PDA

View Full Version : Your faith in Eidos Montréal



jordan_a
4th Feb 2008, 18:16
Think about what we know so far:

The first pictures and informations (october 2008), interviews, the team, the production cycle, the engine, the trailer, the situation at SCi, consoles.

It isn't much but it should be sufficient for the time being.

Vote.

Draco1979
4th Feb 2008, 21:50
I dont have any trust for them because they have not given me anything to work on. The only thing I have to work with is a 30-40 second teaser just telling me there is going to be a third Deus Ex showing a fetus that could of came from the movie "Matrix" and in about three months it is going to be a year from when they made the press release that they are going to make it. I want more maybe story line or maybe some game play or just pictures or maybe to just to put it rest if this game going to take place before or after one of the games. To me this is like area 51 we all know it is there but no one in the government denies or acknowledge it.

AaronJ
4th Feb 2008, 21:59
Didn't the mods delete this?

jd10013
4th Feb 2008, 22:19
thats what I thought.

Draco1979
4th Feb 2008, 22:32
maybe they did and the person reposted but i still stand on what i said above.

jd10013
4th Feb 2008, 23:11
maybe they did and the person reposted but i still stand on what i said above.

I agree with you. games are made to sell to the largest possible audience. In the past, they used to be like art. People like Levine, spector, smith and other could push the envelope and make truly great games. now, it all focus group and marketing driven. :mad2:

there ain't even many small independents left anymore. almost everything has been gobbled up by the conglomerates now.

jordan_a
4th Feb 2008, 23:22
Didn't the mods delete this?
Absolutely not. I did it to change the poll.

humbug
4th Feb 2008, 23:28
I think they will do well with the game, but really its too early to tell. It probably wont be as good as Dues Ex, but show me a game series where the first one is not the best in the series!

jordan_a
4th Feb 2008, 23:32
imho Baldur's Gate 2, Zelda Majora's Mask, Rayman 2, Turok 2... :)

humbug
4th Feb 2008, 23:41
I stand corrected then. ;) I haven't played any of those games though. I've got the Baldur's Gate collection, I haven't played them yet as I've been side tracked by other games. So you reckon I should play Baldur's Gate 2 first?

jordan_a
4th Feb 2008, 23:56
It's not sure BG2 is better than the first one. But it's at least as good. You should start with the first and set up the amateur graphic mod.

Caradoc
5th Feb 2008, 00:44
I'd be truly surprised if they couldn't make DX3 a better game than IW was. All they need to do is start reading what gamers have been saying about the disaster called IW. The flaws were so self-evident that it would take a complete fool not to learn from them. The real question is naturally whether they can reach the same level of quality as in the orginal DX or not.

humbug
5th Feb 2008, 15:30
It's not sure BG2 is better than the first one. But it's at least as good. You should start with the first and set up the amateur graphic mod.


Do I just install the amateur graphic mod or does it need tweeking to get it to work?

metche
5th Feb 2008, 17:07
You know I really shouldn't reduce myself to replying to such threads but seriously....

And you know what about making games? ...

Of course you're entitled to your opinion but good grief if you're going to dismiss the game before you've played it/read the design document/have ANY bloody idea of the storyline - then quite frankly - and forgive me - you're talking out of your arse.

These things take time - no development team wants to put out a crap game believe me, although due to external factors the final quality of the game can suffer. Such is life.

Shouldn't we - as a thriving DX community - be giving positive ideas, constructive criticism and some good karma?

jordan_a
5th Feb 2008, 18:55
you're going to dismiss the game before you've played it.That's not the point of this thread. It's just about the trust we put in the studio, our hope: it's purely personal and abstract.

Shouldn't we - as a thriving DX community - be giving positive ideas, constructive criticism and some good karma?But this is exactly what everyone is doing on other threads.

AaronJ
5th Feb 2008, 20:01
I'm thinking everyone who had been waiting for IW the same time that I had will vote somewhat negatively. It's a lot like going back into a relationship after just having a bad one. I have a "we've heard all of this before" attitude. Remember the badass cover of PC Gamer with JC Denton on the cover holding two P90's? How psyched were you after that? It's going to be the same damn thing, the only thing that may be different is the game, and I pray it is.

Draco1979
5th Feb 2008, 20:20
I am not dismissing the game I just wish Eidos gives us something more then a teaser. I never said I wanted all of what I said just one of the things I said. And to add more to the list maybe some polls for Ideals they are thinking of so we as clients that will buy the game can voice our opinions and know where are being heard.

jd10013
5th Feb 2008, 21:04
I'm thinking everyone who had been waiting for IW the same time that I had will vote somewhat negatively. It's a lot like going back into a relationship after just having a bad one. I have a "we've heard all of this before" attitude. Remember the badass cover of PC Gamer with JC Denton on the cover holding two P90's? How psyched were you after that? It's going to be the same damn thing, the only thing that may be different is the game, and I pray it is.

I couldn't agree more. games are very over-hyped now. till I see and play a demo I'm not getting my hopes up.

B0b_P@ge
5th Feb 2008, 23:23
I'm thinking everyone who had been waiting for IW the same time that I had will vote somewhat negatively. It's a lot like going back into a relationship after just having a bad one. I have a "we've heard all of this before" attitude. Remember the badass cover of PC Gamer with JC Denton on the cover holding two P90's? How psyched were you after that? It's going to be the same damn thing, the only thing that may be different is the game, and I pray it is.


Yeah, I remember that, or the fancy talk about how the AI will react to players shadows ... didn't happen.

But what really shocked me was when I saw the box cover for DX:IW, some guy holding a gun 'gangsta style' ... I knew then and there that this game wasn't going to be even remotely close to the first one. :mad2:

jordan_a
5th Feb 2008, 23:36
But what really shocked me was when I saw the box cover for DX:IWHo I know that feeling only to well. To me it was more "What the hell?..." :D

OuttaZyme
6th Feb 2008, 05:07
I'm not sure that the question shouldn't be whether we have faith in Eidos UK, rather than Eidos Montreal.

