mods) within the first few levels. Sure, the game threw you a few bones here and there--a special weapon or whatever--but it wasn't nearly enough. There was very little motivation to explore because you already had everything you needed. Even the aspects that seemed promising--the black market mods, for instance--had the same issue. Instead of being a rare item, barely obtainable, you had as many of them as you needed before the game was half over.

So there you go. Change DX3 however you like. But please, please make sure that no matter how far you get into the game, your motivation to explore and innovate is still there. That is what made DX great and what was so sorely missing from DX:IW. Everything else is just details.

- Scott

Dave W
30th Nov 2007, 00:56
Frankly I thought exploration was still encouraged in IW. Such as taking out the Templar position overlooking the Omar traders if you explored up the apartments. In an unintentional way it was fun to explore the maps exploiting the physics.

While the character was far more perfect in IW, it did make more sense. Take the original, you're a superagent for the UN's security force. And you fire a pistol with the accuracy of a 7 year old. When you aim a scope, you spin it widly about the screen. Apparantly when I was 11 I could hold a rifle scope better than a nanoaugmented super agent could.

spcutler
30th Nov 2007, 01:27
Frankly I thought exploration was still encouraged in IW. Such as taking out the Templar position overlooking the Omar traders if you explored up the apartments.

Well, I didn't mean to imply that DX:IW was completely worthless in that regard. Clearly, there was still exploration, particularly in the early game where you haven't gotten everything yet. It's just that the motivation dwindled over time because the rewards became worthless. Taking out the Templars spying on the Omar was a good example of where DX:IW got it right, since it meant you saved Leo. But these instances were less common than in DX.

- Scott

StormFront
30th Nov 2007, 13:29
Well, I didn't mean to imply that DX:IW was completely worthless in that regard. Clearly, there was still exploration, particularly in the early game where you haven't gotten everything yet. It's just that the motivation dwindled over time because the rewards became worthless. Taking out the Templars spying on the Omar was a good example of where DX:IW got it right, since it meant you saved Leo. But these instances were less common than in DX.

- Scott

But even the most generous minded of players would have to admit that the exploration was drastically limited, surely? Yes there was the odd room or box that could be found off the beaten track, but the size of the level meant that you could see every single thing the game had to offer in one (very short) play through.

In DE1 it would take 4-5 genuine play throughs to see everything, collect everything and uncover every facet of the game and that is not merely due to the size but simply shows how much was packed into that game.

Dave W
30th Nov 2007, 14:38
Well, firstly that's because the game is longer and the levels could be bigger. But there's still plenty of exploration in IW that it took me several goes to actually find. There's about 3 hidden weapons, lots of cool little ares you can reach like under the Nassif greenhouse. Probably not as many as Deus Ex, but the exploration element is still pretty strong.

StormFront
30th Nov 2007, 15:44
Well, firstly that's because the game is longer and the levels could be bigger. But there's still plenty of exploration in IW that it took me several goes to actually find. There's about 3 hidden weapons, lots of cool little ares you can reach like under the Nassif greenhouse. Probably not as many as Deus Ex, but the exploration element is still pretty strong.

There are 5 hidden weapons if memory serves and I can honestly say I found them all on teh first play through. I even found the hidden ending (by accident) on the first trip through and had to reload! lol

JSDonald
1st Dec 2007, 06:38
But even the most generous minded of players would have to admit that the exploration was drastically limited, surely? Yes there was the odd room or box that could be found off the beaten track, but the size of the level meant that you could see every single thing the game had to offer in one (very short) play through.

In DE1 it would take 4-5 genuine play throughs to see everything, collect everything and uncover every facet of the game and that is not merely due to the size but simply shows how much was packed into that game.

I agree completely. The drastically curtailed exploration options in DX:IW (part, or perhaps most, of which were due to the tiny levels) were a big negative. One of the game's biggest failings was the terribly small levels and constant loads.

In the original, just think about how big Liberty Island was! My first reaction in DX: IW was just how claustrophobic the whole thing felt ****

Godot
1st Dec 2007, 07:40
In the original, just think about how big Liberty Island was! My first reaction in DX: IW was just how claustrophobic the whole thing felt ****
And in DX:IW they couldn't even revisit Liberty Island without covering it with that ridiculously contrived glacier so that the original map could be broken up into Xbox-sized chunks.

:mad2:

StormFront
1st Dec 2007, 10:45
And in DX:IW they couldn't even revisit Liberty Island without covering it with that ridiculously contrived glacier so that the original map could be broken up into Xbox-sized chunks.

:mad2:


Not only that but the entire scale of the island was shrunk. If you had peiced all those bite-sized chunks back together it still would have been about half the size of the one in DE1 :D :lol:

William Croft
1st Dec 2007, 23:31
I couldnt agree more. You put up a good case even though I don't know the games I seem to agree:)

humbug
2nd Dec 2007, 09:39
You have never played Deus Ex Lara Willliam? It is one of the best games ever made, if not the best! I would highly recomend this game, I've just looked on amazon and you can pick it up from as little as 1.99 ( for the PC) .

Bluey71
9th Dec 2007, 16:41
I have had too much red wine and my head is starting to hurt, so for this I have cheated, just a little.

Here is some good stuff about DX1 taken from different areas of the net:

Bring it to life with one of the most advanced 3D engines available today, drop in a full-on role-playing skill system, cram in a massive arsenal of high-tech weapons and gadgets, a bevy of allies and enemies, and a conspiracy bent on world domination. What you get is an immersive roleplaying experience -- without the usual dragons, spells, and annoying little elves.

Deus Ex takes place from a first-person perspective. It was designed to incorporate gameplay elements from four types of games: role-playing, first-person shooter, adventure and "immersive simulation", the latter being defined as a game in which nothing reminds you that you're just playing a game

Gameplay in Deus Ex emphasizes player choice, which GameSpot's review explains: "Deus Ex is quite long for an action-packed first-person game", it states, "but even so, most of its situations present you with two or three possible solutions."[18] Objectives can be completed in numerous ways, including stealth, sniping, heavy frontal assault, dialogue, or engineering and computer hacking. This level of freedom requires that levels, characters, and puzzles be designed with significant redundancy, as a single play-through of the game will miss large sections of dialogue, areas, and other content.

The gameplay of Deus Ex offers many subplots which the player may or may not encounter, depending on their actions within the game.

Deus Ex features a text-reading system which allows the player to read terminals and notes, as well as excerpts from newspapers and books found in various locations within the game level. These various bits of media serve a variety of purposes, from providing the player with useful gameplay information (such as a needed keycode), to the advancement of the plot, to the creation of atmosphere and metafictional irony.

Real world parallels

Conspiracies are one of the main themes of Deus Ex, and the game draws heavily upon popular real world conspiracy theories for many of its plot elements.

