PDA

View Full Version : Philosophy & Intellectual Aspects of DX3 (UPDATE: Wrters Discussed)



Slack
16th Jan 2008, 14:31
I would like to suggest to put more philosophy in DX3, it was amazing in DX1, but in DX2 it almost never exist. I would like to suggest too Nietzsche as a good philosopher in opposition of non-individualistic society... and because he have the "Nietzsche's Superman" , the Übermensch (the man that is totally free, without moral, religion , etc) (Deus Ex could be Nietszche's super man at the final) Please , developers check out about it because is a GOOD point to be in DX3 (Check the 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra', 'On the Genealogy of Morals' and 'The Antichrist' books).
And please, in the endings put phrases of philosophers like in DX1.

If Deus Ex 3 have more phylosophy, it will have the value of art and 'not just a game' and the older guys (like me) will play it and say to everybody.Graphics can be superated, but not a good history.
Thanks for reading!

SomaMech
16th Jan 2008, 16:32
Yeah alot of people here are hoping DX3 features the same level of intelligence as DX1. DX2 was dumbed down in order to to cater for the younger console audiences. They obviouslly deemed it unneccessary, and the only thing on their mind was making as much money as possible. Hopefully Eidos Montreal will bring back the Deus Ex magic!

ThatDeadDude
16th Jan 2008, 20:49
I like the idea of putting in philosophy, but I will be honest and admit that I don't get most of the references put into games. I've simply never been of the inclination to go and read Nietzche and other heavy works. All I am saying is that I don't think the game should try too hard to be smart and try put in philosophical concepts just for the sake of it. I'd rather that it was filled with original ideas, like those in a conversation between friends, if that makes any sense :rolleyes:

They should hire a "designated thinker" or something, to come up with the big questions that are relevant in the setting. I far prefer thinking over reading others thoughts... but I dunno... maybe it just means I'm lazy :D

Papy
16th Jan 2008, 21:53
I love Nietzsche, but unfortunately I don't think it's ever going to happen. Nietzsche is certainly the most misunderstood philosopher and a lot of (superficial) persons won't appreciate having some of his ideas in a video game.

Also, even if children are a minority, they are still an important minority. I doubt that someone who is only 15 years could really understand anything written by Nietzsche.

mr_cyberpunk
16th Jan 2008, 21:59
Imagine if this game used the Aristotle philosophies lol that'd be so ****ed up.

Slack
16th Jan 2008, 22:19
Allright... I agree that the game cannot focus on that... but the real cool thing of DX1 is that he is kinda cult (he have questions like :how we can command the world?, what is the best way?, is it possible?) and he have action and all the things that we love in games .I like it too, of course!.

B0b_P@ge
17th Jan 2008, 02:40
I agree, have philosophy, and have lots of it!! Moreover, make this game for 'above average people' (keyword=people, not console gamers).

Have lots of political-philosophy arguments as well, Dx2 was all about *yawn* transhumanism and all that hardcore sci-fi stuff *yawn* ... bring back MEANINGFUL discussions.... I love that one discussion with the bar tender in 'The Lucky Money' in Hong Kong, or the nationalistic bar-drunk at the canal outside Wan Chai in that one bar.... or reading that book Maggie Chow was reading, "Tai-fung" I think it was called? (It talked about how the only real change is brought from within governments & groups and not through revolution).

jordan_a
17th Jan 2008, 10:57
I regret to say that, but philosophy is a serious matter.

And we can't expect, I hope I'm wrong, from video games developers to implement wisely useful and genuine philosophical theories. In other words what I mean is that to know little in philosophy requires years of study.

This is why I suggested, this will never happen though, that Law, philosophy, science, sociology (ect...) university/college professors participate.

Rosenrot
17th Jan 2008, 11:11
People need to stop the bashing crap, and they know who they are. Deus Ex 2 being 'Dumbed down' for console gamers is pure poppycock. What happened is A. a different dev. team B. different game director. And if anyone thinks Deus Ex 2 was limited by its 'console counterpart' needs to be informed and read up that the problem was really the engine. Please guys, enough console its just pure stupidity and troll food. ****

Rosenrot
17th Jan 2008, 11:13
I agree, have philosophy, and have lots of it!! Moreover, make this game for 'above average people' (keyword=people, not console gamers).

Have lots of political-philosophy arguments as well, Dx2 was all about *yawn* transhumanism and all that hardcore sci-fi stuff *yawn* ... bring back MEANINGFUL discussions.... I love that one discussion with the bar tender in 'The Lucky Money' in Hong Kong, or the nationalistic bar-drunk at the canal outside Wan Chai in that one bar.... or reading that book Maggie Chow was reading, "Tai-fung" I think it was called? (It talked about how the only real change is brought from within governments & groups and not through revolution). By the way. In the trailer theres the little tiny.. [h+] sign. If you can tell what that means, i'll give you a E-cookie. Its something you probably dislike but will probably be in Deus Ex 3.

Slack
17th Jan 2008, 11:41
By the way. In the trailer theres the little tiny.. [h+] sign. If you can tell what that means, i'll give you a E-cookie. Its something you probably dislike but will probably be in Deus Ex 3.


"Transhumanism (sometimes symbolized by >H or H+), a term often used as a synonym for "human enhancement", is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of new sciences and technologies to enhance human mental and physical abilities and aptitudes, and ameliorate what it regards as undesirable and unnecessary aspects of the human condition, such as stupidity, suffering, disease, aging and involuntary death. Transhumanist thinkers study the possibilities and consequences of developing and using human enhancement techniques and other emerging technologies for these purposes. Possible dangers, as well as benefits, of powerful new technologies that might radically change the conditions of human life are also of concern to the transhumanist movement." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism)

Give a cookie to wikipedia =)

It's cool that a game can make us search the things they talk there.That's a little of what I were talking about.It's cool to go with the original purposes of Deus Ex 1 action+rpg+philosophy , because of course the graphics can be superable, but not a good history, good facts or just some good and polemical theories together making a game.

minus0ne
17th Jan 2008, 20:01
I regret to say that, but philosophy is a serious matter.

And we can't expect, I hope I'm wrong, from video games developers to implement wisely useful and genuine philosophical theories. In other words what I mean is that to know little in philosophy requires years of study.

This is why I suggested, this will never happen though, that Law, philosophy, science, sociology (ect...) university/college professors participate.
We should expect it though. If we don't, why else would the devs include it in their game? Don't forget a lot of people had a LOT of philosophy in school/college. In DX it's an added bonus if you understand the bits of philosophy (as it's an added bonus if you understand French, even though there's very little of it, or if you get little jokes like Alex's 'schadenfreude' memo about Gunther's password), it's not required to advance in the game. They can easily do the same with this game. Hell, they can probably do BETTER (I know, sacrilege). People who don't get it/don't want to read it can just skip the in game literature altogether (or speed-read it for clues/passwords).

People need to stop the bashing crap, and they know who they are. Deus Ex 2 being 'Dumbed down' for console gamers is pure poppycock. What happened is A. a different dev. team B. different game director. And if anyone thinks Deus Ex 2 was limited by its 'console counterpart' needs to be informed and read up that the problem was really the engine. Please guys, enough console its just pure stupidity and troll food. ****
Major off-topic, but the engine was perfectly capable of rendering large enviroments (see Tribes: Vengeance). The problem arose because it was to be a console release, the graphics needed to look all Xbox-y and Microsoftish (which for some odd reason at the time meant everything had to look like plastic, especially character models :rolleyes: ), so they sacrificed gameplay (large and mostly seamless enviroments) for the sake of getting some graphics whores/adolescents on board. And they again sacrificed art direction for the sake of a few more polygons.

And I don't see how UE2 is responsible for IW's mediocrity and lowbrow feel. There wasn't any nuance or subtlety, everything was literally shouted in your ears or presented on a silver platter. In trying to make the game "accessible" to the masses/youngsters they instead removed so much obstacles (ie, the game thinks for you) that it became a shallow experience which doesn't present ANY challenge to the player.

Different team? Wrong. Aside from some shuffling, mostly the same team of people who made the first game. And the game was limited by the console version - this is reflected in the review scores (which are exclusively lower for the PC version). The console version was definitely their priority, the PC version was done almost as if it were an afterthought.

Now that consoles have grown up somewhat (as has their audience), let's hope it won't present an issue this time around, though it's hard to ignore how much faster and better looking PC games will be in ~24 months when compared to X360/PS3 games (even assuming devs get better at utilizing the console). I'm not that demanding on graphics (though art direction is a different matter), but I fear they're going to make the same mistake IS made with IW, which would be prioritizing the console version (and not making the PC version as good looking as it could be).

B0b_P@ge
17th Jan 2008, 22:37
People need to stop the bashing crap, and they know who they are. Deus Ex 2 being 'Dumbed down' for console gamers is pure poppycock. What happened is A. a different dev. team B. different game director. And if anyone thinks Deus Ex 2 was limited by its 'console counterpart' needs to be informed and read up that the problem was really the engine. Please guys, enough console its just pure stupidity and troll food. ****

Listen, Deus Ex: Invisible War dropped the ball in every aspect, in every manner. It sucked... OK? Whether it was the developers focus on the console, my nostalgia for the first game, or maybe I need to eat more paint chips to truly enjoy it, I don't know.... but THIS THREAD is hardly any place to start arguing about that... Please discuss this in ANOTHER THREAD. Thank you.

Moving on. I hated how in Dx:Iw EVERYONE had an opinion, even the damn music box... it was damn obscene. Dx did it correctly, usually leaders or people with important political positions 'towed the party line' while a lot of the common people gave they're honest opinions, sometimes it was ill-informed/ignorant/intelligent but in any case, it made the game feel so real. All these mixtures of philosophies made dx such a pleasure to play :)

Papy
18th Jan 2008, 06:57
what I mean is that to know little in philosophy requires years of study.
You seem to confuse the study of philosophy, with the ideas themselves. I certainly met several people who knew a lot about philosophy, but weren't "philosopher" at all. Classifying and (pretentiously) analyzing an idea is not the same as presenting or developing that idea. I agree you need to study philosophy to compare Nietzsche to Kant or Descartes, but you don't need years of study to pick up a book from Nietzsche and to appreciate it.

Personally, I would even say that an interactive video game could be more effective than a book for someone who would want to present those ideas for the simple reason that the context is inescapable. Nietzsche is misunderstood by a lot of people, because they choose their own meanings to the words they read and assume their own context. A video game can achieve the same emotional state as the poetic style of Nietzsche, without allowing the player to misinterpret the ideas. He may choose to ignore them or to disagree with them, but he won't be able to distort them so they fit his own cultural yoke.

Slack
18th Jan 2008, 13:31
I agree with you Papy...good reply
Actually, you can present the philosophy, you don't need to be/become a phylosopher

jordan_a
18th Jan 2008, 14:03
but you don't need years of study to pick up a book from Nietzsche and to appreciate it.
Absolutely. We have a book here in France called Philosophy A to Z. You can pick it up, read it occasionally, appreciate it and learn a lot. It gives you the main ideas for a start.

But to develop a video game's story, plots, twists you need to have a profound knowledge of the subject if you want to strengthen and deepen your fiction.

Hence, from my point of view, those who really are able to bring a genuine philosophical content are university/college professors or really avid readers. Eidos might have the latters on their team, who knows? ;)

SomaMech
18th Jan 2008, 16:38
People need to stop the bashing crap, and they know who they are. Deus Ex 2 being 'Dumbed down' for console gamers is pure poppycock. What happened is A. a different dev. team B. different game director. And if anyone thinks Deus Ex 2 was limited by its 'console counterpart' needs to be informed and read up that the problem was really the engine. Please guys, enough console its just pure stupidity and troll food. ****

If we all go round ignoring the reasons IW was dumbed down, there's going to be alot of dissapointed DX3 players.

*EDIT* Dodgy grammar

Caradoc
18th Jan 2008, 17:09
This is a wonderfull topic and I hope Eidos pays enough attention to the subject. The orginal DX had so much substance that It surpasses most games I've seen.


Have lots of political-philosophy arguments as well, Dx2 was all about *yawn* transhumanism and all that hardcore sci-fi stuff *yawn* ... bring back MEANINGFUL discussions.... I love that one discussion with the bar tender in 'The Lucky Money' in Hong Kong, or the nationalistic bar-drunk at the canal outside Wan Chai in that one bar.... or reading that book Maggie Chow was reading, "Tai-fung" I think it was called? (It talked about how the only real change is brought from within governments & groups and not through revolution).

I agree, those discussions (and the books) were really unique. I'd love to encounter something similar in DX3.

Slack
20th Jan 2008, 23:58
Yeah... a bit of culture doesnt kill anybody...

mr_cyberpunk
21st Jan 2008, 02:06
Yeah... a bit of culture doesnt kill anybody...

Just excludes 90% of their demographic.

This game shouldn't be targeted at academics. It should in its entirety be targeted at the RPG players. (deep story)

If the game is going to hit philosophically then it should do it in a layman's matter else we get bogged down in the complexity of the subject. Hence suggesting things that no one will understand is pointless unless it can be communicated in a matter that is appealing to the story and easy to relate to. Philosophy has a practical use :P its not all text books you know.

AaronJ
21st Jan 2008, 03:24
I doubt that someone who is only 15 years could really understand anything written by Nietzsche.

I read him all the time, I'm 15.

Kusanagi
22nd Jan 2008, 00:45
I like this thread. I am always pleased to find good philosophy; but the success of DX1 lay in the attention to quasi-philosophies, mistakes, wit, instructions, deceptions, code, etc. as well as 'philosophy', always attuned to some sort of 'right answer'...of which there were at least four in DX1. DX1 did a good job of both disguising and forcing one to confront the 1/0 of code, so that the experience was very vivid of commitments, choices, possible mistakes, fear of missed opportunities - in short, of having 'understood' or not (most re-playing of DX1 was for the purpose of exploring, listening to the second or third levels of dialogues). Authors like Eco (Name of the Rose, not the later ones) and Joyce (Ulysses) are very good at embedding high philosophy in the play of the story; most novelists do this at some level (Raymond Chandler, Mark Twain), and it permeates adult comix. We do NOT need the pretentious (and confused) lectures of 'The Matrix'.