Game developers tend to want to make the best game possible. Thet vast majority of developers go into the field because of a love of games, and it becomes a matter of professional pride to create something at once wonderful and meaningful, like Deus Ex. Game publishers, however, tend to want to make as much money as possible. Both philosophies are understandable, but the latter can seriously mess up a game.

Spector stated that he'd been pressured several times to "just make a shooter" during the development of Deus Ex. Does this kind of pressure still exist in the industry, or at Eidos itself, with the popularity of mindless chaff like Gears of War and Halo 3? It's worse now than it's ever been. Check your brain at the door and just make a shooter, and try not to drool on yourself in the process.

I suspect that Deus Ex 3 will much more closely resemble Bioshock than it will Deus Ex 1. While this doesn't quite fill me with warm bubblies, in the current climate of big-budget, low-margin game development I think it's probably the best we can hope for.

So, faith in Eidos Montreal? Sure. Faith in the direction that profitable publishers are heading? Not even a little.

rhalibus
6th Feb 2008, 10:10
There are two reasons that I have hope in Eidos Montreal: The first is that The Crystal Engine was actually used in a previous DX game ("Project: Snowblind", formerly titled "Deus Ex: Clone Wars")...But the most important reason is that they're taking two years to finish DX3...

I've read how Warren Spector and Harvey Smith asked for and got six more months to work on DX to tie up all the loose ends, so every major NPC got their final bow (boss battles with Simons, Hermann, and Chow; Jock's possible bombing; Savage and Tongs' final requests). This completely enhanced the epic fullness of the DX story...Unfortunately for DX:Invisible War, the publishers made them ship the game before it could get the same treatment (See, it's not all design flaws!). They need the time to do DX3 right and make a "Godfather Part II" and not a "Phantom Menace"...

I can't vote in the poll, 'cause there's no option that's between "a good game" and "reach DX1's level". I think DX3 will be a great game, but it will take a herculean effort to equal the original...Instead I'll just wish all of Eidos Montreal the best of luck and encourage them to continually explore the vast landscape of DX ideas within this forum...:)

Boiny Bunny
7th Feb 2008, 09:21
Well on a difficulty scale for a fairly average company, it would probably rate about a 2/10 to beat IW and a 1540/10 to beat DX.

In fact - I'd amost consider using the word 'impossible' in reference to beating DX. Even if DX3 has better gameplay etc. I just don't think it will be able to pull me over the nostalgia of the first game.

To pull off a game BETTER than DX, they would need to have ALL the features of DX (lets face it - it was pretty flawless) + some new things that have developed since like nice physics engines, etc.

I'd like to see ALL the skills and augs from DX PLUS more - and MORE opportunities to use them!

Put in TONS of secrets - every time I play DX through I find a new very well hidden stash of ammo or something.

There are just too many things.

Not only that, unless this is a prequel, DX had a far better setting. I don't give a crap about a demented future where the Illuminati rule the world via the 'Order' and the whatever the other one was, with demented cities and 'coffee wars'.

gamer0004
8th Feb 2008, 14:26
When they've finished DX3, they should take about another 3 months to check all the designs, put in more details and secrets and add/remove vents and stuff like that.

Kratosaurion7
9th Feb 2008, 23:32
Will never beat DX1, but they can at least make the 3 as good as the first.

AaronJ
9th Feb 2008, 23:45
The results of this poll are odd. Everyone seems to be forgetting what happened when we were told the same things about IW.

SageSavage
10th Feb 2008, 00:05
I voted for "Just a good game." because I think they will do their very best and have lots of input at hand about what went wrong with IW but the next higher option (as good as DX1) would be just too optimistic. I still hope for it but as I've said before... I just don't want to set my expectations too high so chances are better DX3 surpasses them. Anything worse than a "good game" would be a shame anyway.

jd10013
10th Feb 2008, 02:03
The results of this poll are odd. Everyone seems to be forgetting what happened when we were told the same things about IW.

I voted for just a good game, but not because of IW. IW was Harvey's fault, and he wont be working on this game. The reason I have little faith in a as good or better than DX game is just the state of the industry at this time.

Everything is made for 10yr olds. all most every game is simplified, dumbed down, and shorted to accommodate the lowest common denominator. damn kids now a days could care less about a story, or deep characters, or immerse environments. They like pretty graphics, physics, seeing things go boom, and shooting things. and unfortunately, that is what the majority of customers is looking for. Its what sells.

Now thats not to say we can't get a good game. Bioshock is a good example of a game not selling out and still selling very well. But much as Bioshock isn't SS3, or as good as SS2; I don't expect DX3 to live up to the original.

Zegano
10th Feb 2008, 05:41
I voted that it will be as good as the first one, but only because I'm hoping it will. I think that it has the potential to be as good, but without any information about it, I can't say that it will be.

carldavid1887
11th Feb 2008, 23:06
Also voted for reaching, but not topping DX 1.
My faith in Eidos Montreal is high. Why? Because I like the Habs :nut:

Lo Bruto
11th Feb 2008, 23:16
The results of this poll are odd. Everyone seems to be forgetting what happened when we were told the same things about IW.

The big deal is comparing Deus Ex 3 with IW... or not comparing at all.

Comparing with the first one, there will be always people saying the game is lame and stinks. That's why IW is rated so low by DX Fans and Above average by non-fans.

IW is a pretty solid game, it's "poor" (personally, I don't think so) if you compare with DX1.

Frog
12th Feb 2008, 01:15
Since Bioshock tore up the charts, I agree withe previous poster that stated it would likely be more like that than DX1.

That still kicks a$$ and is better than IW!!!