It's a cracking game - a real blood, guts and bullets comic book story with depth, flexibility and staying power. Deus Ex presents not only physical and mental problems for you to solve, but also numerous moral dilemmas to overcome. It is a giant of a game and another step forward for the role-playing genre.


I have just read that Eidos Montreal wants at least 24 months to develop DX3 - well, I got my fingers crossed.

Red
9th Dec 2007, 19:37
I just hope that those 24 months would extend to at least 30-36 months in the end . Why? Because only then will I be sure the team of Eidos Montreal is giving its best to polish the game to perfection. (And that Eidos isn't just deadline-must-be-met-no-matter-what money whore [such as EA is].)

StormFront
9th Dec 2007, 23:01
I just hope that those 24 months would extend to at least 30-36 months in the end . Why? Because only then will I be sure the team of Eidos Montreal is giving its best to polish the game to perfection. (And that Eidos isn't just deadline-must-be-met-no-matter-what money whore [such as EA is].)

That's a terrible thing to wish.

Given that they already have the engine built for them and that it is geared mostly toward consoles, there is no way (short of incompetence) that they could take more than 24 months to build the game

Red
10th Dec 2007, 00:44
Whatever you say. 24 months from now, if the game is out and sucks big time (due to an army of bugs and poor porting), I'll say "I told you so".

Dave W
10th Dec 2007, 01:41
That's a terrible thing to wish.

Given that they already have the engine built for them and that it is geared mostly toward consoles, there is no way (short of incompetence) that they could take more than 24 months to build the game

Deus Ex took 28. 34 if you count the predevelopment stage. Montreal have a bigger team, but then, technology means development takes longer.

StormFront
10th Dec 2007, 06:14
Whatever you say. 24 months from now, if the game is out and sucks big time (due to an army of bugs and poor porting), I'll say "I told you so".

'Cos that is such a difficult stance to make given that multiplatform games NEVER launch with bugs...:mad2: You have already decided to dislike this game and that is your choice. Until shown reason to think otherwise I am determined to remain optimistic here. I am sick of ruining games for myself by gettign all bent outa chape well before they even launch...

Deus Ex took 28. 34 if you count the predevelopment stage. Montreal have a bigger team, but then, technology means development takes longer.

Yes but DX had a MUCH smaller team and game development simply took a LOT longer 7 years ago.

On top of that Montreal have already reached "proof of concept" with DX3 which means that a reasonable amount of material has already been created. On top of that the engine they are using is far higher spec that Ueng 1 so should have a far better tool set behind it (quite likely given how quickly games have been knocked out in this engine previously)

Bluey71
10th Dec 2007, 10:55
That's a terrible thing to wish.

Given that they already have the engine built for them and that it is geared mostly toward consoles, there is no way (short of incompetence) that they could take more than 24 months to build the game

Hey Storm - has it been mentioned anywhere yet what platform DX3 is being built for?

I want to be optimistic I really do, but when I hear the word 'console' and 'DX3' in the same sentence bad things come to mind.

StormFront
10th Dec 2007, 11:00
Hey Storm - has it been mentioned anywhere yet what platform DX3 is being built for?

I want to be optimistic I really do, but when I hear the word 'console' and 'DX3' in the same sentence bad things come to mind.


Not in so many words... but... Montreal have stated that they are building for "next generation consoles and PC" and Eidos are very hand-in-hand with M$ these days (not a dig, Eidos, just an observation).

On top of that most companies now look to produce multiplatform games as that is the best way to make cash. Unless the game is HUGE (and DX isn't), the PC market just isn't big enough to make money.

In summary I'd bet anythin you like that this is multiplatform with the main focus being given to 360. Pc will, as usual, get the fuzzy end of the lollipop....

gamer0004
10th Dec 2007, 16:29
Yes but DX had a MUCH smaller team and game development simply took a LOT longer 7 years ago.

Yes, because the games back then took longer to beat. In 2005, 30 hours of gameplay was normal. Now it's 10 hours and a bit multiplayer...

StormFront
10th Dec 2007, 16:48
Yes, because the games back then took longer to beat. In 2005, 30 hours of gameplay was normal. Now it's 10 hours and a bit multiplayer...

That is simply not true and you know it. Name me ONE FPS style game from 2000 that took more than 10 hours, never mind 30 hours to beat.

You are living in a fantasy if you think modern games are worse then their predecessors...

Red
10th Dec 2007, 16:50
'Cos that is such a difficult stance to make given that multiplatform games NEVER launch with bugs...:mad2: You have already decided to dislike this game and that is your choice.

I would like you to quote parts of my message, from which you concluded, that:
- I've made a stance of expecting bugless game
- I've decided to dislike this game in advance.

If you want to debate, then debate. Don't put words, thoughts or even conclusions in other peoples mouths/heads etc.

Not everything has to be your way, and this discussion is one of the things, where your opinion isn't the only correct one. I am not attacking you. I am just putting a statement and a fair assumption of how things could turn out. I believe that in the last 17 years of gaming, which I put through, I think I can pretty much decently foretell a game's fate.

24 months, regardless of the state of the engine, is simply too little time for a masterpiece. I'm not saying this is 100%, maybe I'm wrong, but if they decide to prolong the deadline in next 2 years, I'll be merely happy about it.

StormFront
10th Dec 2007, 17:04
Okay. Well first up, get your panties unbunched. I wasn't attacking you or being angry or patronising. You can read those things into what I type if you choose, but that is your doing. If I want to go and berate people and get in their face, I'll do it in person. Forums are here for discussion and idea exchange (unfortunately no one gets that so I spend a lot of time pointing out when they aer missinformed, incorrect or simply talking crap, but there we are...)


I would like you to quote parts of my message, from which you concluded, that:
- I've made a stance of expecting bugless game
- I've decided to dislike this game in advance.


You did so with your enitre post by "predicting" (with no information to support this) that a game developed in 24 mlonths will be bad. Doomsaying is easy, requires no skill, no thought and offers no down-side.


If you want to debate, then debate. Don't put words, thoughts or even conclusions in other peoples mouths/heads etc.

Wasn't, didn't, don't. :confused:


Not everything has to be your way, and this discussion is one of the things, where your opinion isn't the only correct one. I am not attacking you. I am just putting a statement and a fair assumption of how things could turn out. I believe that in the last 17 years of gaming, which I put through, I think I can pretty much decently foretell a game's fate.

No, you can speculate or doomsay. We have no evidence of anything yet as this game is barely of the drawing board. As for the "having everything my own way" I simply have no idea what the hell you are talking about there so I cannot comment...