Re: games - the link between play and philosophy is very ancient. Hence the profound disappointment when millions of bucks and hours and plenty of talent take the 'philosophical' decision to treat the gamer with contempt.

The distinction between art direction and grafix (I thought photo-realism died with Impressionism) is very right.

Grant_Weaver
22nd Jan 2008, 02:38
lol it doesn't take YEARS of studying to be well studied in philosophy. Just takes the capacity to read and freetime.

minus0ne
22nd Jan 2008, 21:06
lol it doesn't take YEARS of studying to be well studied in philosophy. Just takes the capacity to read and freetime.
No. But study certainly helps. Many philosophers have to be put in their historical/contemporary context to be properly understood. In addition it takes years to even read enough philosophy to form a well-balanced view of the subject matter (since most philosophers can pretty much make any point convincing and convince most readers by their mastery of rhetoric alone).

Papy
23rd Jan 2008, 01:21
since most philosophers can pretty much make any point convincing and convince most readers by their mastery of rhetoric alone.
I strongly disagree. The first philosophy book I read was from Descartes (I don't remember which one exactly) and the only thing his "mastery of rhetoric" could accomplish was to convince me he was a coward and pretentious man who was more interested in intellectual masturbation and pleasing the current political power than real thinking. I love Nietzsche, but it's more because I feel the same as he did than because he was able to convince me he was right.

G.A.Pster
28th Jan 2008, 06:40
What was philosophical in DX1?

O.m.a.r
29th Jan 2008, 22:56
I’m 15 and I think some of you guys are make some Generalizing statements here, some kids out there care about philosophy and what’s happening in the world. Now I don’t read Nietzsche’s work, But at least I know who he is. Now that I’m done with my little rant :nut: Philosophy plays the biggest role in Deus Ex series, in fact (I know this sounds stupid) this game opened my eyes to some new views in life. And since then I’ve been analyzing as much as I can. Deus Ex NEEDS to stick with its Philosophy and its depth story. Thats why this game is great.

djinni33
1st Feb 2008, 14:29
I don't agree with your Übermensch interpretation, but that's another topic ;) Besides that, you have a point.

The only philosopher explicitly being mentioned in Deus Ex 1 was Thomas von Aquin if I remember correctly - haven't played the game for some time. There were also references to literary authors like Olaf Stapledon.

If I remember correctly you were not directly confronted with concrete philosophy and political theories - if you do the necessary conversations you get some hints, and if you decide to chat some more with the NPC you get a little bit more detail.

So yeah, please implement philosophy in the game as a new way of ingame world exploration and for the sake of thinking outside the box. And also for the sake of all the unemployed philosophy graduates...

AaronJ
1st Feb 2008, 14:59
I’m 15 and I think some of you guys are make some Generalizing statements here, some kids out there care about philosophy and what’s happening in the world.


I'm 15 as well. The entire DX community has been like that forever. Ignore it.

minus0ne
1st Feb 2008, 16:56
I'm 15 as well. The entire DX community has been like that forever. Ignore it.
When you're older you'll look back at statements like that and understand you don't and can't understand everything at 15 (even though youth have a heightened learning capacity) ;) I was 16 when I first played it and I'm still finding new insights now. Things I barely noticed back then now actually cause me pause. It's not a BAD thing, you know. Imagine not getting any wiser/smarter as you age, that would suck, would it not? (and unfortunately that holds true for many people).

djinni33
2nd Feb 2008, 00:06
When you're older you'll look back at statements like that and understand you don't and can't understand everything at 15

You also can't understand everything at 25 or 85... at 15 your abstraction has developed far enough to understand any concept if you put your mind to it and simply look up what you do not know yet.

AaronJ
2nd Feb 2008, 00:16
When you're older you'll look back at statements like that and understand you don't and can't understand everything at 15 (even though youth have a heightened learning capacity) ;) I was 16 when I first played it and I'm still finding new insights now. Things I barely noticed back then now actually cause me pause. It's not a BAD thing, you know. Imagine not getting any wiser/smarter as you age, that would suck, would it not? (and unfortunately that holds true for many people).

That makes sense.

RedFeather1975
2nd Feb 2008, 02:49
I think Global just made fun of me and my silly story topic.
Or I'm just being really paranoid.

/me looks over shoulder and flinches

Papy
2nd Feb 2008, 03:02
You also can't understand everything at 25 or 85... at 15 your abstraction has developed far enough to understand any concept if you put your mind to it and simply look up what you do not know yet.
I think this thread is looking more and more vanity driven, but, as I think the original subject is important, I have to answer.

Unfortunately, what you said is not true. What we obscurely call "life" is not a simple concept we can analyze or look up somewhere, not even in a philosophy book. Reasoning and abstraction abilities are pretty much useless to understand people's feeling or social organization from a global scale. The only way we can get a glimpse of enlightenment is by using our own experience. Reasoning can help with extrapolation, but nothing more.

You may think it is not important for a video game, but it is. In another thread there is a question from someone else who ask : Why would the augmented people be segregated and humiliated rather than the pure human? His reasoning was : The hatredness is always against the incapable (i.e. crippled and less common race-based people), while the mechanically augmented are over-capable. It should be otherwise. I'm not sure how old he was, but it's obvious he lacks the experience to understand human nature. Now the question is : What point of view the game will adopt to explain this? Will it be the point of view of a 15 years old or the point of view of someone more mature?

RedFeather1975
2nd Feb 2008, 03:11
It would be realistic if it were both.
You'd have your conservative types attempting to put a leash on the augmented and on the other side of the fence, the progressive folk would be admiring the augmentated and fighting to protect their rights.

Edit: Oh, and also the dozen shades of grey in between those two extremes. Such as the 'ain't my problem' and 'whatever the majority wills'.

djinni33
2nd Feb 2008, 04:56
I think this thread is looking more and more vanity driven, but, as I think the original subject is important, I have to answer.

Like greed and curiosity, vanity is another source of mankinds achievments ;)



Unfortunately, what you said is not true.


Development psychology says I am.



What we obscurely call "life" is not a simple concept we can analyze or look up somewhere, not even in a philosophy book.

How is that related to anything I've said? A biology book can do this much better by the way... a little dry maybe. I still recommend reading 'em fancy "philosophy books". :cool:



Reasoning and abstraction abilities are pretty much useless to understand people's feeling or social organization from a global scale.

When do we think we 'understood' something? When we have abstracted it to a level our minds can grasp. Unless you have a better idea?



The only way we can get a glimpse of enlightenment is by using our own experience. Reasoning can help with extrapolation, but nothing more.

So empirical science leads to enlightenment? I'm also not sure what you mean by enlightenment.



You may think it is not important for a video game, but it is.

Read my earlier post... I think it is, and I also wish more game developers would think so... also for the sake for all the unemployed philosophy graduates out there.



Why would the augmented people be segregated and humiliated rather than the pure human? His reasoning was : The hatredness is always against the incapable (i.e. crippled and less common race-based people), while the mechanically augmented are over-capable. It should be otherwise. I'm not sure how old he was, but it's obvious he lacks the experience to understand human nature.

Experience doesn't seem to be the problem here since he or she is referring to the experiences we've made through history... and experience cannot proof her definitely wrong because we've never ever had a society with augmented people.



Now the question is : What point of view the game will adopt to explain this? Will it be the point of view of a 15 years old or the point of view of someone more mature?

The strength of Deus Ex was always that it offered multiple ideologies to explain itself to the player and they should definitely stick with that. This has nothing to do with maturity or adolescence...

RedFeather1975
2nd Feb 2008, 05:47
Yeah, let's not generalize the perceptions of age groups.
Child prodigies would then generalize us as ignorant.
We're better than those damn child prodigies! Let's show em.
/me shakes fist at my own impending obsolescence

xundonex
2nd Feb 2008, 09:46
Glad to see there's still some young and old playing the game. I agree, philosophy in the game is vital to DX3.

Making one think more about why they have certain convictions, and testing their own thoughts is a very impressive feat for a video game. DX can be a mind opener - and also a lot of fun!

I really hope we get a game comparable to DX1.

Slack
2nd Feb 2008, 14:24
What was philosophical in DX1?

WARNING: THIS VIDEO TELL ALL THE FINALS OF DEUS EX:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N69GX988WwE
Pure phylosophy and culture. I think is easier to you to ask where phylosophy isn't present.
Deus Ex is a game that discuss, among other things, moral and politics.I said that because the game show us that IS NO TRUTH all the endings are acceptable, so the final decision depends ONLY of YOUR values because all of them are correct and wrong in certain point of view.

jd10013
2nd Feb 2008, 14:46
You also can't understand everything at 25 or 85... at 15 your abstraction has developed far enough to understand any concept if you put your mind to it and simply look up what you do not know yet.


not necessarily. Keep in mind, everybody is different. but in general the brain (in a male) does not fully develop until the age of 18; give or take a year or two. I say male because the female brain tends to develop a little sooner. But at 15 the average persons brain has not developed the reasoning, and comprehension abilities of someone in their 20's. Its not just a matter of experience, studying, or wisdom. there is an actual physiological difference in the brain at different ages.

not trying to put down any of the younger members here, but just as your body is not done growing/developing/changing at 15; neither is your brain.

RedFeather1975
2nd Feb 2008, 15:05
Are you sure about all that?
I could have sworn brain development is almost all done before the age of 8-10 years. After that it's hormonal development, not reasoning and comprehension.
I imagine it's environment that plays the defining factor in how quickly people's perceptions mature.
I was thrown out when I was 14 and I managed to grow up quite fast. I'm sure I had a better grip on things than a 25 year old still living at home. :lmao:

And just to add something. The Dali Lama when he was 16 was more politically accomplished and influential in worldwide affairs than the average 20-90 year old I've met. XD

djinni33
2nd Feb 2008, 15:20
Keep in mind, everybody is different. but in general the brain (in a male) does not fully develop until the age of 18; give or take a year or two. I say male because the female brain tends to develop a little sooner. But at 15 the average persons brain has not developed the reasoning, and comprehension abilities of someone in their 20's.

Meh, I checked and you're right: Abstraction skills start to develop more or less at puberty...appaerently I wasn't up to date with this :whistle:

I'm still stating that DX1 wasn't 'the intellectual overkill'... not even for 15 year olds.

O.m.a.r
2nd Feb 2008, 15:39
Its all about brain development. I’m guessing that Einstein was a little more mature then his peers, Same with the Dali Lama. Now I haven’t taken any courses on brain growth. But like jd10013 said, “every one develops at their own rate". Maybe that could be an important part to Deus Ex 3 as well as the real world. The main character could be the fetus in the trailer, and since of his Augments he grows faster then the other children in all aspects, such as the mind. This could cause tension between him and the rest of children. Kind of a backstory for the character.

Papy
2nd Feb 2008, 17:22
...
There is a simple question I like to ask to people to evaluate their level of maturity : What is your goal in life? If the answer I get is about what the person wants to do or things he'd like to have, then I know the person is still immature.

Your post is pretty much a proof of your lack of maturity (no offense intended). Because this is not a discussion about rhetoric, I won't talk about your picket fences reply, which is a sign of having difficulties to form a coherent argument (here the offense is slightly intended as I think you can do better). But the same way someone might misinterpret the question about his goal in life, you misinterpreted what I said in my post. You interpreted my words with your own experience and knowledge, with your own preoccupations, and you didn't grasp at all what I was talking about (I assume you were not deliberately using my words out of context to win an "Internet argument").

I was not talking about child development psychology or biology. The "experience" I was talking about had nothing to do with science. I am scientifically inclined, but science, seen as an individual, is extremely limited. Science won't help you much to determine if a story, or the reaction of an NPC facing a particular situation is "realistic" or not. Talking about science in this context is strange. It looks to me your lack of... let's say wisdom, means your only available tool is science, so that's what you chose to use. But this is a mistake. No matter how good you are with a hammer, sometimes awkwardly using a screwdriver is better.

Don't get me wrong, you look like a bright kid, but I do think your knowledge of "life" and "human nature" is extremely limited and what you would view as a plausible situation would look artificial and "Disneylandish" to me.

Anyway, read my previous post again, and tell me if you now get it... ;)

Edit : BTW, your knowledge of history is also not that good... ;)

djinni33
2nd Feb 2008, 19:02
@Papy:
If you don't want to argue this is fine with me, but hiding behind your supposed wisdom because "you would not understand me because you're not mature enough" is weak and oozes with vanity.

If it seemes I took your words out of context it was because I wanted you to think about them... or give you the opportunity to proof there is indeed more behind maturity than big words like "life", "experience" and "enlightenment" - explain the context I appearently didn't get. Don't point a finger at me for doing this, blame Socrates.

If you are really that 'enlightened' why not leave your cave high up in the mountains and come down and share your wisdom with 'us children' like Zarathustra did?

I am not offended by what you said and neither should you, but a real dialogue still serves everyone better than ad hominem attacks.

By the way, Zarathustra described the 'end stage' of the Übermensch-development metaphorically as a child.... so the OP's suggestion to implement Nietzsche regarding the DX3 trailer is bloody good.

gamer0004
2nd Feb 2008, 19:52
It comletely depends on the person. My sister is 2,5 years older than me, but I can better argue and reason than her. And I'm better in about every subject at scool :P
Your experience depends on your intrests. Some people are interested in politics, philosophy and so on at the age of 15, and some will never be interested in them.

Draco1979
2nd Feb 2008, 20:35
I think the game should put an end to this philosophical question, "does age really matter for philosophical topics."

A. Some one that is 15 can read at any level to understand just about anything that is thrown at them and if not then they can play the game when they get older.