I liked IW though. I would not have played it 4 times through if I did not. But it could have been better, yet it still crushed nearly every other game on the market that year. Hell I loved Thief Deadly Shadows, and lots of old-schoolers hated it. I liked the old Thiefs as well.

Even though I hate EA, I hope to see them make a stab at System Shock 3 also.

I am glad Bioshock turned out so well.

We need more games like the Shocks and Exes!

Papy
12th Feb 2008, 03:30
Bioshock is a good example of a game not selling out and still selling very well.
What? Ken Levine cut most of his ideas with Bioshock in order to "say yes to the player". His idea of an ecology he was so proud of? Focus groups couldn't get it, so it was removed. Limited resources? Not "fun" enough for those same focus groups so it was changed. Gray area with morality? People didn't like that, they wanted a clear good and evil, so that is what they got. Inventory? Not fun enough. Vita-chambers ended up with no cost and no need to activate. The WHOLE game is big sell out to the mass market, to the casual gamers who just want to have some "fun"!

Bioshock is a great example to show how selling out is the best way for commercial success. In my eyes, the only advantage of Bioshock over Invisible War was that it had a better timing. PC player are now used to dumbed down games. I'd certainly won't hesitate to say that, although not as pretty, Invisible War was still a better game than Bioshock.

SageSavage
12th Feb 2008, 07:19
Bioshock is a similar disappointment when you compare it to System Shock 2 or DX (which I did after hearing lots of false promises) but Bioshock is still a thousand times better executed and more envolving than IW. Bioshock manages to deliver a deep atmosphere and NPCs you won't forget so fast. The things that happened around the release, the false promises by Levine and the hype machine, the copy protection desaster etc... all that is overshadowing a beautiful game. It could have been as legendary as SS & DX when they'd included all the elements that were in fact dumbed down and a little less thinned out levels in the last third but yet it's still full of lovely details and way ahead of the bloodless IW.

It's a shame that the modders won't be able to create the missing elements since there's no SDK available (another broken promise).

jd10013
12th Feb 2008, 20:41
What? Ken Levine cut most of his ideas with Bioshock in order to "say yes to the player". His idea of an ecology he was so proud of? Focus groups couldn't get it, so it was removed. Limited resources? Not "fun" enough for those same focus groups so it was changed. Gray area with morality? People didn't like that, they wanted a clear good and evil, so that is what they got. Inventory? Not fun enough. Vita-chambers ended up with no cost and no need to activate. The WHOLE game is big sell out to the mass market, to the casual gamers who just want to have some "fun"!

Bioshock is a great example to show how selling out is the best way for commercial success. In my eyes, the only advantage of Bioshock over Invisible War was that it had a better timing. PC player are now used to dumbed down games. I'd certainly won't hesitate to say that, although not as pretty, Invisible War was still a better game than Bioshock.

I never said bioshock was perfect, or the shooter 2.0 that Levine promised. but it's still far better, and far deeper than anything else out there. As I said, it wasn't SS3, but as others have said, still blows away IW. IMHO, a bioshock type game is probably the best we can hope for. thats why I don't have faith in eidos Montreal producing a game as good (let alone better) than DX.

Smoke Screen
13th Feb 2008, 22:04
Bioshock is a great example to show how selling out is the best way for commercial success. In my eyes, the only advantage of Bioshock over Invisible War was that it had a better timing. PC player are now used to dumbed down games.

Certainly true. Shootergames (and related games) that fall not into the fastfood
category are rare and mostly origin from eastern europe. Its anyhow strange
that those folks who have the longest experience are not able to get their ****
together and create something that goes beyond a level from years ago.
Its definitly not a technology related problem and not a lack of creativity,they just got owned by suits.

AaronJ
13th Feb 2008, 22:29
What? Ken Levine cut most of his ideas with Bioshock in order to "say yes to the player". His idea of an ecology he was so proud of? Focus groups couldn't get it, so it was removed. Limited resources? Not "fun" enough for those same focus groups so it was changed. Gray area with morality? People didn't like that, they wanted a clear good and evil, so that is what they got. Inventory? Not fun enough. Vita-chambers ended up with no cost and no need to activate. The WHOLE game is big sell out to the mass market, to the casual gamers who just want to have some "fun"!

Bioshock is a great example to show how selling out is the best way for commercial success. In my eyes, the only advantage of Bioshock over Invisible War was that it had a better timing. PC player are now used to dumbed down games. I'd certainly won't hesitate to say that, although not as pretty, Invisible War was still a better game than Bioshock.

That post was 100% correct.

OuttaZyme
14th Feb 2008, 07:17
Bioshock's lack of complexity is what dimmed the experience for me. No inventory (not even a simple slot-based inventory like IW), no way of telling which plasmids/tonics you had without visiting a gene machine, no real consequence for any of your actions...it felt like it was trying to be much more, but they slapped a muzzle on it for fear of offending anyone. It's a case of style trumping substance in almost every way, and it felt rather incomplete as a result. Unfinished.

And the reason that so many reviewers and media outlets slobbered over themselves in doting admiration is that it actually was one of the best games in recent years. This says more to expose the lamentable state of gaming in general than it does Bioshock's own flaws.

IW was easily better than Bioshock, if for no other reason than it succeeded in providing the illusion that your choices mattered, and that you were playing the game instead of the other way around.

OuttaZyme
14th Feb 2008, 07:32
We need more games like the Shocks and Exes!

You could do worse than a Bioshock clone for DX3, but I'll be disappointed if it's as simple as that.

All of Bioshock's choices were engineered into the game, and forced upon you by the developers. None of them emerged naturally from the complexity of the gameplay.

Playing Deus Ex again over the last week or so has reminded me of just how good it was. And as far as IW goes, consider that if it were released today, it would be considered too "complex" for the average gamer.