24 months, regardless of the state of the engine, is simply too little time for a masterpiece. I'm not saying this is 100%, maybe I'm wrong, but if they decide to prolong the deadline in next 2 years, I'll be merely happy about it.

Wrong, wrong and wrong again. As is becoming my favourite phrase on these boards, you clearly do not one thing about game development.

Bluey71
12th Dec 2007, 19:27
Do you think DX3 will make use Direct-X 10?

If it does, is that good news in what DX3 will be capable of - level size/interactivity etc?

StormFront
12th Dec 2007, 22:51
Do you think DX3 will make use Direct-X 10?

If it does, is that good news in what DX3 will be capable of - level size/interactivity etc?

I imagine that it will have it tacked on as a weak afterthought like all other DX games so far (Crysis excluded).

DX10 in and of itself does not offer anything that could revolutionise gameplay. The only possible exception is if the use of Geometry shaders takes of in which is unlikely as 360 is utterly devoid of them...

On the other hand we will be at LEAST 1 generation of card on from where we are now and the DX10 performance of said cards should be bloody good. Maybe this team will take its usage more seriously....?

Bluey71
13th Dec 2007, 20:16
Heres another point for the Montreal guys.


Please treat us (gamers, and your customers) as adults. Give us the hard moral dilemma's to deal with. Let us witness cruelty, bloodshed and hard nosed professionalism from the characters we will meet. You are making a next gen Deus Ex game - please, continue with the theme.

We will thank you for it in the future and you yourselves will be remembered for doing so.

SageSavage
13th Dec 2007, 21:46
Yes, DX has to stay an adult game.

comy
14th Dec 2007, 23:17
I agree. DX3 must be an adult game, like the original was. The problem with IW was, that it was just too clean. No slumps, bums, no adult themes at all, just nice clean streets, dull people, dull conversations, no moral dilemas...

DOitlikeDEUSEX1
15th Dec 2007, 23:37
Yep...has to have bums, hookers, drunks & hungry, smart ass kids telling you to "Go to Hell!" when you don't feed them :lol: telling them, "You don't look that hungry..." :lol: :lmao:

DON_The_Grey
18th Jan 2008, 15:15
Hey,
I think it's a good point that the thread turns again to the aspect that DX:IW
had just a perfect environment:


by spcutler DX:IW, however, gave you an almost perfect character (full augs and weapon mods) within the first few levels. Sure, the game threw you a few bones here and there--a special weapon or whatever--but it wasn't nearly enough. There was very little motivation to explore because you already had everything you needed. Even the aspects that seemed promising--the black market mods, for instance--had the same issue. Instead of being a rare item, barely obtainable, you had as many of them as you needed before the game was half over.

I completely agree with you!
To my mind, DX 1 had a rough character, the old graphic engine created a world
that was far from perfection at all. Instead, the perfect, organic, round shaped environment, in addition to the small level design, got lost of this special character of the original game, that made it so unique to us!!!!!
It is obviously that the developing crew will try to create a great graphic but regarding to a mature circle of gamers, it is far more important to concentrate on aspects like the plot, atmosphere, and the exploration thing;)

@DOitlikeDEUSEX1
Yeah, that's right. It got to be trashy^^

WildcatPhoenix
18th Jan 2008, 16:39
As a DX junkie and a member of the modding community, I've been watching these forums from a distance for a while now. I suppose if the developers are listening, I might as well throw my opinion out there just for the hell of it.

So I'll break my analysis of what went wrong with IW into two categories:

Logical Arguments

Universal Ammo- Need we say more? Even if one disregards the sheer silliness of the concept, it still makes no sense for the game designers to limit the player to smaller weapons (personally, as I played IW, I simply gave up on weapons like the sniper rifle because I got tired of constantly hunting for ammo afterwards). There was a good mix of ammunition types in the original game, and the player felt rewarded when he found the rarer ammo such as 20mm HE. If the developers want to make certain types of ammunition more useful, simply make multiple weapons use the same caliber round: i.e.- the MP5 fires a 9mm subsonic pistol round. Why not make an SMG that fires 10mm ammo? At least give us a FEW variants, if not the whole palette of different ammunition types from the original game.

Setting- This might not have bothered everyone as much as it did me, but the setting of the original game was a world I could relate to. Sure, we don't have augmented humans running around and there was no Aquinas Protocol supplying unlimited bandwidth to the world, but all of the technology and world events in Deus Ex seemed very, very plausible (and certain things, like the absence of the Twin Towers in NYC, seem eerily prescient in retrospect). With IW, the story jumped forward into a more traditional sci-fi environment. While this world wasn't necessarily boring or poorly developed, it still felt foreign and didn't connect with the players the way Hong Kong, NYC, and Paris did. When making our mod ("Man in Black," http://www.moddb.com/mods/6841/deus-ex-man-in-black) we chose to set the story merely a month after the events of the original game. I hope DX3 chooses a similar route, or at least, something before IW.

Original Characters- Invisible War's treatment of the characters/organizations of the original game was downright bizarre. Suddenly, there is almost no mention of the Illuminati, UNATCO, or Majestic 12. Sure, the "Order" has replaced Everett's conspirators, but MJ12?? Not even a word about the super-secret military organization that once ran all world affairs? Then we must address the strong changes to Chad Dumier (a transition I could forgive, since he was young and naiive in the original game), Nicolette DuClare, Tong, and most importantly, Paul and JC. These characters seemed NOTHING like their original selves. Sure, people change over the course of decades, but I doubt they would change this drastically.

Level Design- This one hurt a lot. Instead of the wide open plazas and marketplaces of the original game, we were confined to small, cramped corridors. Now, from a level design perspective, variety is essential and some corridor missions will be completely welcome. But most IW players were greatly disappointed by the scope of the maps- where was Liberty Island, Hell's Kitchen, Wan Chai, Paris? All sorts of accusations have been levelled at "hardware limitations" from consoles, but in the end, this was a decision made at the design level and simply cannot be overlooked.

Storyline Development- Personally, I felt IW played its hand too quickly. I didn't hate the storyline in general, I just didn't connect with it. I've played through IW once; conversely, I have played through the original game countless times and will probably continue to do so in the future. One major reason behind this is the depth of the conspiracy, the heart of any DX storyline. In the original game, I was genuinely shocked to find out that UNATCO, my buddies for several missions and supposed protector of human liberty, was actually behind the atrocities of the Gray Death/Statue of Liberty bombing/etc. But in IW, the very first mission reveals that Tarsus Academy is not what it seems and that sinister forces are observing Alex's day-to-day activities. While making DX3, don't get impatient when unveiling the conspiracy- let it take time to develop.