B. 20-25 might read the same thing and relate it to some part of there life experience

C. 30 -40 will enjoy it because this game is not about how many dead bodies to can add under your belt.

D. 40 + Will either love it because it makes you think or they will hate it because they are set in there ways

F. Does not matter because no matter how old you are you going to play the game and either like it or not like it .

Papy
3rd Feb 2008, 17:10
If you don't want to argue this is fine with me, but hiding behind your supposed wisdom because "you would not understand me because you're not mature enough" is weak and oozes with vanity.
What makes you think I don't want to "argue"? If I was not open to discussion (I prefer discussing to arguing) and sharing of ideas, I certainly wouldn't be here. Having said that, I must admit I'm not following you and I'm not sure what and why you are discussing right now. I'm not "hiding behind my supposed wisdom", and I don't pretend I'm "enlightened". To be honest, I hate using those words as they are rather mostly meaningless and certainly overused, but they are still convenient to present a "big picture" and that's why I used them. I love to say I'm still a teenager at heart, and I find self-proclaimed "wise" people quite pretentious, but sometimes the end justify the means.

Also, in order to answer to your ad hominen attacks, I think I have to highlight one of the things I said : "I assume you were not deliberately using my words out of context to win an Internet argument". I now see this was a wrong assumption and you were indeed deliberately using them out of context.

Ok, now that the ego battle is over, at least I hope it is, let me go back to the discussion.

I will admit one mistakes from my part : I somehow confused your posts with the ones from GlobalNode. But even then, I still maintain what I said.

First, I still maintain that a 15 years old is too young to fully appreciate Nietzsche. Chances are he will come to the conclusion that Nietzsche was a racist, a sexist and a whatever you can think of. Can an exceptional 15 years old understand his style of writing? Certainly, but there are not that many exceptional 15 years old and, from a marketing point of view, they can be completely ignored. Do you disagree?

Second, I also still maintain that a 15 years old has a very naive and simplistic view of society, politics and human nature in general, at least in western societies. It's not because of a lack of cognitive abilities, but simply the result of being protected and not having seen enough human behavior to understand it. They simply don't have enough data to forge a correct vision of human nature. Do you disagree?



By the way, Zarathustra described the 'end stage' of the Übermensch-development metaphorically as a child.... so the OP's suggestion to implement Nietzsche regarding the DX3 trailer is bloody good.
I completely agree... And I believe there is not a single chance a mainstream video game can go that way. I hope I'm wrong, but only in my wildest dream.

Reaktor
3rd Feb 2008, 18:26
Let's not get into the whole age-debate. Age is a sensitive topic when you are young, and should not be confused with life-experience, which is an entirely different matter.
As far as intellectual capacity and abstract thinking go, the mind of the fifteen year old you can not compete with the mind of the twenty year old you. You'll learn this as you grow older. Oh, but you're different, you say. And most kids your age are just brainless idiots that don't even know who Nietzsche is, you say. Yes, we've all been there, and we all realised how very little we knew just a few years later. There's also, I might add, quite a difference between knowing who Nietzsche is, and having read and analyzed his works with an open mind - something I believe few fifteen year olds are guilty of. But then again, just knowing his name makes one cool, doesn't it?

Now, to return to the original topic - while I'm all for a deep and involving storyline (who isn't?), I don't want the pressure of adding "philosophy" to the game stand in the way of creating that storyline, if you get my point. It seems a lot of people are seeking to stroke their own vanity rather than to immerse themselves in the wonderful Deus Ex universe :)

gamer0004
3rd Feb 2008, 20:36
Second, I also still maintain that a 15 years old has a very naive and simplistic view of society, politics and human nature in general, at least in western societies. It's not because of a lack of cognitive abilities, but simply the result of being protected and not having seen enough human behavior to understand it. They simply don't have enough data to forge a correct vision of human nature. Do you disagree?


I haven't read Nietzsche.

But about the human nature thing: why wouldn't a 15 years old have a decent view of society? Some do read newspapers and watch the news.
I do. And I'm really interested in the history of men. And when analyzing whatever people have done and do nowadays, you know that the situation is very important for how people react. In WWII for instance, how could people guard the concentration camps? While having a wife and children?
Those guards were not sadistic in nature.

Off course, I know that I know very little as a 16 years old, and that I'll know a lot more when I'm 20 or 40 years old. But I also know that there are many people around that know even less about our society and politics, even though they are a lot older than me. When you're not interested in them, you won't learn much about them.

tanonx
3rd Feb 2008, 21:34
On the one point, reguarding the subdebate of age capacity...

Djinni, just relax a bit. Papy's got his opinion, and the 'Xs don't have the capacity to comprehend Y' isn't something that can be opposed easily. Don't get worked up, or you'll weaken your argument/'discussion point'.

Papy, you're coming off (to me at least) as pretty condescending, not bothering to think of the possibility that Djinni may well understand philosophy. The agreed-on idea that you get wiser as you get older doesn't have any bearing on what age person X can understand Y at. I did long division when I was 8, courtesy of an intense amount of training. At this point, I still think I knew long division, and am backed by the various solutions and test grades I've collected. I imagine that this required some small level of abstraction, and don't know why it couldn't be applied to philosophy, assuming the training was redirected from numbers to people. I did the same to English. I don't think either was due to any special capacity on my part beyond a fairly slight edge in my ability to absorb information. Definately not enough to justify an apparent breaking of some unwritten law of life.

Now that I'm through with that example, I'd like to register that I'm confused as to exactly how 'you know more when you learn more' was tied so tightly to age. Also that I like Gamer's explanation better than mine, but that might be because I'm also 16, and also have never read Nietzshe.

Okay, time to take a breath and make my contribution to the topic at hand. Philosophy in Deus Ex 1 was something I liked, as when I looked around I could see little things that were interesting. I didn't know their context outside the game, but I definately think I understood the implications. If nothing else, they enhanced the gameplay and made for a nice few minutes of being sidetracked. In this, I find it akin to, say, bloom lighting. Great if you can add it in, makes for a nice atmosphere, but not something that will single-handedly kill your game with it's absence, or something that would make a great game if it was the sole focus. Imagine, if you will, Bloom Lighting: The Game. Look at all sorts of wonderful panoramas in this breathtaking screensa-I mean game. Observe views and thoughts of philosophers in this stunning boo-I mean other game.

I'm pretty sure I've used up my fluffy useless word quota now, so...

djinni33
3rd Feb 2008, 23:35
@Papy: With "arguing" I meant that I didn't see the arguments and thoughts behind your position and wanted to provoke you to reveal them... in my own pretentious indirect way that is.

I'm sorry if I seem aggressive or excessively insistent... it's just the way of discussing I'm used to and sometimes it leads to interesting results if both sides do it. :o

Regarding the age: As you put it well, 15 year-olds usually do not read Nietzsche and even if they might, most of them would simply not appreciate it because of the knowledge they lack due to their young age. For this same reason, many of them also have a relative simple view of politics, economy or other aspects of society.

Then again, most 25- or 45- or 85-year olds have never read Nietzsche and would not be able to make any sense of it (even for university professors this is still a challenge by the way). 'Mature peoples' views of society usually don't go too far beyond newspapers and TV. Unlike 15-year-olds they are also not in a process of fast learning and might not appreciate to have their views challenged.

I agree that it is difficult for a mainstream game to implement philosophy. Computer games are a relatively new sort of media and are not considered as "serious art" like literature or other art forms. Isn't it just plain crazy? The potential is enormous since you can combine so many other medias like music, text and visuals. If we still live to see the day this changes we can thank games like Deus Ex to have taken the first step...

Edit: @tanonx: People telling me to relax make me aaaangry!!! Just kidding... :P

Zegano
4th Feb 2008, 07:34
When I was 15, I have to admit that I thought I knew everything. Now, only two years later, I recognize that I have a long way to go (probably because of these forums, since I normally wouldn't think about it). But even if a 15 year old doesn't fully understand something, what they do understand will propel them forward from their naivety, progressing them towards the goal of fully understanding an argument. They may misinterpret something, but correcting that mistake is easier the more they know about the subject.

RedFeather1975
4th Feb 2008, 08:50
I think from an evolutionary view the human animal is designed to be both mentally and physically capable at the time of adolescence. They are at their peak, they just lack environmental knowledge due to the sheltering nature of the family.
The later stages of puberty are simply to introduce the drive to sexually reproduce. I doubt cognition or even fine motor skills are still being developed at that point. It would make no sense for an organism to be entering the reproduction phase without already having peak mental and physical capacity developed, for not only their survival but the protection of their offspring.

I have also learned that starting in adulthood the number of neuron production in the brain decreases. That makes sense too because without artificial influences the human animal doesn't normally live long after their offspring is old enough to survive on it's own. Further mental/physical development beyond the peak reproduction stage would have no way of surfacing in evolution.

Falkenherz
4th Feb 2008, 09:16
O dear^^ I would not like discussions like this in a game. I end up clicking through the dialogues after my second run-through. Philosophies just serve to explain the motivations of each party involved, and thus to separate this game from the standard good vs. evil plot.

But philosophies are NOT the core of Deus Ex. The core is about deception, of enlightenment run afoul. And the hero tries to escape but in the end, he can´t. Look an the endings of IW. Helios is supposed to serve each individual´s needs - but he transforms society into a collective in the end. The Illuminati want Ascension - but they elevate only themselves and restore pre-collapse society instead. The fanatics want to stay human - but they end up as inquisitoric tyranny. The renegade wants to be free of choice - and is just working for the Omar in the end.

This is about deception, not philosophy.

Zegano
4th Feb 2008, 21:31
At its core Deus Ex is a game, a first person shooter interface with rpg like modifications. Philosophy is just a component of the story to add depth to the characters.


I think from an evolutionary view the human animal is designed to be both mentally and physically capable at the time of adolescence. They are at their peak, they just lack environmental knowledge due to the sheltering nature of the family.


I remember reading in a science magazine some time back that originally humans hit puberty later than they do now (about 15 average) and that they were mentally mature when this happened, but now we hit puberty earlier and mature mentally later (early 20's, I believe). From an evolutionary view I would say that it is better to be "both mentally and physically capable at the time of adolescence," but that as society has made our lives easier, it is possible for us to mutate into a less advantageous position and not die off, so the species weakens because it does not have to be stronger. A lot of people think that evolution is constantly 'improving' species but in actual fact it only improves them if the situation changes for the worse. If the situation gets better survival of the fittest no longer counts, since you don't have to be as fit to survive.

Papy
5th Feb 2008, 07:25
I think from an evolutionary view the human animal is designed to be both mentally and physically capable at the time of adolescence. They are at their peak, they just lack environmental knowledge due to the sheltering nature of the family.
The later stages of puberty are simply to introduce the drive to sexually reproduce. I doubt cognition or even fine motor skills are still being developed at that point. It would make no sense for an organism to be entering the reproduction phase without already having peak mental and physical capacity developed, for not only their survival but the protection of their offspring.
You give far too much credit to individual survival-based evolution, particularly for a species which always lived with social structures. We are also not a species which reproduce once and then die. If you look at other animals, you will realize that the first try for reproduction is rarely the most successful. You have to take into consideration that sex alone is not enough to transmit genes, the animal must also be able to protect those "genes" from competitors who may wish to destroy them to give a better chance to their own. As having sex and killing children require much less power than protecting and feeding them, you can guess that peak power must be well after "adolescence".

Anyway, if you look at athletes, scientists or intellectuals, you'll realize that 15 is rarely a peak in anything. There are a few sports where 15 can be considered the peak age, like some of the gymnastics discipline, but this is more because of an ideal ratio between body weight and power.

Oh, and girls do prefer older boys. :rasp:

Tyrant Worm
5th Feb 2008, 16:26
I remember my first playthrough of DX1 like it was yesterday. It was actually my first summer home from college, several months after the events of 9-11. I was awed, not only by the pressing relevance of several issues present throughout the game, but also in it's level of depth and philosophy involved. Believe it or not, the game actually inspired me (sounds cheesy, I know) to learn as much as I possible could about the world around me and the ideas present in them. When I teach my World History classes, I spend hours on philosophy and religion. Most of the students love it. I will be ashamed and dismayed should this game not contain at least tiny morsels of philosophical thought and relevent socio-political ideas.

And for the record, 14-15 years old is FAR from the peak of anything (I see mind-boggling examples of this EVERY DAY!!) If you look at the education psychology models for human development, the human brain isn't fully developed until the early 20's.

Illuminati
12th Feb 2008, 21:41
I’m 15 and I think some of you guys are make some Generalizing statements here, some kids out there care about philosophy and what’s happening in the world. Now I don’t read Nietzsche’s work, But at least I know who he is. Now that I’m done with my little rant :nut: Philosophy plays the biggest role in Deus Ex series, in fact (I know this sounds stupid) this game opened my eyes to some new views in life. And since then I’ve been analyzing as much as I can. Deus Ex NEEDS to stick with its Philosophy and its depth story. Thats why this game is great.


I have to agree with you there. I myself was around that age when DX 1 came out and it opened my eyes as well. DX made me explore my own beliefs and convictions and tested them.. It made me decide on what i thought was important.

I really hope they can make me feel the same way i felt when i first played DX1

TheRealestRealist
28th Apr 2008, 20:47
Hi, I just registered but I definitely have a lot to say about the application of philosophy to this game.

I believe one of the reasons that DX1 was so much more succesful than DX2 was the inclusion of philosophical elements into the storyline. The elements included that benefitted DX1 so much were not "overt" ones such as the quoting of philosophers and the conversation between the genius bartender in the Lucky Money and JC. But rather the less conspicious elements that made the story so compelling. The motifs and themes of the story were ridden with philosohical themes. Good v. Evil; what is good and what is evil? Liberty v. oppressive authority...etc. The Matrix movie series is one of the best examples of this in cinema.

To me, it is more important that the story is inundated with just below the surface philosophical concepts than it is that the characters themselves are constantly referencing obscure works to the delight of philosophy majors.

Just my 2 cents.

Aminevo
28th Apr 2008, 21:07
It is essential that we push the history, philosophy and conspiracy aspects of the game.

It was a major part of DX 1 and of course should be for DX 3.

Transhumanisim and the rise of AI is one.

This film is a perfect example of the questions that we face.