Blade_hunter
14th Feb 2008, 17:38
I don't vote now, I stand when they show us more features and things of Deus Ex 3. I think the game must conserve some DX1 gameplay and enhances it.

grayfox
28th Feb 2008, 17:07
I was originally really looking forward to this game... then they announced they would be using crystal dynamics for the engine. I won't be buying the game unless it gets 10/10 on most reviews now.

I have a hard time justifying the cost of a game if it doesn't have an sdk and if its not powered by a well polished mainstream engine (The Unreal engine from Epic, The Source Engine from Valve, Tech 5 from id)

One other thing I will be looking at in the future when I buy games as well is what DRM its using. If you guys use the same activation bull**** drm that bioshock used I WILL NOT ever consider buying the game. I made that mistake with bioshock and a few format and reloads later I cant even play my game without needing to use a crack because its been activated too many times.


edit: I have a good deal of respect for Eidos Montreal, They seem to be listening to the community and don't want another DX:IW on there hands.

SageSavage
28th Feb 2008, 18:32
So if it gets an average of 9/10 you won't buy it?

jordan_a
28th Feb 2008, 19:34
Since when do internet or magazines' reviews matter a lot?

Red
28th Feb 2008, 21:23
This one (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=74115) is the ultimate one... :lmao:

WildcatPhoenix
28th Feb 2008, 22:18
I voted "Just a good game" because honestly, that's all I hope for in the current climate of video gaming. Once video games became such a force in the entertainment market, the quality has shown a noticeable drop (I realize that nostalgia plays a big part in how we remember the great games of the past, but I believe there are very few out there who would disagree with the idea that shorter development times, massive marketing campaigns, and simplification= weaker games)

Can Deus Ex be equalled? I don't think so, not in my estimation. It's my number 1 game of all time. Can something come close? I certainly hope so, but like many of you, I remember being burned by IW and feeling my stomach turn as my hopes were crushed by spiky haired Alex waving his gangsta gat in my face to the tune of "the future war on terror" :mad2:

Maybe DX3 will redeem my hopes. But until it does, I'm not gonna count on it.

-Wildcat

lightbringerrr
29th Feb 2008, 04:22
They need the time to do DX3 right and make a "Godfather Part II" and not a "Phantom Menace"...
And.......Here we go:


Distaste for Gungans aside, are you insane?
Yeah, watching luke struggle to move rocks is so much more exciting than the force powers displayed in Episode 1.
Watching every character to weild a lightsaber do so with the arthritic and "children with broomsticks"-precision of the Original Trilogy was so much better than Park, McGregor, Neeson in Episode 1.

Thank you friend; you have truly made me see the light!:lol:

WildcatPhoenix
29th Feb 2008, 15:58
I completely disagree, man. I thought the prequels were utter dog*****.

Anyway, back on topic...

IcarusIsLookingForYou
3rd Mar 2008, 05:23
Considering the fact that even the series' original developers managed to botch a sequel, I'd say DX3 has a 30% chance of being an excellent game when compared to the first one. It has a good chance of being a decent game in its own right, like IW, but it needs to be able to stand next to the original, in terms of depth, replayability, and story in order to get my thumbs up. I'm trying to keep my spirits up, but with the rise of casual gaming looming behind us like the shadow of a pedophile's van, DX3 seems all but doomed to mediocrity. Watch there be respawn pods littered throughout the maps, making death pointless...

Necros
8th Mar 2008, 11:22
I'm hoping for the second one (voted for that too) but it's really too early to tell. I think a few months later things will be more clear about the game.

Kevyne-Shandris
25th Mar 2008, 12:34
Can't vote, as I think it'll jinx the hope. :o

Want to believe Eidos Montreal can make DX3 remind me of DX1 (can you imagine walking the Hell's Kitchen area, and see the same set, just more modernized with higher poly 3D models; or the voices are so similiar that it's hard to tell the difference; or we get an updated version of Brandt's soundtrack?). But I know reality is a cruel thing that crushes dreams. What we'll get is some new world, with luck some reference of the past, and a new art style that looks nothing like the old game.

One thing I praise about Bethesda's Elder Scrolls series is they keep the same art theme. Oblivion from Morrowind the "look" didn't change much, and I felt like I was basically playing a more modern Morrowind.

Will Eidos Montreal try to keep the same art theme? That JC will still be wearing that trench coat and shades (and can I play him as a redhead, so he doesn't look like Dracula)? Or will we get a that metrosexual or Star Trekish appearance, instead?

Want to hope and dream. Want to say Eidos Montreal can pull what Ion Storm Austin couldn't. I just can't bring myself to vote and say, "yes" they will, as there's no evidence that they will. Everyone knows how publishing works if you follow the gaming industry, and games are destroyed because the publisher pushes a game to completion, while the devs are still trying to work out bugs or putting in the final elements. The result is we get half-baked games.

Got burned with DX2, and my faith has been shattered. Want that faith to return with evidence -- not hype. Then I can say, that Eidos Montreal did what even Specter couldn't.

IceBallz
25th Mar 2008, 14:37
I really don't know how much faith i can give Eidos. My first time to hanging in their community and bombard them with ideas. :D

They maybe listen to us or not. I don't know. But some stuff tells me that there is some dev activity in here. That's good or maybe even great, well it's great. :) It should be some balance with devs and the fan core. I write down everything i get in my mind and it's just up to the devs to look if it's possible to script it into game. I don't demand or wait that everything i come with, will come into final product. I just mindstorming and hopefully devs takes up some great ideas from me/you and look if this things could be done.

I think every fan here, like me. Don't want Deus Ex 3 to fail. It's like our baby, as like the devs baby. So i think, everybody here and there really want this game to be the greattest again.