Which brings us to the next category:

Illogical Arguments

Platform- The cross development for consoles and PCs is by no means the kiss of death for a game. There have been numerous examples of brilliant games for both consoles and PCs: Call of Duty (2&4), KOTOR (1&2), Bioshock, etc (and games like Mass Effect show that consoles can still weave together elements of storyline with great gameplay). DX3 almost certainly WILL be developed multi-platform, and there is no reason for this to detract from the quality as long as the designers remember what made the original game so successful.

Engine- I'll admit, I hated the physics of IW. But guess what? I hated the physics of the original game. Yet Deus Ex is still my favorite game of all time. Obviously I would like to see some major improvements to the graphics, physics, and character animations in DX3, but this was not what brought IW down. I hope the developers concentrate far less on creating physical effects than developing unique, interesting characters and an intriguing storyline.

Expectations- I've heard the argument that expectations were simply too high, that Deus Ex could never be topped. I think this is a weak suggestion, especially given the bevy of examples of sequels that were just as good, if not better than their originals (Call of Duty 4 jumps immediately to mind, as do classics like Mario 3 or Zelda: Occarina of Time). I think nostalgia will always keep Deus Ex high in our hearts, but that's no reason not to anticipate greatness in Deus Ex 3.

Alright, well, I'm done constructing my Wall O' Text. Until next time, comrades.

-Wildcat

gamer0004
18th Jan 2008, 20:59
I mostly agree with you; apart from some mistakes (MJ-12 WAS mentioned in DX:IW ;) ) these are good points. Still not all of them, though...

WildcatPhoenix
18th Jan 2008, 23:12
Well, as I stated, I only played through IW once (and I fully acknowledge the fact that I missed a lot of stuff). However, MJ12 certainly did not have any kind of role other than a footnote, a fact which I found surprising.

-Wildcat

Rosenrot
19th Jan 2008, 10:16
As a DX junkie and a member of the modding community, I've been watching these forums from a distance for a while now. I suppose if the developers are listening, I might as well throw my opinion out there just for the hell of it.

So I'll break my analysis of what went wrong with IW into two categories:

Logical Arguments

Universal Ammo- Need we say more? Even if one disregards the sheer silliness of the concept, it still makes no sense for the game designers to limit the player to smaller weapons (personally, as I played IW, I simply gave up on weapons like the sniper rifle because I got tired of constantly hunting for ammo afterwards). There was a good mix of ammunition types in the original game, and the player felt rewarded when he found the rarer ammo such as 20mm HE. If the developers want to make certain types of ammunition more useful, simply make multiple weapons use the same caliber round: i.e.- the MP5 fires a 9mm subsonic pistol round. Why not make an SMG that fires 10mm ammo? At least give us a FEW variants, if not the whole palette of different ammunition types from the original game.

Setting- This might not have bothered everyone as much as it did me, but the setting of the original game was a world I could relate to. Sure, we don't have augmented humans running around and there was no Aquinas Protocol supplying unlimited bandwidth to the world, but all of the technology and world events in Deus Ex seemed very, very plausible (and certain things, like the absence of the Twin Towers in NYC, seem eerily prescient in retrospect). With IW, the story jumped forward into a more traditional sci-fi environment. While this world wasn't necessarily boring or poorly developed, it still felt foreign and didn't connect with the players the way Hong Kong, NYC, and Paris did. When making our mod ("Man in Black," http://www.moddb.com/mods/6841/deus-ex-man-in-black) we chose to set the story merely a month after the events of the original game. I hope DX3 chooses a similar route, or at least, something before IW.

Original Characters- Invisible War's treatment of the characters/organizations of the original game was downright bizarre. Suddenly, there is almost no mention of the Illuminati, UNATCO, or Majestic 12. Sure, the "Order" has replaced Everett's conspirators, but MJ12?? Not even a word about the super-secret military organization that once ran all world affairs? Then we must address the strong changes to Chad Dumier (a transition I could forgive, since he was young and naiive in the original game), Nicolette DuClare, Tong, and most importantly, Paul and JC. These characters seemed NOTHING like their original selves. Sure, people change over the course of decades, but I doubt they would change this drastically.

Level Design- This one hurt a lot. Instead of the wide open plazas and marketplaces of the original game, we were confined to small, cramped corridors. Now, from a level design perspective, variety is essential and some corridor missions will be completely welcome. But most IW players were greatly disappointed by the scope of the maps- where was Liberty Island, Hell's Kitchen, Wan Chai, Paris? All sorts of accusations have been levelled at "hardware limitations" from consoles, but in the end, this was a decision made at the design level and simply cannot be overlooked.

Storyline Development- Personally, I felt IW played its hand too quickly. I didn't hate the storyline in general, I just didn't connect with it. I've played through IW once; conversely, I have played through the original game countless times and will probably continue to do so in the future. One major reason behind this is the depth of the conspiracy, the heart of any DX storyline. In the original game, I was genuinely shocked to find out that UNATCO, my buddies for several missions and supposed protector of human liberty, was actually behind the atrocities of the Gray Death/Statue of Liberty bombing/etc. But in IW, the very first mission reveals that Tarsus Academy is not what it seems and that sinister forces are observing Alex's day-to-day activities. While making DX3, don't get impatient when unveiling the conspiracy- let it take time to develop.

Which brings us to the next category:

Illogical Arguments

Platform- The cross development for consoles and PCs is by no means the kiss of death for a game. There have been numerous examples of brilliant games for both consoles and PCs: Call of Duty (2&4), KOTOR (1&2), Bioshock, etc (and games like Mass Effect show that consoles can still weave together elements of storyline with great gameplay). DX3 almost certainly WILL be developed multi-platform, and there is no reason for this to detract from the quality as long as the designers remember what made the original game so successful.

Engine- I'll admit, I hated the physics of IW. But guess what? I hated the physics of the original game. Yet Deus Ex is still my favorite game of all time. Obviously I would like to see some major improvements to the graphics, physics, and character animations in DX3, but this was not what brought IW down. I hope the developers concentrate far less on creating physical effects than developing unique, interesting characters and an intriguing storyline.

Expectations- I've heard the argument that expectations were simply too high, that Deus Ex could never be topped. I think this is a weak suggestion, especially given the bevy of examples of sequels that were just as good, if not better than their originals (Call of Duty 4 jumps immediately to mind, as do classics like Mario 3 or Zelda: Occarina of Time). I think nostalgia will always keep Deus Ex high in our hearts, but that's no reason not to anticipate greatness in Deus Ex 3.

Alright, well, I'm done constructing my Wall O' Text. Until next time, comrades.

-Wildcat

You should've made a self topic, i would definately wish it to be stickied since you are 100% RIGHT sir!

Aspire
21st Jan 2008, 18:24
Nice to see Eidos giving this a go. I agree 100% also with the post a few above mine.