Building Gods. Robots Cyborgs God Soul Immortality (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1079797626827646234)

Very similar to some of the issues raised in DX 1.

The conspiracies are also one that cannot be overlooked.

Though many are controversially like September 11, withholding them from the game could break it.

Ive been posting alot of the sources, articles and films in this thread. (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=75974)

pHdeus
29th Apr 2008, 02:12
It is possible that this "game" could actually make a contribution that is important, partly by being able and willing to ask big questions and provoke answers from the player from the interactions and choices that they make.

It seems that when a writer understands that their words and works could impact the future in ways that could be very important, they become better writers. I believe that the entire Deus Ex 1 team knew that they could do more than create a game, and were out to create the best work (of art) possible. The team must have had a shared vision to do that.

Beyond that. Perhaps it is actually important that the Deus Ex 3 be more than just a game. The previous Deus Ex games have accurately predicted pieces of our own future. Deus Ex 1 that there would be national anti-terrorist organization, which was preposterous at the time the game was made, and if I am not mistaken the absence of the World Trade Center (perhaps by accident). The second game predicted that the consequences of fighting terrorism would be global economic problems, albeit not a "collapse" per se (or yet).

And, if that weren't enough, this is just a reminder (partly to me) that philosophy did not used to be an academic pursuit, but was considered to be central to life itself.

serene_chaos
29th Apr 2008, 11:10
I think that Nietzsche, while good philosophy, would make the game a little... bad. [inarticulation]
I agree with whoever said it on the first page, that the game should feature original discussions which may touch on or draw from prominent philosophers like Nietzsche, Kant, Descartes, etc. but dont quote directly. which i think is what DX 1 did.
Also people seem to have neglected to mention the ethical dilemas riddling the first game. The endgame choice was great, each option would appeal to different people equally, depending on their personal ethical views. The conversations with the HK bartender (political) and the Morpheus AI (...theological?) were awesome, too.

If these sorts of conversations were more frequent, but not so much that it becomes a 'feature' of the game, it would be good.

rhalibus
29th Apr 2008, 21:33
It would be interesting to get a general breakdown of the age ranges of our DX community; I've been reading very philosophical posts from many different types of users...

Philosophy is definitely a part of DX; think of the brilliant conversation JC has with the Morpheus AI in Morgan Everett's Paris apartment. It would be unusual for Eidos Montreal to abandon this philosophical element, especially considering the probable number of Eidos Montreal employees who are French...:)

Papy
30th Apr 2008, 06:50
It would be interesting to get a general breakdown of the age ranges of our DX community
Why?

Anyway, I don't think the population of this forum is representative of the people who will buy and play Deus Ex 3.

rhalibus
30th Apr 2008, 19:27
Why?

Anyway, I don't think the population of this forum is representative of the people who will buy and play Deus Ex 3.

Really? I would think this forum would be as good any to represent the type of people who would eventually buy the thing they spend so much time discussing (as long as it was legal for them to buy an M rated game)...

I was about 31 when I first played Deus Ex back in 1999--I was a technical account manager at the time with a pretty good career--but it was the immersion of Deus Ex and its philosophy that helped push my life career into filmmaking. Although it sounds sort of dorky, it's still a true statement that Deus Ex changed my life for the better...

I doubt we could ever really get an age breakdown of the people in this forum; but since the average age of a typical gamer (according to the ESA) is 33 and the average age of a buyer is actually 38, it would be interesting to know were Deus Ex fans stand.

Or perhaps it would only be interesting to me. :)

InGroove2
30th Apr 2008, 19:36
I regret to say that, but philosophy is a serious matter.

And we can't expect, I hope I'm wrong, from video games developers to implement wisely useful and genuine philosophical theories. In other words what I mean is that to know little in philosophy requires years of study.

This is why I suggested, this will never happen though, that Law, philosophy, science, sociology (ect...) university/college professors participate.

... this is a little off base considering that the first movie already implemented some real serious philisophical elements of which i'm pretty sure most of us non-philo-scholars were able to grasp to some degree.

second, philosophy by nature only really needs the willingness to understand to understand it.

i refuse to accept that i must have studies something for years to grasp it's conceptual value. maybe it takes that long to remember who wrote what and what their overall thought is... but really... this whole forum is a philisophical sounding board.. albeit narrow philosophies on nerdy stuff like "video games" and "consoles vs PC"

nevertheless...

Gary_Savage
30th Apr 2008, 19:37
Really? I would think this forum would be as good any to represent the type of people who would eventually buy the thing they spend so much time discussing (as long as it was legal for them to buy an M rated game)...
...
I doubt we could ever really get an age breakdown of the people in this forum; but since the average age of a typical gamer (according to the ESA) is 33 and the average age of a buyer is actually 38, it would be interesting to know were Deus Ex fans stand.

Or perhaps it would only be interesting to me. :)

You could put up a (non-public) poll, where the voters' aliases do not appear next to their vote.

Certainly I would be interested in knowing the age breakdown. Even if this forum does not represent the average demographic of those who will buy this game, it will definitely represent those who are willing to discuss this game; that is something I am curious about.

Voltaire
30th Apr 2008, 20:12
Just for the sake of comparison, the average age of video gamers in the UK is quoted as being 26, buyers as being 29.

Gary_Savage
30th Apr 2008, 20:49
Am I wrong to think that the average DX (I am referring specifically to DX1) gamer is older than the average gamer?

I think that (without statistics to support this) because DX requires a lot more maturity to fully appreciate, than the games that I normally played, back when I was a teenager. Of course, one can certainly enjoy DX's non-philosophical, non-conspiratorial, non-social commentary aspects of DX, like choosing to shoot foes, only, rather than shooting everything that moves, the body part hit point system, the varied ammo, etc., at a much younger ages.

FelixP
1st May 2008, 02:04
Creating an immersive environment is the most important overall concern. In DX1, the newspapers, books, emails, and so all contributed greatly to this, but were not *necessary*. I, for one, would really like to see an even greater level of detail in DX3, but of course, it shouldn't interfere with the gameplay; I'm sure that there are plenty of gamers who could care less about the philosophical underpinnings of organizations or individuals in the game world, for example.

jcp28
1st May 2008, 03:04
Well, I was 14 when I first played Deus Ex back in 2003. And I was utterly immeresed. That would mostly be because I'm not one of those kids with ADD, and because things involving the humanities fascinate me. I was somewhat more mature and thoughtful than the average 14 year old, though I was rather inexperienced. But right now, I'm figuring out so much about life in general, I don't know what to do with all it

Papy
1st May 2008, 21:07
I doubt we could ever really get an age breakdown of the people in this forum; but since the average age of a typical gamer (according to the ESA) is 33 and the average age of a buyer is actually 38, it would be interesting to know were Deus Ex fans stand.
People here are only a subset of the people who played and loved Deus Ex. Most "adults" who play games don't spend time on a forum. I'd bet the average age here is closer to 20, if not less, than the 33 of the ESA (I'm 38 by the way).

But you didn't answer my question. Why do you want to get a general breakdown of the age ranges of our DX (forum) community?

minus0ne
1st May 2008, 21:47
People here are only a subset of the people who played and loved Deus Ex. Most "adults" who play games don't spend time on a forum. I'd bet the average age here is closer to 20, if not less, than the 33 of the ESA (I'm 38 by the way).

But you didn't answer my question. Why do you want to get a general breakdown of the age ranges of our DX (forum) community?
Seconded. I seriously suspect more than half of the visitors and posters here are in their teens. It makes sense of course, as one has less and less time to pointlessly debate things of no consequence as one gets older.

If this forum is representative to DX3 buyers, Eidos Montreal is in serious trouble :p

rhalibus
2nd May 2008, 00:24
People here are only a subset of the people who played and loved Deus Ex. Most "adults" who play games don't spend time on a forum. I'd bet the average age here is closer to 20, if not less, than the 33 of the ESA (I'm 38 by the way).

But you didn't answer my question. Why do you want to get a general breakdown of the age ranges of our DX (forum) community?

Since the average age of a typical gamer (according to the ESA) is 33 and the average age of a buyer is actually 38, it would be interesting to know where Deus Ex fans stand. I'm sorry Papy, but I can't think of a more earnest answer than that...

I just showed my girlfriend the Morpheus philosophy scene from Deus Ex and now she's really interested in the game; it's not just a simple shooter to her anymore. I hope Eidos Montreal understand the importance of philosophy in the Deus Ex universe and how it makes every decision more profound...

Papy
2nd May 2008, 01:56
Since the average age of a typical gamer (according to the ESA) is 33 and the average age of a buyer is actually 38, it would be interesting to know where Deus Ex fans stand.
Do you think the typical Deus Ex player is older than 33? (That's the kind of thing I wanted you to say)

Durandark
2nd May 2008, 22:21
I think intelligence is a necessary. I am not one to replay games, but purely out of the philosophical and hard-lining intelligence contained in DX1, I replayed it at least twenty times a year. Since 2002. I was in Middle School at that point. I hated DX2 for the fact it lacked anything DX1 did. The Company attempting to appeal to a broader audience is what made it die for me. By broading their target audience, they immediately associated it with dumbing down, as WoW had for online games. DX to me wasn't about meaningless FPS entertainment. It was about intelligent, roleplaying element that inspired thought. I can literally blame DX1 for inspiring me to pick up a few books that I now note as the greatest works /ever written/. The Man Who Was Thursday has become literally one of my top five and it was DX1 to blame.

I pray DX3 is as genius as the first.

Papy
3rd May 2008, 03:55
I think intelligence is a necessary. I am not one to replay games, but purely out of the philosophical and hard-lining intelligence contained in DX1
I know I won't be popular, but this look to me more and more like mass hysteria and people looking at a game with rose tinted glasses. Having a game with a story that was more than "save the princess" or some other kind of typical 8 years old subject was great, it was immensely refreshing, but "hard-lining intelligence"? Please! Deus Ex is at best on the same level as "The Matrix" (the movie), which means quite shallow. The real "depth" from Deus Ex didn't come from a few pop-corn philosophy lines, but from the setting and NPC that were there for their own sake, and not only to please the player like most other games. Deus Ex did not try to be Disneyland, it tried to look real. It was not another stupid black and white vision of the world, where the player is the center of attention of everyone. To illustrate the depth of Deus Ex, here's a single question : was Gunther Hermann a bad guy? Of course, the answer is not obvious. That's where the depth and intelligence of Deus Ex was. The philosophical mumbo jumbo was just a baggy coat : something to make the game look bigger than what it really was.

Don't get me wrong, I would love a game with deeper philosophical subjects, I also think Deus Ex had more depth than most regular games, and I will acknowledge that the pop-corn philosophy is in part responsible for that, but the truth is a baggy coat does not impress me that much. Pop-corn philosophy is fun, but it's still only pop-corn philosophy.


As for IW, yes, the gameplay was dumbed down and yes, even the story was dumbed down. But it was not the "philosophy" that was dumbed down. You could still extract from the game a lot of very interesting subjects, probably even more than with Deus Ex. It was less obvious than with Deus Ex, it was not thrown to the face of the player like with Deus Ex, but it was there. The story of IW could be qualified as dumbed down because the world adopted a more Disneylandish attitude. The player was the center of the world, to make sure he could have choices. That's where the dumbing down came from, not from the supposedly missing pop-corn philosophy.

flownez
3rd May 2008, 14:24
I had a conversation with my learned brother-in-law (my other brother from another mother) this afternoon in which we discussed GTA4. The essence of our conversation was that although this game has been touted as revolutionary, it is pretty similar to every other one that had been released. This led us onto the topic of Deus Ex 1, which we both agreed was revolutionary in the sense that it provided an intellectual sub-plot which did not impede the experience of those less concerned with social reflection or metaphysics, yet greatly enhanced the quality of the game for those who did.

Deus Ex 2 was a good game from a technical perspective. What it lacked for me was the grimey introspection on present society, and a relevence that we can all experience by watching the first 10 minutes of the 6:00 news. Maybe this was because of the futuristic setting that bares less resemblance to todays society, or maybe it was because the story line lacked the depth of the predecessor. I don't think it was the lack of philosophy in the sequel that caused this though, I think it was a change in philosophy of the game producers.

This passive aggressive rant aside, and rose coloured glasses off: I'm a 30yo who likes to play games. I would love to be able to purchase a game that gives me the same trip that Deus Ex 1 gave me. I have no inclination to purchase mindless 3rd person shooters.

Papy
3rd May 2008, 18:43
What it lacked for me was the grimey introspection on present society, and a relevence that we can all experience by watching the first 10 minutes of the 6:00 news.
I agree the look was different, but subjects were the same. IW was sci-fi the same way that Star Trek is sci-fi : only by its decor. You could use a lot of the ideas with even a medieval settings if you wish. Class struggle is nothing new. Individuality, freedom, conspiracy are not new subjects. Economic struggle between small farmers and big corporation is certainly a current problem. Using the image of a pop star to influence people is pretty much what our society do now. Do you want me to go on? I don't think I would have a lot of problem changing the decor of IW, to make it look more current, without changing much of the story.

pHdeus
4th May 2008, 00:20
Deus Ex 2 was a good game from a technical perspective. What it lacked for me was the grimey introspection on present society, ....

In Deus Ex 1, the introspection or "philosophy" showed up in the conversations with people in the game, even the bystanders, mole people, etc and the somewhat main characters also: Sam Carter, Harry Filbin (sp), El Ray, as well as numerous terrorists.

What was good about the game, was that people had a tendency to reveal something about their individuality, even in the conversations that were basically directed toward one goal. Deus Ex IW had moments of that, but many more that were devoid of it.

Who else but Tracer Tong could have described himself in terms of a mathematical equation. :o

c0ma
8th May 2008, 01:13
Great discussion everyone; it's nice to see so many people interested in talking about the complexities of this game.

I just wanted to mention a few things here.