So yeah. I have faith in Eidos. ;)

:thumbsup:

gamer0004
27th Mar 2008, 09:49
One thing I praise about Bethesda's Elder Scrolls series is they keep the same art theme. Oblivion from Morrowind the "look" didn't change much, and I felt like I was basically playing a more modern Morrowind.


Err... I think exactely the opposite of TES:III and IV...
Morrowind was a deep game, with a great atmosphere and it wasn't the standard fantasy setting. In Oblivion, that changed. The atmosphere was still very good, but it wasn't nearly as deep as Morrowind and damn the fantasy setting was boring (medieval with some magic). Almost as bad as the Gothic series...
Shiveing isles was great though.

Kevyne-Shandris
4th Apr 2008, 19:30
Err... I think exactely the opposite of TES:III and IV...
Morrowind was a deep game

Ah, I was posting about the artwork between the two games!

Consistent art themes is the glue that binds the old with the new. Sure some things can have a fresher look, but what matters is the artistic theme isn't radically changed.

Morrowind and Oblivion's artwork hasn't changed much. Same style in character design, let alone the scenery.

Larington
4th Apr 2008, 20:26
I strongly disagree with the idea its impossible to make a better game than DX1, it just needs to be freed from the usual obstacles to free development that often plague a games production from technical issues with the graphics engine to interfering management who think they know better than the game designer(s) how something should work or what should be added to the game (That one severely damaged the success of a game called planetside btw), in fact I've recently heard about one of the Blizzard devs saying (At GDC I think) that part of the reason they've been so successful is for precisely that reason, Blizzard are also smart enough to recognise that the brand is more important than any release deadline hence its reputation for top notch games that are full to the brim with polish.

Kevyne-Shandris
4th Apr 2008, 21:24
I strongly disagree with the idea its impossible to make a better game than DX1

:mad2:

With the track record so far after DX2, hopes are quite a bit dashed that DX3 will be anything like DX1 in quality; gameplay; and yes, even music.

DX1 had all the qualities lacking in games now that's considered "best sellers" and "epic". Oblivion is a good game, but Bethesda kept many things the same so there wasn't a system shock going from Morrowind to Oblivion. Going from DX1 to DX2 was like switching games -- heck, you didn't even play JC again.

I keep mentioning the game F.E.A.R. but that universe has many lessons how a once GOTY game turned into trash after it's first expansion pack (which killed almost every character; then the second expansion did the DX2 scenerio, and now you're a new pointman -- Monolith looks like they're going with yet another pointman -- zero continuity).

The biggest gripe from diehard fans is that one main issue: lack of or fearing the lack of continuity. Deus Ex is a game like "Gone with the Wind" was to movies -- you can colorize it, but you can't remake a classic that fine.

This is the problem with any sequel/prequel with Deus Ex. The bar has been set incredibly high, so high it'll be a feat of modern game development if DX can be improved (other than updating the 3D models/graphics/sound).

Adding things, even cars, is something to salvage what we fear may be lost in DX3 (one thing they won't be doing is giving fans 35+hrs worth of gameplay -- for shame, as Oblivion showed it can be done with great graphics even).

Larington
4th Apr 2008, 21:30
Its a personal point of principle for me see - If its impossible to make a better game than DX1, even with an ideal development team, budget and publishing model, then why bother making another game at all...
For instance a certain game designer decided to quit working on Pen & Paper RPGs after he realised that the game designs essentially boiled down to which kind(s) of dice should be used in the game, at which point designing the P&P games started to seem sorta empty.

My point of view boils down to refusing to believe that its impossible to improve on DX1, but understanding that it is VERY difficult, even without certain outside constraints that might be imposed on a project.

Kevyne-Shandris
5th Apr 2008, 05:04
Its a personal point of principle for me see - If its impossible to make a better game than DX1, even with an ideal development team, budget and publishing model, then why bother making another game at all...

DX wasn't just another "let's join the bandwagon" game. It's one of the top 100 games of ALL time.

Making Jesus Christ and then trying to create God Himself -- ah, one out of two is as about good as it can get! :lol:

Vasarto
5th Apr 2008, 18:04
I dont have any trust for them because they have not given me anything to work on. The only thing I have to work with is a 30-40 second teaser just telling me there is going to be a third Deus Ex showing a fetus that could of came from the movie "Matrix" and in about three months it is going to be a year from when they made the press release that they are going to make it. I want more maybe story line or maybe some game play or just pictures or maybe to just to put it rest if this game going to take place before or after one of the games. To me this is like area 51 we all know it is there but no one in the government denies or acknowledge it.



Im placing my complete and utter trust in them. I don't know why though. However if they fail in any way than I will hate them for all eternity!

Like the company that did Two words and Vampires rain....both had such hype and Two worlds looked exactaly like Oblivion and when I spent 70 Dollers on the Special Edition. The Special Edition failed in the sense that
the music it came with was only like 4 tracks and you couldn't even copy it.
Also the Game was an Epic Fail.

So if they fail than Eidos AND montreal is on my black list for the rest of my life.

Viz79
6th Apr 2008, 19:22
The problem I have is the fact that development companies these days are trying to go cross console. Eidos practically sold out to the Xbox with DX2 and thus gave us a dumbed down shadow of the original. WE KNOW that this is also going to be cross platform with the 360... so... I've voted good game because I am sure it will be that...

But as good as or better than DX 1? That would require an old school development mentaility that I have not seen for such a long time. Even Betheseda hurt TESIV by developing it cross platform. Interface and may other issues were consolified until modders changed it for the PC. Anyone know of any examples of cross platform games that have not been dumbed down? Heck even Bioshock could have been better but its console 'roots' are clear.

DX1 is one of my favourite games ever. DX3? I don't expect a thing - if it turns out as good as the first, it will restore my faith in PC games again.`And since Eidos already made the poor sequel in DX2, what do we really expect from DX3?