Now just for the record I have played and completed both DX and DX:IW, so my post will be a general comparison of what I enjoyed from DX and what was missing from IW.. so here goes..

Exploration - What I really enjoyed about DX was the fact that you could explore an open ended world.. it would be like "Nice, a secret area and a cool weapon modification! Plus I get 250 skill points for exploration.. bonus!". For me the skill points alone were incentive enough to have a browse around the place. When these were left out of IW, along with the addition of Universal Ammo, it didn't really give me much reason to look around and made the game feel very linear. Otherwise (as previously mentioned) IW wasn't very open ended and I felt that lost a lot of the general atmosphere the first game had.

AI - Now I have to say I thought the AI on IW wa appalling, as soon as you were maxed out on the "Silent Footsteps" mod the game was far, far too easy. Plus the enemies had a much smaller cone of vision than the ones on DX and didn't hide for cover, but just stood there shooting until they were killed, which wasn't really much of a challenge. I feel in some parts of DX3 enemies should be able to radio for backup.

Variation - I would like to see more mods, weapons, ammo types and items (who wouldn't) within the game. More things to waste my credits on as I found by the end of the both games I always had stupid amounts left over! I felt a positive point about IW was the addition of black market mods you could buy from the Omar. Very cool. I felt that in both DX and IW the mods offered didn't really make me think twice.. I know the exact ones I'd go for, so I'd quite like to have a selection of mods where I'm really spoilt for choice. Plus I think this could add a whole lot of reply value to the game.

Thats all I can really think of at the moment, I haven't played either of the games for a while as I've played them to death, but may have a backtrack through DX to see if I can spark anymore likes or dislikes :D

G.A.Pster
28th Jan 2008, 02:37
IRT #1 same here.

O.m.a.r
29th Jan 2008, 23:25
Hey,
I think it's a good point that the thread turns again to the aspect that DX:IW
had just a perfect environment:



I completely agree with you!
To my mind, DX 1 had a rough character, the old graphic engine created a world
that was far from perfection at all. Instead, the perfect, organic, round shaped environment, in addition to the small level design, got lost of this special character of the original game, that made it so unique to us!!!!!
It is obviously that the developing crew will try to create a great graphic but regarding to a mature circle of gamers, it is far more important to concentrate on aspects like the plot, atmosphere, and the exploration thing;)

@DOitlikeDEUSEX1
Yeah, that's right. It got to be trashy^^

I completely agree with you guys 400 %. I loved the first Deus Ex because of its grittiness. It was great I felt like I really was in a world on the brink of collapse. But in IW when you went down into places of poverty you didn’t get that feeling of well poverty. And IW lacked that feeling of atmosphere that you get in Deus Ex.

Falkenherz
30th Jan 2008, 08:56
What I do like about IW is the freedom of choice. I did not play DEx1 though.

- I want to have options like sneaking, dialoguing, hacking, combatting. It was SO cool to enter and leave MAKO totally unseen except for the scripted events (which even would have been unnecessary in order to reach the goals!)

- I want to have "realistic" equipment. Different ammo seem realistic. But let´s face it; carrying 10 weapons including different ammo and lots of grenades does not seem very convincing. The avatar has but a pistol holster. So I like playing it with a pistol only. I wish that the avatar would show all equip you actually have in your inventory.

- I like options in character customisation. I would feel limited if I had to bear with a choice from ealry game up until the end game. In IW you found plenty of biomod infusions so you could switch out your mods once or twice. That was a great option to have.

- I liked very much the freedom of choice concerning the in-game decisions you could make. No good nor evil, a very great concept!

- I hate to say it because many fans think otherwise: I liked the duration of the game. I can finish a game in about two evenings. This gives me a sense of achievement without having to invest too much time. I can show the game to friends who never played before and explain and show them how a game can be better than a book! A too complex game detracts "beginners".

- I like that the game tells a story which is based upon serious philosophical stuff. It´s not only a game, it´s like a true sci-fi book, this makes a game more than a game. It is a piece of art-literature. Like comics have evolved by encompassing mature themes, a game can evolve likely and this is somethin Deus Ex excels in.

WildcatPhoenix
30th Jan 2008, 16:04
- I hate to say it because many fans think otherwise: I liked the duration of the game. I can finish a game in about two evenings. This gives me a sense of achievement without having to invest too much time. I can show the game to friends who never played before and explain and show them how a game can be better than a book! A too complex game detracts "beginners".


Better put up the flame shield, buddy. ****

Seriously, though, all of the positive things you listed in IW were there in DX1 except for the ability to change biomods. I personally prefer the "hardwired" approach- I don't want to be able to mix and match just because a situation is too hard to get through with my current aug loadout. I want the designers to put enough thought into the level design to where you can find different solutions through an obstacle (i.e.- use ballistic resistance aug to survive gauntlet of cameras/turrets, use swimming aug to traverse long underground water tunnel, use enviro-resistance to pass through radiation pain zone, or use speed to mantle up to the rooftops and cross over).

-Wildcat

Draco1979
2nd Feb 2008, 21:37
Anyone remembers the sex scene in the hotel in hells kitchen well more like hearing the moaning as you walk by. Took me a few minutes for the shock to wear off when I heard that. One thing of many I dont like about IW that you get to liberty island and all you have to do is walk around the corner and bam your at the place you want to be and if you want to side with the OMAR's then you go around killing every one.

Falkenherz
4th Feb 2008, 09:08
The Omar Ending was the most shocking one for me. With all the other endings I knew that I somehow worked for someone other´s goal which incidentially correspond to mine. The "renegade" ending was all about NOT working for someone other´s goal... and then, after all is done, in comes the message "The Omar appreciate doing business with you..."

Whaaaaa! Deception, deception everywhere!

Draco1979
4th Feb 2008, 22:46
The Omar Ending was the most shocking one for me..... Whaaaaa! Deception, deception everywhere!
Yea that was a good ending to bad they didnt have more on it during game play.

Zegano
4th Feb 2008, 23:31
I think the Omar were pretty well done. I mean, they really just stay behind the scenes and manipulate things. I do think that there should have been more depth to them, stuff hidden in locked rooms instead of in the design document:D

Draco1979
5th Feb 2008, 00:11
I would have to say that in DX1 had many small maps like the ocean antic one was kinda small after you go under the lab or the hotel in the hells kitchen. I think there should be a balance of maps. One thing I didn't like about IW was the ability to open does that you need a pass word for, even if you knew what it was. On that note when I played DX1 I hated the fact I needed a pen a paper to write things down. So maybe for DX3 they can combine the two if you find the password it will open the door or if you want to guess it you can type it in.