First, I think it's clear that a significant part of what made DX so great was the synergy of all its elements: it was clearly more than the sum of its parts. Plus, each of the parts meshed well with the others, rather than being clearly separate. So, for example, the discussions with NPCs would come at arbitrary points, fights would start and stop without a big parade, books and such would just be lying around, etc. This, to me, is what separates this game from say, the Matrix trilogy, which has some very interesting elements, but are presented in a modular, heavy-handed way. In other words, you know exactly when an important speech is coming, or when a fight is about to break out, etc. This may just be due to the difference in the medium, but it is a difference nevertheless.

Also, because I'm a graduate student in philosophy, I wanted to make a few comments about philosophy itself. There are different ideas regarding what philosophy is exactly, and it's probably not important to draw such lines precisely. One thing that, to me, is central to thinking philosophically is being able to engage with an idea for a very long, concentrated time; this takes some work. There's a misconception that doing philosophy is just thinking big or deep thoughts; that can be part of it, but there's a lot more. Just like being a historian requires more than just knowing when a bunch of stuff happened: philosophy is more than just knowing what a bunch of people said about some big ideas. Personally, I like to think of philosophy as a field of inquiry into things that can't be settled (at least not yet) by science or math or anything else, but can still be put into relatively clear sets of questions and concerns. Answering those questions is a matter of seeing what other things we're committed to, what other things we think, and making logical arguments.

That said, I do think that it's worth talking about big ideas in non-academic settings, and it's one of the great things about DX. Although most of the philosophical topics in the game revolve around different political philosophies, it does touch on the nature of technologically extending humanity, and the nature of artificial intelligence. I would like to see those things discussed more in DX3.

Finally, because I haven't seen it mentioned yet, I would recommend the book "Foucault's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco to anyone who really liked the Illuminati/conspiracy aspects of DX (I think this was part of IW, but I never played it after hearing how bad it was compared to DX).

SomaMech
9th May 2008, 14:14
People need to stop the bashing crap, and they know who they are. Deus Ex 2 being 'Dumbed down' for console gamers is pure poppycock. What happened is A. a different dev. team B. different game director. And if anyone thinks Deus Ex 2 was limited by its 'console counterpart' needs to be informed and read up that the problem was really the engine. Please guys, enough console its just pure stupidity and troll food. ****

Explain to me how the engine can reduce the number of polysyllabic words + tech/geek/science/philosophy-speak and list me a few console games that come anywhere near DX1's standard. I'm not denying there were probably other reasons for DX2 being a comparitive failure and I'm not entirely blaming consoles for the dumbing down of the game, but anybody that doesn't see the influence consoles are having on the standards of computer games in the past 5 years or so is absolutely blind.

Isn't it a bit of a coincidence that all PC game series moved to console have similar issues? A lack of true interactivity with the game world... a decrease in smaller details relevant to the game world and relevent to minor, side-quest style details (DX2's datacubes/books etc definitely felt like a forced attempt at creating side-content just to keep people from moaning) .... a decrease in map size.... an absolute RAPING of the User Interface + Inventory systems. Take a look at Oblivion for example. How many times have you wanted to go back to Oblivion when compared to Morrowind?

paul
9th May 2008, 17:34
This is an incredibly important point. The game needs to be as cerebral as the first. I can think of no other game in which one could walk around and glance at books such as "The Man who was Thursday." This was the most original concept I've ever seen on a computer game and should definitely be explored in Deus Ex 3. It dramatically increases replayability value and can also be very enlightening.

LUCID-X
14th May 2008, 05:54
Was the philosophy put into DX1, for the sake of the philosophy, or for some other reason. Here is how I see it. The differing philosophies within the game was merely a vehicle through which the makers of the game helped players consider the differing possibilities within a non-linear game.

Deus Ex 1 was a game put into a setting, where the world was tearing itself apart at the seams. The player was given the power to influence the world as he/she saw fit, helping guide it to a such and such conclusion. The world was filled with many organisations, or groups of people, who represented different ways of thinking or philosophies. Each of these groups, realising the power the main character had, attempt to influence the player in ways that would make them share their philosophy and therefore bend the final outcome in their favor. This was done by controlling the perceived reality in which the player is situated, in ways that would support their point of view. This created, as Spector himself described, shades of grey. The player pretty much has to choose which philosophy is for the greater good, and make it a reality.

The philosophies and opinions put throughout the game, where not there to educate the player, or teach them the meaning of life. Its purpose was to help the character to realise they are not limited by a single philosophy or the reality created within the game. The player could make their own decisions and create their own reality within the game, do things the way they want to. If something in the game happens in a way you don't think it should, try to change it.

Rather than educating the player about real world philosophies, though it may have. It was challenging the gaming philosophies players had come to expect. Rather than following the obvious linear path through the game, try and find ways to not follow the obvious path. Consider other ways of thinking.

I think this is one of the thing that allowed the game to have the effect it had, and the beauty of it. It was seamlessly challenging the traditions of game design and philosophy, by asking the player to challenge what your character was designed for and the philosophies established by the characters in the world within the game. A situation with a homeless person on the street telling you their thoughts on how the world should be managed, was almost helping put you in the frame of mind to consider and try other options or solutions to problems or situations you face within the game.

I hope this makes sense to at least a few people, not sure of another way of explaining it.

Dioxin2
5th Jul 2008, 09:29
I agree with the OP.

I simply do not enjoy storylines that are meant to be merely entertaining and are devoid of any in depth philosophical allusions. The single most important factor in how much I enjoy a narrative driven game or movie (obviously not ones like Mario or Sonic) is how bold it is in presenting deep philosophical concepts. If DE3 is dumbed down in that it abandons the philosophical discussions of DE1 I simply won't enjoy it, in fact I would probably abhor it.

Psychopomp
5th Jul 2008, 14:43
No.
You're all wrong.
Deus Ex 3 should be based on Freud.

:P

Seriously though, Nietzsche's "Ubermenche" would be a perfect fit for Deus ex.

However, we shouldn't have philosophy for the sake of philosophy. To much and you get into the realm of pretension and while a little can (like cheesiness) be a good thing, no one likes a pretentious ****.

Dioxin2
5th Jul 2008, 14:54
No.
You're all wrong.
Deus Ex 3 should be based on Freud.

:P

Seriously though, Nietzsche's "Ubermenche" would be a perfect fit for Deus ex.

However, we shouldn't have philosophy for the sake of philosophy. To much and you get into the realm of pretension and while a little can (like cheesiness) be a good thing, no one likes a pretentious ****.

Pretentious is a good thing IMO.

Most people call anything with extensive philosophical/intellectual presentation pretentious simply because it makes them feel uneducated or "dumb". I enjoy pretentious because it is usually the mark of something with a lot of intellectual merit.

Psychopomp
5th Jul 2008, 15:07
Pretentious is a good thing IMO.

Most people call anything with extensive philosophical/intellectual presentation pretentious simply because it makes them feel uneducated or "dumb". I enjoy pretentious because it is usually the mark of something with a lot of intellectual merit.

I agree for the most part. I just believe that there is a point where you're just going LOOK AT ME I'M SMART, DUURRRRRR!

jcp28
5th Jul 2008, 18:41
Psychopomp makes a good point I think that has been raised earlier in this thread, yet he comes right out and tells the pitfalls in philosophy-heavy approach. But I don't mind philosophy

And props to Psychopomp for mentioning Nietzche. His ideas are somewhat outdated, but I still feel they have great relevance once adapted a little more. I put a quote from him in my sig to test it out and see if my sig will display more than half the time.

Kevyne-Shandris
5th Jul 2008, 19:16
And props to Psychopomp for mentioning Nietzche. His ideas are somewhat outdated, but I still feel they have great relevance once adapted a little more. I put a quote from him in my sig to test it out and see if my sig will display more than half the time.

It would be suicide, though. Nietzche was godless and for a godless world, which in the scheme of the DX world, would be like the Spector scenerio -- "God" tried best to kill his own creation, with the mortal tools that could be the downfall of all known life -- his creativity; the tools as his disposal; and the will to do so.

Love philosophy. It's solid brain food. Yet going from one extreme (that basic shooter) to the other (psych/e heavy) isn't a balance well suited for gameplay. To play a game means from getting to point A to point Z, not stay focused on point P and never wanting to get to point Z, as point P is 3hrs of philosophizing with god-machines (then trying to play with a head full of anything BUT gameplay!).

DX has a nice balance of lore, enough to leave a little in the back of your mind while you play of what's is or maybe happening to flesh out why you're even there, but not so much to interfere with where you're going.

pHdeus
6th Jul 2008, 00:41
Let's not forget the social, the conversations. For me that helped knit the elements of philosophy and action game play into something both real and compelling.

Actually it reveals the philosophies.

jcp28
6th Jul 2008, 01:29
It would be suicide, though. Nietzche was godless and for a godless world, which in the scheme of the DX world, would be like the Spector scenerio -- "God" tried best to kill his own creation, with the mortal tools that could be the downfall of all known life -- his creativity; the tools as his disposal; and the will to do so.

Love philosophy. It's solid brain food. Yet going from one extreme (that basic shooter) to the other (psych/e heavy) isn't a balance well suited for gameplay. To play a game means from getting to point A to point Z, not stay focused on point P and never wanting to get to point Z, as point P is 3hrs of philosophizing with god-machines (then trying to play with a head full of anything BUT gameplay!).

DX has a nice balance of lore, enough to leave a little in the back of your mind while you play of what's is or maybe happening to flesh out why you're even there, but not so much to interfere with where you're going.

Which is why the focus should still be on the gameplay. Besides, I recognize Nietzche is just one of many. And I find it a little eerie that he kind of saw the downfall of nations in some of his writings. Cultural stagnation leads to a decaying society and all that. But I admit that nobody really wants to hear such a doom and gloom message. I'm sorry for not being coherent

But sure, we can even hear the thoughts of humanists in this as long as they are more of the cautious humanist type that doesn't detract from the cyberpunk theme of DX. Maybe one of the weaker factions that wants a perfectly democratic society can quote Maslow for instance. But in any case, it should be a backdrop that should only be referred to as symbolism of any places and characters that have relevance. The emphasis should still be on the gameplay.

Dioxin2
6th Jul 2008, 04:08
Which is why the focus should still be on the gameplay. Besides, I recognize Nietzche is just one of many. And I find it a little eerie that he kind of saw the downfall of nations in some of his writings. Cultural stagnation leads to a decaying society and all that. But I admit that nobody really wants to hear such a doom and gloom message. I'm sorry for not being coherent

But sure, we can even hear the thoughts of humanists in this as long as they are more of the cautious humanist type that doesn't detract from the cyberpunk theme of DX. Maybe one of the weaker factions that wants a perfectly democratic society can quote Maslow for instance. But in any case, it should be a backdrop that should only be referred to as symbolism of any places and characters that have relevance. The emphasis should still be on the gameplay.

I disagree. The gameplay is a nice bonus for sure but the focus should be on the storyline, especially the philosophical implications.

Kevyne-Shandris
6th Jul 2008, 04:55
I disagree. The gameplay is a nice bonus for sure but the focus should be on the storyline, especially the philosophical implications.

It's gameplay > storyline > graphics.

Need gameplay first to keep interest and ensure high production values. Without that, the story wouldn't even matter, as you'll be bored to tears on what you can do if emphasis isn't placed on it.

The scripting has to be done, as it's something the modders can't readily touch at first, and everything they'll be doing is centered on it (any graphics can be added by the community if need be -- for games with an avid modder community this is too under utilized. Devs know modders will be doing it even if they don't like it, so might as well give that to them, as that's really personal customization. Works wonders, look at Bethesda's Morrowind mod community, they'd edit anything not nailed down!).

But what will happen is it'll be graphics > gameplay > storyline as that's the formula that sells.

Watch.

phlebas
8th Jul 2008, 02:35
Well, first of all, the whole debate about age/intelligence relationship was wholly off the topic. I am not sure if a developer would be willing to read through all of that to get to the good stuffs.

That said, I think forcibly trying to fuse some heavy philosophical element within the game world would be detrimental to the experience. The first, and despite what some people say the second game to certain extent were great because their ideas and themes were well thought out and relevant to the game world.

The MGS series for example. I respect Hideo Kojima, but some of his philosophical musings can get in the way of the game, and at worst not as well thought out as they would first appear to untrained audience (people who only hear about ideals of governance and world economy through games, rather than proper resources put together by professionals of the field).

To a person who devotes his/her lifetime pursuing the ideals of government , economy and humanity, themes all under pursuit in both DX games to certain extent, the ideas that amaze us in those games might as well offend or worse, bore them to death. Yet the games themselves are still fun to play, and most people who play the two games find themselves thinking about certain themes and ideas presented in the games.

I think it has to do with the presentation and how well thought out the ideas themselves are (by the developers themselves), despite its relatively meager depth.

And perhaps those two things are the ones the eidos montreal studio should pay most attention to, story-wise at least.

Vadim Verenich
13th Aug 2008, 20:26
I would like to suggest to put more philosophy in DX3, it was amazing in DX1, but in DX2 it almost never exist. I would like to suggest too Nietzsche as a good philosopher in opposition of non-individualistic society... and because he have the "Nietzsche's Superman" , the Übermensch (the man that is totally free, without moral, religion , etc) (Deus Ex could be Nietszche's super man at the final) Please , developers check out about it because is a GOOD point to be in DX3 (Check the 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra', 'On the Genealogy of Morals' and 'The Antichrist' books).
And please, in the endings put phrases of philosophers like in DX1.

If Deus Ex 3 have more phylosophy, it will have the value of art and 'not just a game' and the older guys (like me) will play it and say to everybody.Graphics can be superated, but not a good history.
Thanks for reading!

I have a same suggestion to make DX3 more intellectual (for me DX is a priori most intellectual game ever done and therefore unique).
But I am more sympathetic with French post-structuralists (Michel Foucault, Rolan Barthes, Julia Kristeva, Jacques Derrida and Gilles Deleuze). The whole plethora of their ideas were presented by Chad Dumier in his long dialogues with JC (DX1 Paris Catacombs level).I assume that Mr.Pacotti simply put in his dialogue direct quotes taken from books of aforementioned authors. Including famous quote of Bakhtine.
It is through the essays contained within The Dialogic Imagination that Bakhtin introduces the concepts of heteroglossia, dialogism and chronotope, making a significant contribution to the realm of literary scholarship.Bakhtin explains the generation of meaning through the "primacy of context over text" (heteroglossia), the hybrid nature of language (polyglossia) and the relation between utterances (intertextuality).
Heteroglossia is "the base condition governing the operation of meaning in any utterance." To make an utterance means to "appropriate the words of others and populate them with one's own intention".Bakhtin's deep insights on dialogicality represent a substantive shift from views on the nature of language and knowledge by major thinkers as Saussure, Kant.