Seems its the case nowadays for everyone - when was the last time Bioware focused on a PC game? Dragon Age.. who knows whats happening to that. A PC 'port' of Mass Effect is now coming. Sigh... it seems to be that to make a really top quality PC game, it needs to be PC only aimed at PC Gamers. When its aimed at BOTH PC and Console gamers something gives.

This sort of thign applies less when its genres such as FPS - see Half Life Orange Box which is spectacular regardless of the console. But then when it comes to RPGs you have dumbed down Oblivion vs PC only Witcher and its easy to see the differences.

rhalibus
6th Apr 2008, 20:19
The problem I have is the fact that development companies these days are trying to go cross console. Eidos practically sold out to the Xbox with DX2 and thus gave us a dumbed down shadow of the original. WE KNOW that this is also going to be cross platform with the 360... so... I've voted good game because I am sure it will be that...

But as good as or better than DX 1? That would require an old school development mentaility that I have not seen for such a long time. Even Betheseda hurt TESIV by developing it cross platform. Interface and may other issues were consolified until modders changed it for the PC. Anyone know of any examples of cross platform games that have not been dumbed down? Heck even Bioshock could have been better but its console 'roots' are clear.

DX3 will have to be a multi-console game--the business model has seen to that. There are a few examples of console games being respectfully ported to PC (Rainbow Six Vegas, GRAW, KOTOR) so I have my hopes up...

One of the big problems with DX2 was that it was supposed to be a sequel to a game, but the resources available for the Xbox were actually less than the recommended requirements for the original Deus Ex: An Xbox had 64 meg of RAM to work with and the GOTY edition of Deus Ex recommended 128 meg. Imagine having to surpass an original game by including bump maps and real-time shadows but have only half the resources...That's why DX2 had such small claustrophobic levels that completely destroyed the sense of an immersive world. Hopefully Xbox 360's minimum 512 meg of RAM and a multi-core processor will prevent this resource problem for DX3...

Larington
6th Apr 2008, 20:46
The problem is that the people who have access to sales figures for PC online distribution are holding the numbers to themselves. Meanwhile, developers & publishers alike are watching as console to PC sales are higher on the console to ratio's of 3 to 1 or higher at retail, though this can be attributed to facts such as PC versions often being released after the console version - IE multi system gamers of which there are many now will buy the first version they can get a hold of which just happens to be the console version, the only thing that a company that needs cashflow will see is the numbers on each different system and less so the reasons for those numbers.

In addition to this piracy levels are scaring developers away from PC development altogether, with companies such as EPIC (Behind Unreal Engine 3 and who have declared that UE4 will be developed with consoles in mind first and PCs second, because as far as they are concerned the market for PC is bottoming out (Never mind the fact that for PC gamers UT3 was a so-so game that honestly, we've already seen before with previous incarnations so there wasn't much impetus to get the new version anyway, but the consolers are more likely to snap it up because they haven't been fed as large a diet of FPS games as PC gamers have - If UT3 was a story based game it could've worked by providing us with a good sequel/prequel/alternate story, but because its essentially a deathmatch game there wasn't enough new in UT3).

In short, my fear that piracy will harm publisher/developer faith in the PC platform has come true. And we're now reaping the disadvantages of high development costs and PC sales which are regarded as lacklustre - The companies have to go multi system on the project to pay the bills and survive to make the next game. And as has been proven in the past, the limited control system that consoles offer (Read, crappy gaming pad with no mouse/keyboard input) leads to the necessity of so called 'dumbing down'.

Yes, I'm blaming the pirates.

That said its possible to design around the shortfallings of a console input system. Take for example typing in password & login details on the computer/hacking screen. You could expand the data vault system so that it stores logins & passwords and lists all of these on the computer access screen when you attempt to log on, so even though you can't type the details, you can still enter them and not lose that element of the gameplay, unfortunately the gameplay mechanic is still fundamentally changed (Though you could argue for the better).

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/unreal-console-success
"The numbers I've been seeing for hardcover PC franchises like Half-Life and Call of Duty are 8:1 or 10:1 sales ratios, consoles to PC, and we can't ignore that you know?"

minus0ne
6th Apr 2008, 23:14
It's easy to blame piracy for this supposed stunted growth in the PC gaming sector, that's for sure (and for one thing, pirates won't speak back). ID Software was one of the first to blame their disappointing sales on piracy, and soon every devhouse with disappointing figures began to blame piracy.

I'm NOT saying piracy doesn't have an effect on sales, I'm saying its effects are overestimated by a mile, and then some. People who never buy games aren't going to any time soon. However people who did buy games did not just stop buying them because they could download them for free. Perhaps developers should look at themselves before pointing fingers. Innovative and original games (not meaning original IPs) are few and far in between these days.

An example to illustrate this: Sins of a Solar Empire, a game that until release practically no one had heard of, is the most pirated game of 2008 so far, yet it's also the best-selling title of this year. It has no copy protection whatsoever.

http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=303512

Also, console games are just as easy to pirate than PC games. In fact, in the majority of console games are much EASIER to pirate than PC games. Modern consoles are easily modified with a chip or custom firmware, most of these hacks basically turn the console into a piracy-jukebox, if I may coin a phrase, allowing owners to simply download and copy the game ISO (DVD image) directly to the console's harddisk and play them. While this is mostly also true for PC games, they often require additional steps like downloading and applying game-specific cracks/updates/cracked-updates etc.

The problem with scapegoating piracy is that it's ignoring the real causes of the imbalance between PC and console gaming. Frankly I think Microsoft is more to blame for this than piracy altogether (intentionally or not). The fact that it takes intimate knowledge of computers, their workings and the software to have your Windows installation in such a state that it'll run games problem-free obviously creates a huge barrier for people to even get into PC gaming in the first place. Vista hasn't thrown down this barrier one bit either, despite great claims by Microsoft of the opposite. In fact vanilla Vista is much slower than XP, yet MS is forcing it down gamers' throats through DX10.