Demonikus
5th Feb 2008, 02:34
Hi all:) I am new to this forum so i just had to say few things...
First>English is not my prime leng. so don't flame me :P
Sec.>Deus Ex 1 is one of many best games i have ever played :)
Third>Hope to see Deus Ex 3 in best form there is...well....after his first brother that is :D
Fourth>......... hmmm...there is no fourth:scratch:??

Anyway, i want to say that as much as i loved DX 1 it did had bad things like that you did had to work later for NSF no matter what, than that main story line had to be too linear i did wanted to work for Simons\Unatco.
Except for JC Denton, Simons and Jock all other char. ware mediocore at best, but all other things are godly still, after so many year's.It had the world that was so dark and tasty and was that good.I only hope that they continue that wich they created whit love,fun and most important whit mature idea's.Story great, but you already now who is your enemy and what to expect talking whit agent Nevara realy gives you a clue that something is wrong whit Unatco and as soon you see Simons walking in there well... need to say more.

Now DX 2 was good for me too it did had great char. that are nice to see and meet, like that girl pilot that you could free from WTO and she will not charge a thing:) for flying you to next mission,or that chick Nassiff and Leo:) very nice acting, well better than most of DX 1 char.Now on the
the atmosphere side of things DX 1 and Dx 2 do have there own atmosphere,and by that i mean for a world that is in total chaos (DX1)
and the world that has rised from the collapse whit new things and rightfully differant atmosphere(DX2). I loved them both still do.Story also good,why?well firstly it did not tell you who is your enemy at very begining of the game only led you to the choise you can make during and at the end of the game, and that is choosing your enemy and ally.

Next weapon mods and ammo well this is what i did not like in DX 2.WAY too simple i just hate when game get dumbed down for console's:mad2:And what about door's and there codes or hacking i just love doing that hoping that the guard wont see me;and email's reading them and knowing somethig new. That gave even more depth to DX1.This is what i dont like and never will about DX2.Easy way dose not make it a good way... ever.

In the end which one shell be the guiding star on the sky for DX 3,well i hope both or even batter for it to be uniqe in its own right. Just forget the console for a while please Devs. learn from mistake's and listen to the fans from time to time. (well not allways:D )

all best from me :):)

well :eek: this wasnt just a few things:mad2: :D

gamer0004
5th Feb 2008, 12:07
I would have to say that in DX1 had many small maps like the ocean antic one was kinda small after you go under the lab or the hotel in the hells kitchen. I think there should be a balance of maps. One thing I didn't like about IW was the ability to open does that you need a pass word for, even if you knew what it was. On that note when I played DX1 I hated the fact I needed a pen a paper to write things down. So maybe for DX3 they can combine the two if you find the password it will open the door or if you want to guess it you can type it in.

I want to type in every code. But it'd be ok if you'd be able to select an option that it happens automatically.

Boiny Bunny
7th Feb 2008, 09:33
There are 5 hidden weapons if memory serves and I can honestly say I found them all on teh first play through. I even found the hidden ending (by accident) on the first trip through and had to reload! lol


I find it *extremely* hard to believe that you found a UNATCO flag lying around outside and just *randomly* decided to carry it inside, put it in Manderly's toilet, and flush.

****

gamer0004
8th Feb 2008, 14:29
I find it *extremely* hard to believe that you found a UNATCO flag lying around outside and just *randomly* decided to carry it inside, put it in Manderly's toilet, and flush.

****

I also threw the flag into the toilet, but I didn't flush.

SageSavage
8th Feb 2008, 16:25
I also threw the flag into the toilet, but I didn't flush.You've just ruined your cover, Bill...

Mephistopheles
11th Feb 2008, 10:58
Hmmm...

I'm noticing a whole heap of anti-IW sentiment here and, to be frank, I didn't find it bad at all. It didn't come close to DX but it remained streets ahead of just about any game of its time.

Yes, the levels were claustrophobic. Yes, there was a lack of a few things - water, lifts/elevators and wide open vistas. Some of the characters seemed a little stiff and didn't exist outside their immediate presence. These were major gripes but not "game killers".

The things that elevated DX so far were subtle. The sex was one of them. That's right - the sex. Relationships and encounters were hinted at all the time, whether it be the juvenile, creaky-bedded room in the 'Ton or the e-mails and dialogue that indicated that various characters had done the nasty.

The effort that went into ensuring that characters had a life outside their immediate appearance was another. There were reams of notes about various folks that indicated that they were actually real and had lives that you had not directly witnessed.

The fact that there were genuinely multiple ways of getting through the game was also insanely important. In IW, you really had to equip your boltcaster in the early phases and aug up on Spy Drone and Cloak, hoping for a repair bot all the while later on, and that was the only realistic way through the game.

I liked IW a whole awful lot but it wasn't DX. I've actually employed at least four distinct strategies during journeys through DX. My journeys through IW were enjoyable but they were largely the same as one another, give or take this or that piece of exploration or one or another side quest completed or otherwise.

My hope is that DX3 will bring back the subtleties but I am still pretty happy with IW.

gamer0004
11th Feb 2008, 15:02
Hmmm...

I'm noticing a whole heap of anti-IW sentiment here and, to be frank, I didn't find it bad at all. It didn't come close to DX but it remained streets ahead of just about any game of its time.

You have never tried to sneak through the whole game, have you?



Yes, the levels were claustrophobic. Yes, there was a lack of a few things - water, lifts/elevators and wide open vistas. Some of the characters seemed a little stiff and didn't exist outside their immediate presence. These were major gripes but not "game killers".


Elevators were everywhere, they even had this cool elevator music. But you didn't ever see them move.

Pushtrak
11th Feb 2008, 15:51
You have never played Deus Ex Lara Willliam? It is one of the best games ever made, if not the best! I would highly recomend this game, I've just looked on amazon and you can pick it up from as little as 1.99 ( for the PC) .
Had never seen it on PC in stores near me. Recently saw it on the PS2 preowned... While I have never had a Sony console, my brother does have a PS3 so I picked it up for him. I'm sure I'll get to play the PS2 version soon enough.

How does it compare to the PC version?

I just hope that those 24 months would extend to at least 30-36 months in the end . Why? Because only then will I be sure the team of Eidos Montreal is giving its best to polish the game to perfection. (And that Eidos isn't just deadline-must-be-met-no-matter-what money whore [such as EA is].)
Why not just wish the simpler "Listen to QA" notion. Trying to put a time frame on games development is like trying to fit a square object into a circular hole. It fails.

Frog
11th Feb 2008, 18:13
I think that all of the complaints about universal ammo, the removal of skill points, the small levels, the inventory system, and so on are valid criticisms of DX:IW. However, I don't think they're truly fundamental to why it was inferior to the first DX. Any one of these changes might have been all right in isolation, but the combination made for a game that was very disappointing compared to the first.