Demiurge
16th Aug 2008, 17:15
Don't get me wrong, I would love a game with deeper philosophical subjects, I also think Deus Ex had more depth than most regular games, and I will acknowledge that the pop-corn philosophy is in part responsible for that, but the truth is a baggy coat does not impress me that much. Pop-corn philosophy is fun, but it's still only pop-corn philosophy.

Papy, Don't get me wrong, I agree with your basic point, but I am rather glad it just "Popcorn Philosophy" and too much depth will want to make you go insane. Have you ever tried studying Kierkegaard, for example, or reading Wittgenstein's "Tractatus Logico Philosophicus"? :eek: I would rather shoot myself than re-live that nightmare.

Popcorn will bring mass appeal, not mass suicide.

jcp28
16th Aug 2008, 20:07
^

I tried reading Zarathustra not so long ago. It didn't really seem coherent. So I gave up about 1/4 of the way through. I still got an idea of what Nietzsche was saying, but I had already acquired that from other sources so I wasn't worried.

TrickyVein
19th Aug 2008, 12:33
Nietzsche became a madman after contracting syphilis. He would stay up nights by candlelight scribbling aphoristic sayings about literally, anything. He was a loner and had few human contacts towards the end of his life. Don't read Nietzsche, read Dostoevsky - he will tell you why Nietzsche is wrong.

He did have an impressive mustache though.

One way to make DX3 more intellectually savvy would be to give all of the great thinkers facial hair. Mustache? Good thoughts. Beard and a mustache? This guy's Jesus on crack cocaine.

Demiurge
20th Aug 2008, 18:50
Dostoyevsky has some very interesting ideas but is pretty depressing. I think that Deus Ex 3 should give us a bit more Marx, he is one of the Philosophers who got a lot of things right, maybe we could see his prediction coming true and capitalism destroying itself? In a way it did with the collapse, but I want Revolution!

jcp28
20th Aug 2008, 21:16
think that Deus Ex 3 should give us a bit more Marx, he is one of the Philosophers who got a lot of things right

Yes indeed he got a lot of things right, except for little minor things like the revolution of the proletariat and other such inconsequential nonsense that would have a huge impact it actually happened.

Marx made some fairly good observations, but his reasoning was misguided and completely off.

And most philosophers get at least a few things wrong when they publish their works. That's why there will be always be new opportunities in the study for people to come up with ideas of their own if they so choose.

Truthfully, I would double-major in philiosophy if I had the money(which I don't)

Spiffmeister
21st Aug 2008, 05:03
DX1 was all about the philosophy really, it made the player think, and react accordingly to what they thought was the right (or wrong) choice. DX:IW was lacking in this area, but to see as many different philosophies come up in DX3 would be good.

The Devs have a lot to do to make it at DX1s level, lets just hope their up to the challenge.

iWait
21st Aug 2008, 07:02
MARX??>>>111!!!!!!1@@!!!!!!!!111

Seriously? You think he got a lot of things right?

Marxism relies on honest people, and if honest people don't need governments.

TrickyVein
21st Aug 2008, 22:30
Dostoyevsky has some very interesting ideas but is pretty depressing. I think that Deus Ex 3 should give us a bit more Marx, he is one of the Philosophers who got a lot of things right, maybe we could see his prediction coming true and capitalism destroying itself? In a way it did with the collapse, but I want Revolution!

...yes, and at what point does the dictatorship of the proletariat actually end? Won't find Lenin or Marx saying much about that. Let's see, it took around 70 years of oppression and misery before Russia self destructed; China calls itself communist but then again, their female gymnasts are actually all 16, you know. :whistle:

iWait
22nd Aug 2008, 01:01
What cracks me up is that it's called the "People's Republic of China."

Oh, the irony!

Slack
15th Feb 2009, 19:39
Yeah... Dostoiévsky sounds good I think because he thinks differents even in today days...

Abram730
22nd Feb 2009, 16:51
What was philosophical in DX1?


"What good's an honest soldier if he can be ordered to behave like a terrorist?"

"Somehow the notion of unalienable liberty got lost. It's really become a question of what liberties will the state assign to individuals or rather, what liberties we will have the strength to cling to."

"Being a soldier isn't just following orders, it's following those orders in the service of a higher cause. When that cause is betrayed, we're not soldiers anymore, just pieces on a chess board dying for the wrong reason."

"When government surveillance and intimidation is called "freedom from terrorism" or "liberation from crime", freedom and liberty have become words without meanings."

"Culture by definition a shared territory of meaning, inspires conflicts far more destructive than any other dispute over territory on the Earth's surface."

"The human being created civilization not because of willingness but of a need to be assimilated into higher orders of structure and meaning."

JC Denton: "You said 'outside influences.' What does China fear?"
Isaac: "China is the last sovereign country in the world. Authoritarian but willing - unlike U.N.-governed countries - to give its people the freedom to do what they want.
JC Denton: "As long as they don’t break the law."
Isaac: "Listen to me. This is real freedom, freedom to own property, make a profit, make your life. The West, so afraid of strong government, now has no government. Only financial power."
JC Denton: "Our governments have limited power by design."
Isaac: "Rhetoric--and you believe it! Don’t you know where those slogans come from?"
JC Denton: "I give up."
Isaac: "Well-paid researchers - how do you say it? - 'think tanks,' funded by big businesses. What is that? A 'think tank'?"
JC Denton: "Hardly as sinister as a dictator, like China’s Premier."
Isaac: "It’s privately-funded propaganda. The Trilateral Commission in the United States for instance."
JC Denton: "The separation of powers acknowledges the petty ambitions of individuals; that’s its strength."
Isaac: "A system organized around the weakest qualities of individuals will produce these same qualities in its leaders."
JC Denton: "Perhaps certain qualities are an inseparable part of human nature.
Isaac: "The mark of the educated man is the suppression of these qualities in favor of better ones. The same is true of civilization."


Art is the lie that enables us to realize the truth.
Pablo Picasso

Moon Hoplite
24th Feb 2009, 06:53
Read Brave New World, I guess it creates an image of the future, with totalitarianism. Google it, too hard to explain, it's a famous novel.

spm1138
24th Feb 2009, 10:15
Nietzsche became a madman after contracting syphilis. He would stay up nights by candlelight scribbling aphoristic sayings about literally, anything. He was a loner and had few human contacts towards the end of his life. Don't read Nietzsche, read Dostoevsky - he will tell you why Nietzsche is wrong.

He did have an impressive mustache though.

One way to make DX3 more intellectually savvy would be to give all of the great thinkers facial hair. Mustache? Good thoughts. Beard and a mustache? This guy's Jesus on crack cocaine.

**** yes. I judge the importance of any thinker on the bushiness of their facial hair.

http://www.sociologyprofessor.com/images/socialtheorists/georgeherbertmead.jpghttp://www.mohr-siebeck.eu/mw/img/max_weber.jpghttp://internationalrelationstheory.googlepages.com/emile_durkheim.jpg

Azaell
8th Mar 2009, 20:00
First of all, hi everyone. I’m obviously new here, and I am glad to see that the Deus Ex is of great interest to all of you.

The point that I wanted to discuss was the intellectual depth of the game. Far beyond the gameplay itself, the elements of realism that surrounded the setting of the game made it all a more immersive experience. Amongst these elements of realism I can emphasize on facets like the historical references to the templar, the Paris catacombs, or various conspiracy theories that all hold a bit of truth. Every bit of history like this, found on the side, weren’t essential to your progress in the game, but I’m sure that someone who didn’t pay attention this aspect of the game did not get the same experience out of it.

There is also another point that goes in the same line of thought as the historical facts, and it is the philosophical aspect of the game. One of the main highlights of the philosophical aspect of the game, apart from the ending, is the conversation with the hidden AI called Morpheus. These insights about the past and the future makes you ask questions about life, and about Mankind. And to me, it is in this small dark room light by the blue interface of the AI, that Deus Ex reaches peak perfection.

"The individual desires judgment. Without that desire, the cohesion of groups is impossible, and so is civilization." - Morpheus

K^2
8th Mar 2009, 20:57
Gameplay is designed for persons with IQ in the 90-110 range, to cover the most demographic, so I have doubts about them spending a lot of budget and effort on deep story line. Who knows, maybe we'll be surprised, but expectation bar should be put at about IW level.

Blade_hunter
8th Mar 2009, 21:16
LOL I hope they use a deep story with philosophical thoughts but it seems some of us loose their hopes about that game, and I understand them well.

K^2
8th Mar 2009, 21:22
I don't loose all hope. I wouldn't be sticking around. I expect it to be a fun shooter that I'll play through once or twice. I just don't expect it to be a deep thought game requiring me to make a lot of complex decisions based on either the story or gameplay mechanics. I won't be trying to figure out whom to trust and whose side to take. I won't be sitting in a hiding place with almost no health and last clip of ammo trying to figure out how to sneak out and find some place to get more health. These challenges will be gone, because it's not a game meant to follow in Deus Ex' footsteps.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
8th Mar 2009, 21:32
First of all, hi everyone. I’m obviously new here, and I am glad to see that the Deus Ex is of great interest to all of you.

The point that I wanted to discuss was the intellectual depth of the game. Far beyond the gameplay itself, the elements of realism that surrounded the setting of the game made it all a more immersive experience. Amongst these elements of realism I can emphasize on facets like the historical references to the templar, the Paris catacombs, or various conspiracy theories that all hold a bit of truth. Every bit of history like this, found on the side, weren’t essential to your progress in the game, but I’m sure that someone who didn’t pay attention this aspect of the game did not get the same experience out of it.

There is also another point that goes in the same line of thought as the historical facts, and it is the philosophical aspect of the game. One of the main highlights of the philosophical aspect of the game, apart from the ending, is the conversation with the hidden AI called Morpheus. These insights about the past and the future makes you ask questions about life, and about Mankind. And to me, it is in this small dark room light by the blue interface of the AI, that Deus Ex reaches peak perfection.

"The individual desires judgment. Without that desire, the cohesion of groups is impossible, and so is civilization." - Morpheus

Welcome to the forum. :)
We have an existing thread regarding intellect and philosophy, so I've merged.

Azaell
8th Mar 2009, 21:35
That wasn't really the point of the thread, to diss the coming game. The point was to underline what made the intellectual side of Deus Ex one special, and differant from any other games.

Don't loose hope of getting a great game out of this. You are not going to get the game you've been 'waiting for', because it is impossible to satisfy every single detail each and every expects but it can still be a good surprising game. Take HalfLife 2 for exemple, it was differant from the first one, but still a very good game!

Back to the main topic now please.

K^2
8th Mar 2009, 21:48
I wasn't trying to diss the game in any way. I'm only saying that the apparent target demographic tends to underappreciate depth of the story, so it is unlikely that developers will put too much work into it. So expecting something like Deus Ex story line is probably too high of an expectation. If you expect something closer to IW level, which really wasn't that bad in comparison, you will not have your hopes crushed. It is likely that the story will turn out to be better than IW, but I still wouldn't expect it to be as deep as original.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
8th Mar 2009, 22:29
But didn't D'Astous state that the philosophy behind the DX games was one of the key elements they wish to retain and what the separate teams of devs are working on? I believe that was the reason why DX3 has such a late anticipated release date.

jamhaw
8th Mar 2009, 22:39
JC Denton: "You said 'outside influences.' What does China fear?"
Isaac: "China is the last sovereign country in the world. Authoritarian but willing - unlike U.N.-governed countries - to give its people the freedom to do what they want.
JC Denton: "As long as they don’t break the law."
Isaac: "Listen to me. This is real freedom, freedom to own property, make a profit, make your life. The West, so afraid of strong government, now has no government. Only financial power."


Apparently Isaac never bothered to read the Continiuity Bible. :)

K^2
8th Mar 2009, 23:22
But didn't D'Astous state that the philosophy behind the DX games was one of the key elements they wish to retain and what the separate teams of devs are working on? I believe that was the reason why DX3 has such a late anticipated release date.
First of all, DX3's release date is not late by any measure. That's how long it should take to release a game. The games that get completed faster are pretty much garbage, and I'm glad that DX3 isn't put into the same category from start by the suits at Eidos marketing. EM was given enough time to put together a quality game, and they seem to be making progress at an appropriate rate.

The statement you are paraphrasing can be interpreted in many different ways. The background of Deus Ex was thought out on many different levels, and a lot of it was missed by the less sophisticated players. Together with the DX3 being made more accessible to wider demographic, as seen from changes to gameplay, and with D'Astous' own statement about "artistic vision", this could be easily taken to mean that they'll make DX3 run like Cliff Notes to Deus Ex.

More importantly, actions speak louder than words. When I see a sequel where gameplay has been simplified to appeal to the masses, it has never come with a deeper storyline. There is always a first time, but the odds are stacking strongly against it.

If you chose to expect something more, whatever, but my recommendation to expect something of the level of Invisible War's story line holds.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
8th Mar 2009, 23:43
If you chose to expect something more, whatever, but my recommendation to expect something of the level of Invisible War's story line holds.

Yeah, I do prefer to remain optimistic. :)

Also, Rene said: "the story and conspiracy elements are every bit a Deus Ex game. It's awesome. The writing team at EM is made up of many talented and experienced people. And did you notice the Sheldon reference...?"


So this reassurance supports my personal optimism for DX3.

René
9th Mar 2009, 05:08
^^ Yep. I think there's 3-4 full time writers plus (http://jmswallow.livejournal.com/70922.html) contractors, who have written for other games, tv shows, or had novels published. The story is huge and the conspiracies are multi-layered. I'll see if I can post something tomorrow that's related to this...