Gary_Savage
7th Apr 2008, 00:55
I like this argument. Console games have been illegally copied even when they used to come on chips and circuit boards, rather than on CD/DVD. I remember kids paying less than a third (maybe a fifth, though I this has become hazy, over the years) of the price of the legal version, for an illegal game cassette/cartridge. With games coming out on CDs and DVDs these days, it is much easier to just copy with a burner.

Also, back when I was in high school I noticed that the guys with the most pirated games were also the ones with the highest allowances, which gets me to think that they are not just trying to get a "better deal," they just didn't want to pay, at all.

These days I hear of people buying modded versions of consoles, online. I am not sure what exactly these mods do (and I am pretty sure that most mods are not intended for running Linux or FreeBSD on an XBox), but certainly some of these mods could be the permanent modifications that minus0ne mentions. So, illegal copy wise, it could be that consoles have more appeal than PCs, going by minus0ne's argument that all the cracks per game (on a PC) can scare away many people.

Just a thought:
Could it be that console game sales are better (i.e., if they are) than PC games, because people like to kick back, and sit on the couch, while they enjoy their gaming, rather than sit at a desk, as if they were at work? I, personally, don't mind being at a desk, since I get very involved in my games, but being at a desk is the only way that I have played (since middle school, at least). Could it be, however, that a lot of gamers just want to chill out, and be in a relaxed pose/posture when blasting baddies away?

Smoke Screen
7th Apr 2008, 01:02
Excellent post minusOne. Youve said only the truth,at least what my experience tells me. To be honest a lot folks here in germany think Vista is a ****up to lure gamers into big brother land. But the majority is to experienced and not that simple minded to fall into a trap like this. D3D10 is a sweet candy,but surely not
sweet enough and not supported by realy good games that are worth the risc.
In fact where are exactly the D3D10 games who stand out qualitywise? Ive seen simply none so far.
As a matter of fact most games in the last years are made to be technological spectacular and quick forgotten to make room for the next games. Well,it simply didnt work that way in the long run. Good games last longer. Remember the late nineties.

WhatsHisFace
8th Apr 2008, 03:20
I give them a lot of credit for even trying. I've got some info that this is a good team though. Guys from Bioware, Silicon Knights and Ubi Montreal. This should be a very awesome game.

minus0ne
8th Apr 2008, 14:59
These days I hear of people buying modded versions of consoles, online. I am not sure what exactly these mods do (and I am pretty sure that most mods are not intended for running Linux or FreeBSD on an XBox), but certainly some of these mods could be the permanent modifications that minus0ne mentions. So, illegal copy wise, it could be that consoles have more appeal than PCs, going by minus0ne's argument that all the cracks per game (on a PC) can scare away many people.
Definately, I won't go into the technical details as the mods may not like it, but pirating a console game is much easier than for your average PC game. Plenty of for example trackers feature more console games than PC games (of course, there simply are more console games than for PC). There are even boatloads of PS3 game ISOs on the net, except the modchip is taking a little longer for that one.

Just a thought:
Could it be that console game sales are better (i.e., if they are) than PC games, because people like to kick back, and sit on the couch, while they enjoy their gaming, rather than sit at a desk, as if they were at work? I, personally, don't mind being at a desk, since I get very involved in my games, but being at a desk is the only way that I have played (since middle school, at least). Could it be, however, that a lot of gamers just want to chill out, and be in a relaxed pose/posture when blasting baddies away?
Well console gaming is a much more casual form than PC gaming. It can be argued that it's more sociable than PC gaming too (not just online multiplayer but playing against people in the same room). It has much of the same appeal as television, as it's perhaps a more passive medium (save, perhaps, for the Wii ;) ). This is not only reflected in the differing control schemes but indeed, where you play it.

In fact where are exactly the D3D10 games who stand out qualitywise? Ive seen simply none so far.
Exactly, and the flagship D3D10 game, Crysis, has a tweak for Windows XP which makes the game just as beautiful as the DX10 version - provided you've got the hardware of course (and as XP is still loads faster, playing this "DX10" game on XP is still the best choice.

I give them a lot of credit for even trying. I've got some info that this is a good team though. Guys from Bioware, Silicon Knights and Ubi Montreal. This should be a very awesome game.
I do too. I already have good hope for this game.

Vasarto
8th Apr 2008, 15:44
I give them a lot of credit for even trying. I've got some info that this is a good team though. Guys from Bioware, Silicon Knights and Ubi Montreal. This should be a very awesome game.

Well I guess the only thing we can do for now is hope they don't muck it up.
Sit back,Talk about all the stuff that would be cool if it was in it. The stuff we hate and don't want. Than wait for it to come out...which may take a while.

zubatov
10th Apr 2008, 22:17
I’m a pessimist concerning DX3 and voted “They won't pull it off, average game” in the poll and I’d like to explain why. Not because I don’t think they can’t make a good game or reach DX1 level. Sure they can. As a matter of fact, I strongly disagree with those who say “it’s impossible to reach the level of the original masterpiece.” I think if developers were indeed going to make a good game it would be hard NOT to make a MUCH BETTER game than DX1 — because, frankly, DX1 was not a masterpiece, in a way it was a terrible game. Now, don’t you misunderstand me: DX1 was and still is my favorite game and I’m playing it right now (decided to try it without hacking and GEP gun), I wouldn’t hesitate nominating it for the title “The best game ever made,” but perfect? Nope. Average at best graphics, lousy implementation, plenty of inconsistencies in both plot and gameplay, etc. It was discussed many times in many places, no need to repeat it again. And developers are perfectly aware of that.

So, why didn’t I vote “Complete trust. DX3 will be better than the first” then, if they ARE in a position to that? Because they won’t.