What really made the first DX game wonderful for me is that throughout the entire game, you were motivated to explore, to find novel solutions to problems, and so on. Even getting every skill point in the game didn't allow you to get a perfect character, so you tried your best. You couldn't upgrade every augmentation. You couldn't upgrade every weapon. So even late in the game, it was a real treat to find a previously unexplored region that gave you a nice bonus in something. And even on my tenth (or so) playthrough of the game, I'm still finding new things.

DX:IW, however, gave you an almost perfect character (full augs and weapon mods) within the first few levels. Sure, the game threw you a few bones here and there--a special weapon or whatever--but it wasn't nearly enough. There was very little motivation to explore because you already had everything you needed. Even the aspects that seemed promising--the black market mods, for instance--had the same issue. Instead of being a rare item, barely obtainable, you had as many of them as you needed before the game was half over.

So there you go. Change DX3 however you like. But please, please make sure that no matter how far you get into the game, your motivation to explore and innovate is still there. That is what made DX great and what was so sorely missing from DX:IW. Everything else is just details.

- Scott

Great post! I did not mind the biomods of IW, it's just like you said it you had everything and too much power halfway through. You could even rip your augs out 3/4 through and re-wire a character from a hacker Ninja to a full on commando.

It needs to be where you develop your character/avatar through the game and have to replay to get the other abilities/skills/augs/biomods/mods. It gives the game more depth.

With IW I had to place arbitrary restrictions on myself to roleplay different characters through the game. It was fun, but not as fun cause I had so many weapon-modes and biomod cannisters I could easily tranform into a whole new character on the spot.

Lo Bruto
11th Feb 2008, 23:48
On that note when I played DX1 I hated the fact I needed a pen a paper to write things down. So maybe for DX3 they can combine the two if you find the password it will open the door or if you want to guess it you can type it in.

Did you really wrote them down? :eek:
I used the Note system in the game itself, when I needed a password I just checked up the notes. The ones that needed to be wrote down were the ones you find at computers, and they were few.

And if some guys prefer not to type the codes or the Computer Login/Password, let it be selected in the Menu but please, a bunch of people like to type... it gives lot of immersion.

WildcatPhoenix
12th Feb 2008, 01:01
I completely agree with Lo Bruto. I, for one, loved being forced to manually type in keycodes, write down notes from e-mails, etc. It really drew me into the story and made me feel like I was actually there.

I'll never forget busting into the armory in the MJ12 detention center beneath UNATCO HQ. I knew the keycode, but my hand hit the wrong keys as I was punching in the code and that giant milbot was coming around the corner...:eek:

Intense, and definitely worth keeping (at least as a selectable menu option).

-Wildcat

madeye
20th Feb 2008, 04:02
I feel that the original DX is far superior to DX2. If they would have kept the similar storyline of DX2 but used the same game engine as DX1, I probably would have like DX2. There were way too many quirky things about DX2 that I disliked (different inventory, universal ammo, quirky UI, etc.).

Pay
20th Feb 2008, 08:50
Hi, this is my first post here and first of all, please excuse my english because I'm french.
I've been reading this forum since the DX3 trailer has been released and there are some thing I need to state since I am really looking forward to this game.

As for the question of the keycodes and stuff that you have to type in manually, I definitely think it was stupid to have that removed in IW. The need to note down or remember a code or a password was great for immersion in DX.
Some people seem to think "well, the game enters the code itself, it takes less time and that doesn't matter a lot for immersion" but I think it does matter. It really gives you the feeling that you are in JC's body, raising you arm to push these littles buttons and open the door, instead of thinking "my character knows this code so the door will now open, no time to waste with this little detail".

I also hope DX3 will be a prequel. One of DX's strenghts was that it was set in a world that we all know, but has changed a lot in 50 years. We all had already heard about the governments, organisations and historical events that were mentionned in the game, and that made it even more immersive. IW was exactly the opposite. This "post-collapse" world was pure sci-fi, and nothing reminded us of the world we know.

One last thing: I think IW was an improvment on some points, like the fact that you could choose wo to work for since the very beginning of the game. But there was a big problem about that: since the beginning, you are clearly told that you can choose your side. Even though every organisation has it slogans, its propaganda and its ways to make you join them, it was pretty obvious that the devs didn't want any organisation to look like the good guys or the bad guys. I think that sucks compared to DX: the UNATCO clearly seemed to be the good guys, but then you started to discover the truth. It's true that once it was clear there was a conspiracy, you couldn't choose to stay with the UNATCO, but the game did manage to make you feel like you were fighting terrorists, and that you were the good guys. That is a conspiracy.

Spyhopping
20th Feb 2008, 11:32
One thing that I find frustrating is the way that FPS games made these days seem to focus on multiplayer.
This is a personal opinion, and I haven't experienced the full scope of what multiplayer gaming has to offer- but think I have sampled it enough to be confident that it is not what I want when I play a game.
When I buy a game, I am looking for escapism- the potential to be totally immersed in a story for a while.
When a game focuses on multiplayer, the story tends to suffer.
I have played games (often sequels) where the storyline had so much potential (just like the Deus ex story!) but it was cut short by the inclusion of multiplayer.

PD182
20th Feb 2008, 12:17
I loved DX1 hated DX2. felt like i was being treated like a child be spoonfed the conspiricy in bitesize chunks to make sure it didnt overwhelm me. what am 4 years old? Its an adult themed game, it should never have been dumbed down so much. DX1's execution of plot was flawless (well almost). DX2 felt like the childrens pg13 version, what happened to the grit, the npcs having sex, the drug abuse, the police brutality? The world was suppose to be post collapse.. why was it so squeaky clean?

Oh and how in a technological recession did teleporters come about?? seems like an easy way out of developing actual methods of getting a player from point A to point B.

Lo Bruto
21st Feb 2008, 00:36
Completely agree with Pay, same thoughts...

By the way... everybody think IW is dumbed down and is... because it was targeted at a Wider audience, to sell more...

Money talks and game devs want money first... recognition and admiration in the industry are not priorities...
Older gamers should remember all the hype created around Daikatana... "John Romero is about to make you his *****! Suck it down" was one of the logos. :nut: Advertise using the main dev name is cool, yeah... and ask how many of you actually know who is John Romero... :scratch: but he's rich, and that's what matters and what everyone wants

Just imagine DX:IW being advertised in a poster with a big line: "Warren Spector and Harvey Smith's New Game". We (the fans) know them... but THEY (non-fans) don't know... and "They" are the people who gives Eidos the biggest part of the money...

More recent example, Kane & Lynch received mediocre reviews, still it sold well because of all that advertisement and badass-look gamers want...