K^2
9th Mar 2009, 06:20
I really would like to know who the full time writers are.

Necros
9th Mar 2009, 06:50
I really would like to know who the full time writers are.
Mary Demarle is the senior narrative game designer. :cool: She wrote the story for Myst 3 & 4, if I remember correctly.

And I'm with MyImmortal on this, I am optimistic about the story and the depth behind it. :thumbsup:

I can't wait for that little piece of info René, I hope you can get it soon. :D

thomasaquinas
9th Mar 2009, 07:57
Developers say it will be heavily philosophical. So what? Is this game being developed in a vacuum or something? Developers have historically said a lot of things pre-release that either end up being changed for whatever reason, or were outright lies to begin with. I mean they are, afterall, like, you know, trying to market a product and stuff?

I mean, how exceptionally impressive were Fallout 3's "over 200 different endings"?!
Oh, wait - there were only 3. And the general consensus was that they were all quite poor... Ha... Uh, nevermind then.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
9th Mar 2009, 09:04
Developers say it will be heavily philosophical. So what? Is this game being developed in a vacuum or something? Developers have historically said a lot of things pre-release that either end up being changed for whatever reason, or were outright lies to begin with. I mean they are, afterall, like, you know, trying to market a product and stuff?

I mean, how exceptionally impressive were Fallout 3's "over 200 different endings"?!
Oh, wait - there were only 3. And the general consensus was that they were all quite poor... Ha... Uh, nevermind then.

You ask 'So what?' Well, other members here have asked about it because its an important element of a DX game. :cool:

So, do you mean that what little information we know is some sort of marketing ploy and that we are being lied to, just to sell the game?
I'm not convinced of that, personally. How can tidbits of information and a forum be construed as mega-marketing promotion? I mean, there are much better ways to promote, if it were the case...



^^ Yep. I think there's 3-4 full time writers plus (http://jmswallow.livejournal.com/70922.html) contractors, who have written for other games, tv shows, or had novels published. The story is huge and the conspiracies are multi-layered. I'll see if I can post something tomorrow that's related to this...

Oooh, can't wait!

K^2
9th Mar 2009, 09:20
He is saying that developers often overstate the truth as far as depth and complexity of the story goes. Some make up lies, some merely fail deliver on their promises.

And that's the unfortunate truth of the market. Developers saying that they have a great story for their game means absolute zip these days. That's why I'm asking specifically who the writers are. It still doesn't tell you a whole lot. Even the best writers often turn out absolute garbage when they are asked to write something fast and on the budget.

In addition to that, sequels have additional problems. "Can't step into the same river twice." Often even the same author will fail to capture the feel of the original. When you bring in new people to try to replicate something... It might turn out to be a good work, but it will not be anything like the original, and the fans will riot. Or the author may try to hard to copy the work and choke, again, with much rioting in outcome.

This happens all the time. Not just a lot or often, but in most cases. Combine that with the shaky ground that DX3 is on with the purist fans already because of the gameplay, and can you really be surprised that people doubt what developers are saying about the storyline?

And yes, I understand that this is a bit unfair towards developers. With gameplay, they can show us footage or even a demo at a later stage to try and convince us that the gameplay works despite changes. There will always be people dead set against all changes, but some people will be convinced. With a story, you can't do that. Normally, the reviews are supposed to fix this part, but reviews are even less reliables as the source of information.

Maybe EM will manage to put together a demo that grabs you as much as original DX demo did. That would convince a lot of people. Otherwise, people will keep doubting the good story bit right up to the end credits.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
9th Mar 2009, 09:28
I like your idea for some footage. Hopefully that will come...

In the meantime, guess it makes sense to wait for Rene to give us further information. Then we can discuss in greater depth. :)

Sabretooth1
9th Mar 2009, 12:35
I'm actually confident that EM will get at least the intellectual aspect of the game right. If anything, the teaser helped confirm that. It wasn't just some odd everyday teaser where you see the shoulder of the protagonist before he jumps into a battle that you see for 3 seconds.

It inspired a whole bunch of YouTube videos and articles dissecting the montage and its meanings. Now that's intellectual stimulation right there.

I wonder if the whole Renaissance-era aesthetic will give way to Renaissance-era philosophies (not that I'm very well-acquainted with them). We do know that Transhumanism should be a core element, since that's been Deus Ex's inherent theme throughout the series. I think EM also confirmed that one theme would be the alienation of mechs from non-mechs.

AaronJ
9th Mar 2009, 12:40
It inspired a whole bunch of YouTube videos and articles dissecting the montage and its meanings. Now that's intellectual stimulation right there.

Shortly after I made my videos, Stephane D'Astous said in an interview that he didn't expect the trailer to be analyzed that much. That makes me think they didn't know what kind of fanbase we were. Hopefully they do now.

Sabretooth1
9th Mar 2009, 13:28
Shortly after I made my videos, Stephane D'Astous said in an interview that he didn't expect the trailer to be analyzed that much. That makes me think they didn't know what kind of fanbase we were. Hopefully they do now.
Perhaps, but it was a witty teaser nonetheless. Alternately it could have been something generic like AJ looking off a skyscraper in Shanghai, saying some cheesy line like "Target in sight" and using the bungee-tentacle aug. :p

I know now that they're at least thinking in the right direction.

René
9th Mar 2009, 13:40
To answer K^2's questions, confirmed writers are:

-Mary DeMarle (http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,39957/)
-James (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1399305/) Swallow (http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,94804/)
-Sheldon Pacotti (http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,19546/) consulting
-At least 1-2 more people

Sabretooth1
9th Mar 2009, 13:51
Well it's a relief to hear that Pacotti is on board, even if just for consulting. I was worried Deus Ex wouldn't be the same without him.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
9th Mar 2009, 14:50
^ It has been known for quite some time that Pacotti is a consultant on the team. :cool:

**

Thanks for this info, Rene. :thumb:

K^2
9th Mar 2009, 15:28
Thanks, Rene.


Well it's a relief to hear that Pacotti is on board, even if just for consulting. I was worried Deus Ex wouldn't be the same without him.
Didn't save IW, did it?


I know now that they're at least thinking in the right direction.
I'll give you that, but I have a feeling that so did the IW writers. I've already talked about why writers might not make it despite good intentions, but what really bothers me is that even if they do, there is a very real danger of some suit stepping in and saying, "No, this is too complicated and subtle. You'll have to break it down a bit more so that everyone can understand the plot." It feels like it already happened with other parts of the game.

I mean, lets look at IW. The overall plot was alright, wasn't it? Very DeusExy. It really was the issue of how it was presented, and it's even hard to say how much of it was due to writing.

Edit: On second read, this post turned out a lot more negative than intended. I'm just saying, don't get your hopes too high. You never know.

René
9th Mar 2009, 16:00
^^ Yes. Even with IW, they had good intentions. The point to be made for DX3 is that the effort is being made with the story and characters a major focus of the entire project with the resources and skilled people being put behind it.

We'll all have to wait and see if it works in the end, but I think we can be positive about the potential right now.

René
9th Mar 2009, 16:06
I'll see if I can post something tomorrow that's related to this...

Hello Ghost of René Past, this is Present René speaking. Unfortunately this idea has been put on ice as I did not get the go-ahead to release this. What I wanted to illustrate was something like this that we have for DX3:

http://debbyestratigacos.mu.nu/archives/Power%20Corp%20chart.jpg

It illustrates various people, corporations, and their ties to one another. C'est la vie. One day. But not right now unfortunately. :(

K^2
9th Mar 2009, 16:14
That's too bad. That would have been very interesting to take a look at.

SemiAnonymous
9th Mar 2009, 16:35
Might just be me, but does anyone else see the irony in "Wrters Confirmed"

a house
9th Mar 2009, 16:44
Might just be me, but does anyone else see the irony in "Wrters Confirmed"

haha

Anyway, we know from the czech info that various secret societies operate behind the corporations and that they all tie in to some individual who wants to take control of humanity. Quite familiar tbh...

Lady_Of_The_Vine
9th Mar 2009, 17:21
*chuckles*
Yeah, okay... the title has been changed to 'Writers Discussed'. :p

a house
9th Mar 2009, 17:26
*chuckles*
Yeah, okay... the title has been changed to 'Writers Discussed'. :p
No.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
9th Mar 2009, 17:27
No? :o

:)

a house
9th Mar 2009, 17:31
No? :o

:)
See, the irony in the original title was that the I in 'confirmed' is not pronounced whereas the missing I in 'writers' is fully pronounced... :)

Lady_Of_The_Vine
9th Mar 2009, 17:35
I see, sorry, my bad. :whistle:
I thought you meant the irony was the announcement itself ('writers confirmed') after all this time, when really the writers have been working on it since day one, hehe. :D

K^2
9th Mar 2009, 21:47
That's what I thought the giggling was all about. I didn't even notice a missing letter.

AaronJ
9th Mar 2009, 22:21
Mary DeMarle wrote Myst and Dungeon Siege II. If I'm just going by previous works here, she's my biggest concern. James Swallow writes a lot of steampunk, which isn't good. But I guess Sheldon Pacotti will keep them in check.

K^2
9th Mar 2009, 22:43
Considering the shift towards mechanical augmentations, I don't think a hint of steampunk in atmosphere would hurt the game. As long as the story line itself remains true to the original, I don't mind shifts in the atmosphere.

I do mean shifts, though. As in small incremental changes that make sense with the prequel-sequel relationships. No amount of conspiracy would turn Wonka's Chocolate Factory into a good DX setting, I don't care what the Umpa Lumpas are plotting.

AaronJ
9th Mar 2009, 22:47
Considering the shift towards mechanical augmentations, I don't think a hint of steampunk in atmosphere would hurt the game. As long as the story line itself remains true to the original, I don't mind shifts in the atmosphere.

I do mean shifts, though. As in small incremental changes that make sense with the prequel-sequel relationships. No amount of conspiracy would turn Wonka's Chocolate Factory into a good DX setting, I don't care what the Umpa Lumpas are plotting.

The birth of Cyber Renaissance is the fine line between DX3 and Bioshock. A hint of steampunk wouldn't be very good. I'd like the emergence of Cyber Renaissance to hold it's own without any boosts from pre-existing genres.

Sabretooth1
10th Mar 2009, 02:42
Thanks, Rene.


Didn't save IW, did it?


I'll give you that, but I have a feeling that so did the IW writers. I've already talked about why writers might not make it despite good intentions, but what really bothers me is that even if they do, there is a very real danger of some suit stepping in and saying, "No, this is too complicated and subtle. You'll have to break it down a bit more so that everyone can understand the plot." It feels like it already happened with other parts of the game.

I mean, lets look at IW. The overall plot was alright, wasn't it? Very DeusExy. It really was the issue of how it was presented, and it's even hard to say how much of it was due to writing.

Edit: On second read, this post turned out a lot more negative than intended. I'm just saying, don't get your hopes too high. You never know.

I, for one, thought Deus Ex 2's plot was a-okay. It wasn't as good as Deus Ex, but it was definitely up there, above most other games. It managed to do a very good job treading on philosophies like transhumanism, city-states, the whole human-computer-democracy etc. I only hated the length and gameplay in DX2, the plot was cool enough for me.

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 03:00
IW's plot felt like someone telling you a joke, and immediately starting to explain it, because nobody laughed. Only, nobody laughed because the joke simply wasn't that great and a bit old to boot, not because anyone had trouble figuring it out.

And yeah, the central idea was fine. It had conspiracy, multiple factions that weren't what they were, etc. But the presentation was bad, and the whole suffered.

Note also that I did not say that I expect DX3's story to be a terrible flop. I simply recommended that people don't expect from it more than they got with IW's story. If you think that wasn't bad, then you'll probably be perfectly fine with DX3's story as well. It's just that a lot of people expected more from IW's story, and got disappointed.

And I do expect things to be more polished. I'm sure EM will put more effort into dialog, which is already more than Ion Storm has done.

Overall, all that I'm saying is that people shouldn't be expecting a real Deus Ex game. If instead of waiting for a new version of Deus Ex, you wait for a much improved prequel to Invisible War, you'll not only avoid disappointment, but will be pleasantly surprised in many ways. Think of it as a Deus Ex inspired game with someone else's artistic vision, and you'll have fun playing it. Try to spend too much time thinking of all the ways in which it isn't Deus Ex, and you'll probably end up hating it. And what good would that do?

Sabretooth1
10th Mar 2009, 03:17
Note also that I did not say that I expect DX3's story to be a terrible flop. I simply recommended that people don't expect from it more than they got with IW's story. If you think that wasn't bad, then you'll probably be perfectly fine with DX3's story as well. It's just that a lot of people expected more from IW's story, and got disappointed.
I think the reason would be that IW's story design was radically different from Deus Ex. Deus Ex was largely a linear storyline where certain events occurred in an ordered, but allowed decisions both insignificant and important to the player. Invisible War was more like a concentrated packet of the Elder Scrolls, it let you play with any faction you want, how you want. I think the story was good enough to do a concept like that justice.


Overall, all that I'm saying is that people shouldn't be expecting a real Deus Ex game. If instead of waiting for a new version of Deus Ex, you wait for a much improved prequel to Invisible War, you'll not only avoid disappointment, but will be pleasantly surprised in many ways. Think of it as a Deus Ex inspired game with someone else's artistic vision, and you'll have fun playing it. Try to spend too much time thinking of all the ways in which it isn't Deus Ex, and you'll probably end up hating it. And what good would that do?
Good and all, but the reason so many people are hopeful is that EM has explicitly stated that they're learning from IW's mistakes and are making the game more like the original.

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 03:23
I don't doubt that they are learning from IW's mistakes, and they will probably be closer to original than IW was, because that isn't hard, but the goal is still not making another Deus Ex game. It is to make a marketable game inspired by Deus Ex' story.

jamhaw
10th Mar 2009, 04:01
I don't doubt that they are learning from IW's mistakes, and they will probably be closer to original than IW was, because that isn't hard, but the goal is still not making another Deus Ex game. It is to make a marketable game inspired by Deus Ex' story.