So just keep in mind, DX3 CAN be a great game but will not come close to the first one in that "WHAT A GREAT GAME" feeling we all felt... so, don't compare because comparing games with DX is just unfair.

rokstrombo
21st Feb 2008, 12:45
I agree that it seems like IW was designed with different priorities in mind than the first game.

Unfortunately games are so complex now that they are really expensive to develop. I think most developers are well-intentioned, but publishers just can't afford to continually push back release dates to allow them to perfect their work.

This is one of the reasons why I am so excited about Duke Nukem Forever. I am totally sick of first person shooters after so many years, but the game has been in development practically since before I was born. Even if it just another Doom/Quake/Unreal clone, there has to be some redeeming features because I don't expect these guys to spend 25 years coding something that isn't totally awesome. Plus, they have changed engines 30 or 40 times and have barely spoken of the technology. This is a huge contrast with many game developers who speak only of the technology. If only the Eidos Montreal team had a whole generation to spend on this game...

Lo Bruto
21st Feb 2008, 14:31
Duke Nukem Forever is one of the most legendary games ever... It is in Dev since 1997/1998 :rasp:
Just saw the teaser here, Nice :thumbsup:

BTW... I wish DX3 realeased in 2010 or 2011. They can create a really cool game in 3 or 4 years.
But figuring the bigger picture... Eidos Montreal is a new dev house, they'll not take so much time to give the public their first creation...

gamer0004
21st Feb 2008, 19:08
Duke Nukem Forever is one of the most legendary games ever... It is in Dev since 1997/1998 :rasp:
Just saw the teaser here, Nice :thumbsup:

BTW... I wish DX3 realeased in 2010 or 2011. They can create a really cool game in 3 or 4 years.
But figuring the bigger picture... Eidos Montreal is a new dev house, they'll not take so much time to give the public their first creation...

I think that the 2 years time they want to spend on this game is fine, however I'd really like to hear them say after 2 years "Well, we've finished the game, so it will be released after another 6 months which we want to spend on polishing the game".

rhalibus
21st Feb 2008, 23:32
I think that the 2 years time they want to spend on this game is fine, however I'd really like to hear them say after 2 years "Well, we've finished the game, so it will be released after another 6 months which we want to spend on polishing the game".

That's almost exactly what Warren Spector and Harvey Smith asked for after completing development of Deus Ex--They wanted to tie up the loose ends and NPC battles. And they got the extra six months. Harvey Smith didn't get another six months for DX2 and it suffered.

madeye
22nd Feb 2008, 02:27
One thing that I find frustrating is the way that FPS games made these days seem to focus on multiplayer.


I agree 100%. One game that I can think of that I played recently is Crysis. I actually was dissappointed with the story. It was far too short. I really don't care for multiplayer... I have so many games that have multiplayer included that I will never have the time to play them. I'd rather have more single player story and multiplayer omitted.

caldron68
22nd Feb 2008, 13:30
One thing that I find frustrating is the way that FPS games made these days seem to focus on multiplayer.
This is a personal opinion, and I haven't experienced the full scope of what multiplayer gaming has to offer- but think I have sampled it enough to be confident that it is not what I want when I play a game.
When I buy a game, I am looking for escapism- the potential to be totally immersed in a story for a while.
When a game focuses on multiplayer, the story tends to suffer.
I have played games (often sequels) where the storyline had so much potential (just like the Deus ex story!) but it was cut short by the inclusion of multiplayer.

This is absolutely correct. Remember the very first Unreal FPS? There was an actual story line and playing through the levels actually made you feel like you were accomplishing something. Later, story based game play was abandoned in favor of tournament style multi-player death match. Not much fun if you want to do more than just kill other characters for an hour or so :confused:

Cheers

Angel/0A
22nd Feb 2008, 15:26
This is absolutely correct. Remember the very first Unreal FPS? There was an actual story line and playing through the levels actually made you feel like you were accomplishing something. Later, story based game play was abandoned in favor of tournament style multi-player death match. Not much fun if you want to do more than just kill other characters for an hour or so :confused:

Cheers

So, rather than trying to compromise, let's just cut off the leg altogether since that wound might become infected.

caldron68
24th Feb 2008, 00:44
So, rather than trying to compromise, let's just cut off the leg altogether since that wound might become infected.

I guess that's the whole point, isn't in Angel/OA? If there is a COMPROMISE then the game will not be like DX1. The story line will completely disappear in multi-player mode. It will simply become yet another death-match arena.

Angel/0A
24th Feb 2008, 01:47
I guess that's the whole point, isn't in Angel/OA? If there is a COMPROMISE then the game will not be like DX1. The story line will completely disappear in multi-player mode. It will simply become yet another death-match arena.

No, what you're stating is the other polar extreme, not a compromise. -.- DX1 had multiplayer enabled with the patch, and it didn't obliterate the single-player story.

Papy
24th Feb 2008, 02:54
A compromise is not a sum. You always end up with both parts being not as good because of the compromise. Personally, I'd rather buy two games, each without any compromise.

I'm not against making some kind of multiplayer patch AFTER the game is finished, but I'm strongly against any compromise because of multiplayer, even if it means a bad multiplayer game.

Smoke Screen
25th Feb 2008, 03:07
A compromise is not a sum. You always end up with both parts being not as good because of the compromise. Personally, I'd rather buy two games, each without any compromise.

I'm not against making some kind of multiplayer patch AFTER the game is finished, but I'm strongly against any compromise because of multiplayer, even if it means a bad multiplayer game.

Agree. Actually are enough MP out that "nobody" plays. I guess the dev-team
has there hands full already with SP. So please no waste on resources for a
MP-Part.

lightbringerrr
26th Feb 2008, 01:45
Pc will, as usual, get the fuzzy end of the lollipop....


Man you ain't foolin'. And I believe that the Console-centric approach for IW that got foisted on to the PC version was one of the REAL reasons that many of the problems that people complain about exist in that game.

Why have a detailed inventory screen when you can just grab some 'anything goes' ammo?

IcarusIsLookingForYou
3rd Mar 2008, 06:56
Pc will, as usual, get the fuzzy end of the lollipop....


Man you ain't foolin'. And I believe that the Console-centric approach for IW that got foisted on to the PC version was one of the REAL reasons that many of the problems that people complain about exist in that game.

Why have a detailed inventory screen when you can just grab some 'anything goes' ammo?

I don't see it as just PC gamers getting shafted, I see it as all gamers getting the rod. It boggles my mind how devs seem to assume you can't create PC depth on a console. The XBox version of Morrowind, for example, was great despite the clunky menus and it ended up being one of the console's best selling games. Granted, a PC's interface alone makes it more versatile than a console, but I honestly don't see why you'd have to dumb down a game to IW proportions to make the concept "work" for "everyone". Once the word "streamlining" starts getting used, we all lose out.