Thats something at least. I was disapointed that Snowblind wasn't set in the Deus Ex universe.

WhatsHisFace
10th Mar 2009, 04:14
IW's plot felt like someone telling you a joke, and immediately starting to explain it, because nobody laughed. Only, nobody laughed because the joke simply wasn't that great and a bit old to boot, not because anyone had trouble figuring it out.
The more I think about it, the more true that becomes. At the very least, Deus Ex: Invisible War provided organizations with clouded intentions and somewhat creepy agendas.

However, it was handled in a very bad way. Eventually everything falls under one of two umbrella corporations, making your previous choices pointless, and then there are a few more factions introduced just to keep things varied. But in the end it all feels like a waste.

Wulflorne
10th Mar 2009, 04:22
(Pardon, this is my first post... So, hello!) IW's factions felt distinctly 'typecast'; cliche dystopian fare, with two dimensional agendas (and one that's so downright extremist that you'd only pick their ending if you deliberately wanted to be an evil bastard.) That being said, choosing an ending in IW was as easy as deciding how altruistic or dirty you wanted your character to be, and less thought as to what you'd do. At least, that's how I felt; the first Deus Ex presented you with choices that were, essentially, personal questions pointed at the player; how would you handle it? They all were gray.

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 04:58
That's not entirely true. I often enjoy playing as an evil bastard, and I still couldn't find an ending that worked for me.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
10th Mar 2009, 08:31
Good and all, but the reason so many people are hopeful is that EM has explicitly stated that they're learning from IW's mistakes and are making the game more like the original.

Agreed... and I believe they are doing exactly that. :cool:
We have an awesome writing team working on this game and I have every faith in DX3 being much closer to DX1 than DX:IW.

gamer0004
10th Mar 2009, 09:41
The problem is that in Deus Ex you unravelled the conspiracy, and even in the end you wasn't really sure whether you could trust the illuminati.
In IW there was nothing, and then *SLAM* in the face, they told you. What's the fun in that?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
10th Mar 2009, 09:46
DX3 has a great story, with plenty of conspiracy and multiple endings. Fear not. :cool:

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 09:50
Fear not. :cool:
Famous last words.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
10th Mar 2009, 09:55
Trust me. :D

(famous last words again? ;) )

gamer0004
10th Mar 2009, 09:59
"Trust us" and "Fear not" were the famous last words of prime-minister Colijn just before the Germans crushed the Dutch forces in only five days in may 1940.

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 10:04
I think, most recently they were used in that context by the President of Georgia. He then chewed on his tie for a bit as Russian tanks rolled in.

Ashpolt
10th Mar 2009, 10:17
Another problem with IW's story was that it didn't give you any motivation to do anything. In Deus Ex, you start as (essentially) a cop, so you've got a clear motivation: this is your job, these people are bad, here's your mission. You then move to the NSF when you discover there's something sinister behind UNATCO, and the rest of the game is spent trying to solve that particular problem.

In Invisible War, on the other hand, you escape the Tarsus Academy and...here's a city, go do what you will, not because you have any motivation, but just because you can. You're just aimless. I did missions not because I felt I needed to, or because I felt I was doing any good for the world by doing them, but because I needed to in order to get further in the game. On my second playthrough, I'm in Cairo and there's still nothing approaching motivation to do missions (except that I like the Omar, and so want to help them, but that's more of a personal thing!)

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 11:07
Another problem with IW's story was that it didn't give you any motivation to do anything. In Deus Ex, you start as (essentially) a cop...
And in DX3 you're essentially a rent-a-cop. So it's the same, really, only you do it for the money. It's starting to make sense already.

jordan_a
10th Mar 2009, 11:14
Games in which you do things for the money usually have a poor story, I don't think that will be the case with AJ.

René
10th Mar 2009, 13:45
Mary DeMarle wrote Myst and Dungeon Siege II. If I'm just going by previous works here, she's my biggest concern. James Swallow writes a lot of steampunk, which isn't good. But I guess Sheldon Pacotti will keep them in check.

Aaron, buddy, come on man! That comment's way out of line! For example, you looooooove the story in Deus Ex 1, right? Not to knock Sheldon and DX1 because it was, of course, awesome, but what had he done before that? A game called Wishbone (http://www.mobygames.com/game/wishbone-and-the-amazing-odyssey).

And what about other forms of popular media? For every Spielberg Saving Private Ryan you have a Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't write things off based off such a small sample size. I know for a fact that fans loved what DeMarle did with Myst IV and V and please tell me, if you can, what exactly regarding DX3's story you don't like? What the DX3 writing team has done with the story is fricking awesome. It's huge. It's Cyberpunk. It's multi layered. There's tonnes of interesting people to meet. Dialogue and acting are great. Not much has been revealed, there's a lot more to say, but from what has been released, you're "concerned"? You're welcome to be "concerned" but I don't see how.

K^2
10th Mar 2009, 13:54
Rene, you should know better than hotlinking like that.

FrankCSIS
11th Mar 2009, 03:07
I'm curious, how does one get recruited for writing duty on a game? Or from your point of view, how is the choice made?

thomasaquinas
11th Mar 2009, 08:51
What the DX3 writing team has done with the story is fricking awesomeNo offense intended, but "X is awesome!", with no actual supporting evidence provided, is a pretty meaningless statement. I mean, for starters it's just opinion, and is essentially rhetoric. Then it's opinion from someone who is, along with colleagues and friends, personally involved (and is therefore not impartial). And then it's also opinion from a member of a team attempting to market a product with a sales end-goal.

For example, Fallout 3 developers came out and told us how fantastic the "over 200 different endings" were. Of course there were only really 3 endings, and they weren't all that "different". The general consensus is actually that they were all quite mediocre...

If I remember, Invisible War developers told us how "awesome" the game was pre-release (developers seem to use the word "awesome" a lot), and then once the period of prospective sales diminished, admitted they actually thought it was a rather sub-par, unworthy sequel. I really mean no disrespect, but you have to understand that "the story is awesome!" is pretty hollow, at this time, from someone invloved. Even if, I understand, you're not actually allowed to provide evidence for your statement.

I suppose the point is that if saying that it's awesome is supposed to allay our fears - it doesn't. Design a game that actually has an "awesome" story, and all our fears will be gone by release day, when presumably the hype machine has been ramped up to full-power and evidence has been released.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
11th Mar 2009, 09:50
In fairness, Rene is obviously describing the story from a personal point of view - because he can. He's just sharing his opinion on what he knows, I don't think it is intended to allay our fears (for those who have them) or an attempt to market a product. Give the guy some slack... :p

K^2
11th Mar 2009, 10:34
Immortal, have you ever participated in making of something big? Even if it isn't all that great, while you are working on it, it feels like it is the greatest thing ever. That feeling remains until some time passes after you have completed the project. Then you can look at it in retrospect and realize that it was really mediocre.

I don't think Rene is lying or trying to put a spin on things to make more sales. I'm sure he actually thinks that DX3 is great in every respect. But he's involved in the project. That makes him extremely unreliable as a witness to the project's quality. Same goes for everybody on the development team. So as thomas said, when Rene says that something is "awesome" it tells us very little.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
11th Mar 2009, 11:30
No, I can't say that I have at a very personal level... but I understand what you are trying to say as I have studied the subject and I do work closely with RCA, Vector and Superstar Media management. So I get the gist of general marketing strategy, yes.

However, in this case, we should still give people like Rene the benefit of the doubt, no? We are not forced to believe him... that is up to each of us individually. But, at the same time, we don't need to dismiss his contributions outright as nothing more than a cheap sales pitch. I just think its a shame that everything he says is open for misinterpretation. Perhaps its because I'm getting that myself, so I'm understanding it and feeling super-sensitive, hehe. :o

I agree that his comments don't really offer up much by way of "guaranteed reliability", no disputing that; but I don't think that was his intention anyway. Perhaps it is better for him not to say anything in some respects. Seems like its a no-win situation...

K^2
11th Mar 2009, 11:57
I don't think you followed what I said. I specifically stated that I don't think it is a sales pitch, and that it has nothing to do with marketing.

A person cannot objectively evaluate quality of a project that he is an integral part of. It is nature of human psyche, and as much as he might try to be objective, he cannot be.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
11th Mar 2009, 12:10
I don't think you followed what I said. I specifically stated that I don't think it is a sales pitch, and that it has nothing to do with marketing.
Sorry, I was replying in general there... with reference to thomasaquinas's post.


A person cannot objectively evaluate quality of a project that he is an integral part of. It is nature of human psyche, and as much as he might try to be objective, he cannot be.
Yes, I see your point, of course. :)
I still feel sorry for Rene though, hehe. I'd hate to be in his shoes. :D

K^2
11th Mar 2009, 12:21
That I can agree with.

René
11th Mar 2009, 14:09
So as thomas said, when Rene says that something is "awesome" it tells us very little.

It's a valid point and I can see your frustration. I'm just trying to do something since I'm not allowed to provide any more details right now. But when someone is, in my opinion, way too aggressive and harsh in criticizing what they do know, which is only a small portion, I feel the need to respond since I do know. But I can't share it with you. So I use my own vernacular with words such as "awesome" which I know some people don't like. But that's just me and I can't change it!

Besides, I think the way I talk is radical, tubular, far out, and I'm stoked to be here.

/end sarcasm :D

Jerion
11th Mar 2009, 14:40
I still feel sorry for Rene though, hehe. I'd hate to be in his shoes. :D

Ditto. :hmm: :D

Lady_Of_The_Vine
11th Mar 2009, 14:42
He'll be okay though... after all, we can act as substitute punch-bags for those who wish to vent, hehe. :D

Capital_G
11th Mar 2009, 18:29
I don't think you followed what I said. I specifically stated that I don't think it is a sales pitch, and that it has nothing to do with marketing.

A person cannot objectively evaluate quality of a project that he is an integral part of. It is nature of human psyche, and as much as he might try to be objective, he cannot be.

someone saying ''it will get * 80% overall score'', or that ''it will be more like IW than DX'', or ''the story wont live to our expectation'' can't be more objective than René..the game is still in devellopement and we know almost nothing about it (I mean nothing clearly) !

You can give you're opinion, but thats not more objective than him.

(I'm saying this because normally you don't hesitate to say DX3 won't be a really good deus ex game :rolleyes: )

AaronJ
11th Mar 2009, 21:31
Aaron, buddy, come on man! That comment's way out of line! For example, you looooooove the story in Deus Ex 1, right? Not to knock Sheldon and DX1 because it was, of course, awesome, but what had he done before that? A game called Wishbone (http://www.mobygames.com/game/wishbone-and-the-amazing-odyssey):

And what about other forms of popular media? For every Spielberg Saving Private Ryan you have a Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't write things off based off such a small sample size. I know for a fact that fans loved what DeMarle did with Myst IV and V and please tell me, if you can, what exactly regarding DX3's story you don't like? What the DX3 writing team has done with the story is fricking awesome. It's huge. It's Cyberpunk. It's multi layered. There's tonnes of interesting people to meet. Dialogue and acting are great. Not much has been revealed, there's a lot more to say, but from what has been released, you're "concerned"? You're welcome to be "concerned" but I don't see how.

I think you've misinterpreted my post, it wasn't meant to be that negative. I specified that if I'm only going by previous works, I'm worried due to Dungeon Siege II, her most recent work. As for Deus Ex 3's storyline, I can say this:

November saw the announcement of Adam Jensen being a security guard who's WORLD IS TURNED UPSIDE DOWN when black ops commandos raid his workplace. In my humble opinion, this is quite cliché. Any worry I may express comes from the "best foot forward" logic. This is all I know.

Please don't send me a PM about this.

René
11th Mar 2009, 21:50
^^ Keep in mind that the magazines don't work for us. They're free to write whatever they want. They come, they see the game, then they go back and write their story and we don't see it until it's on shelves like the rest of the world. There isn't any collusion. I can tell you that line was not written by us because, as you noted, it is freaking cheesy as heck!

GmanPro
11th Mar 2009, 23:04
I already know that the beginning of DX3 is going to be clique as hell. Judging from that quote I saw somewhere about how they think that DX1 was too 'slow'. Its going to be exactly like IW was. Your going to get about 5 to 10 minutes of going around the place, situation normal. Until something happens and action ensues. Like Fallout 3.

I'm sure the rest of the game will be fine, because plenty of other good games start off this unoriginal way. Like Baldur's Gate, and Half-Life. Deus Ex was great because it took several missions before the "WORLD IS TURNED UPSIDE DOWN". But if that is too "slow" for the EM guys, then so be it.

K^2
11th Mar 2009, 23:12
someone saying ''it will get * 80% overall score'', or that ''it will be more like IW than DX'', or ''the story wont live to our expectation'' can't be more objective than René..the game is still in devellopement and we know almost nothing about it (I mean nothing clearly) !

You can give you're opinion, but thats not more objective than him.

(I'm saying this because normally you don't hesitate to say DX3 won't be a really good deus ex game :rolleyes: )
You are mistaking objectivity and correctness. A statement can be one without being the other.

I might be wrong, but my evaluation is objective. I take facts I do know about the game and my experience of playing Deus Ex and many other games. I analyze these facts in that context and state my conclusion.

That is perfectly objective, and any error in my position does not arise from my feelings towards DX3. It arises from lack of information.

Rene is not objective.
I lack information about the game.
Neither one of us can give reliable description of the game, but for different reasons.

The only way to form an objective and educated description of the game is for someone who is not involved in the making of the game to play and evaluate it.

Mindmute
11th Mar 2009, 23:16
The only way to form an objective and educated description of the game is for someone who is not involved in the making of the game to play and evaluate it.

I could make that sacrifice for the sake of objectivity!..

K^2
12th Mar 2009, 02:23
Ah, but can you imagine having seen the game and being bound by NDAs? Still, it'd be worth it.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
13th Mar 2009, 00:28
I could make that sacrifice for the sake of objectivity!..

Count me in too. :D