Well, let’s see what they can do and why the will not do that. To make better than DX1 that can (all or most of that probably was already suggested here):

1. Return composite health, enhancing it with new gameplay effects like requiring both healthy hands for some weapons, blurry vision for head injuries, etc.
2. Return skills. Possibly also with some enhancements like skill-specific points earned by using skill (in addition to non-skill-specific exploration points), ability to train (i.e. exchanging ammo for skill points), etc.
3. Return different ammo types. Again, enhance it with some cross-weapon ammos.
4. More weapons with alt-file instead of reloading for some of them (like bullets/grenades).
5. Combine again grenades and mines, add some new types (bring from DX2) like spider, deployable turret, etc.
6. Return inventory. I mean with weights assigned to each item but preferably without need to constantly toss everything around.
7. More augs (12 sounds right with flashlight out of this number), more selections for each slot. More drones: concussion and scramble in addition to existing EMP, purely reconnaissance with ability to photograph both objects (as evidence for some quests, for example) and aerial view. Mind reading (high-level enhance enhancement for friend vs. foe), telekinesis, etc.
8. More realistic physics where everything won’t start flying around just because you tried to put a box on top of another box.
9. Better models and more models. And with more and random animations.
10. Destructible environment.
11. More use of objects, not just Babel-towering but using planks to make makeshift bridges, ropes, etc.
12. Enhance datacubes/email with ability to carry audio and video. Add (video)phones (to call, be called, hear/see others’ messages).
13. Return all interface pages like logs, conversations, adding/editing notes, etc.
14. Hire a half-decent author to come up with more than decent (for a game) conspiracy story.
15. And the most important: Make it BIG. I mean, just remember the first time you played DX1, how many times did you think “that’s gonna be the last chapter…” just to be presented with a completely new twist in the plot and a whole bunch of new (and huge!) locations. You all prize DX1 for “depth,” well that depth comes directly from the size. As I told, I’m playing it right now, close to finish and the conversation with Paul in the dock feels like a distant past. UNATCO days were like in another lifetime, so much things happened since then. And very different things, for that matter, not just countless rooms cleaned that all look the same.

Is it easy to do all of that? Of course it is. Well, not impossible anyway. But will Eidos do it? I don’t think so. For a variety of reasons:

1. It’s a beaten argument, but yes, some of the suggestions above require interface that doesn’t fit gamepad. And DX3 will be released for consoles, whether you like it or not.
2. We (players) and critics may prize DX1 all the way to the heavens but in reality it didn’t sell well. Not a complete disaster, but not a stellar, more like average, may be even less than average. While Eidos wants DX3 to be a blockbuster. They want to capitalize on DX1’s admiration by critics to promote a new game but not to repeat its lackluster sales.
3. They just don’t make big games these days. DX1 was rated what, like 40 hours? I’m now just entered Sector 4 and I’m 37-something. I new everything, I didn’t wander trying to find stuff, I didn’t read newspapers and most datacubes/emails (well, I did open everything, but didn’t actually read), fast-forwarded some of the lengthiest dialogs. Still, almost 40 hours, not counting reloads. DX2 was like 20 hours, correct? Everybody (in DX crowd) complained it was short, but honestly, it wasn’t short at all compared to its contemporaries. And now Specter himself (some of you mourned his demise from DX franchise) declared he doesn’t want any more to make 20-hour games because only a small fraction of gamers actually finish them. Whether it is correct or not but that IS a universally shared belief in the industry.

So, what Eidos WILL produce in that case? Well, I do believe in their good intentions (toward their shareholders) that their ability to realize them as a game. DX3 will be highly polished, taking advantage of all the modern technologies, with good physics and very nice graphics. It will have relatively decent dialogs with good voice acting. It will have some DX1 things returned, may be even enhanced, but definitely not all. And it will be SHORT. Shorter than DX2, most likely. But it will have more cutscenes, and well-made cutscenes, for what it worth. As of gameplay, it’s likely to be more action than before. More bosses and they will be more bossy bosses — no more killing Simons with a single sword stroke. More swarming on you and more jumping around like a mad rabbit UT-style just to survive. And, of course, there will be very well developed multiplayer component with different kinds of games, ladder, honors, custom maps, chatrooms, instant messaging, etc.

And as a final touch, there will be an announcement that Eidos is now working on an even better game: The World of Deus Ex.

Larington
10th Apr 2008, 22:57
Larington would like to make it clear he is unimpressed with the WoWification that seems to be going on at the moment, citing that not all games need to be multiplayer focused and that to do so would be very much detrimental to games development in general. Multiplayer games are not the be all and end all of gaming despite some views to the contrary. Indeed, a very large number of the MMOs that have attempted to get some of WoWs steam have been complete failures, this isn't a co-incidence, there simply isn't room for lots of MMOs on the market.

Alternatively, trying to compete with the Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4 multiplayer hype trains is an exercise in futility, there are things that DX will clearly do far better as a single player game. Even in DX1 that multiplayer stuff was added as an afterthough in a patch as a "hey wouldn't it be cool if we tried this", the result was interesting but not necessarily worth the effort of getting it all to work.

Vasarto
11th Apr 2008, 02:21
Larington would like to make it clear he is unimpressed with the WoWification that seems to be going on at the moment, citing that not all games need to be multiplayer focused and that to do so would be very much detrimental to games development in general. Multiplayer games are not the be all and end all of gaming despite some views to the contrary. Indeed, a very large number of the MMOs that have attempted to get some of WoWs steam have been complete failures, this isn't a co-incidence, there simply isn't room for lots of MMOs on the market.

Alternatively, trying to compete with the Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4 multiplayer hype trains is an exercise in futility, there are things that DX will clearly do far better as a single player game. Even in DX1 that multiplayer stuff was added as an afterthough in a patch as a "hey wouldn't it be cool if we tried this", the result was interesting but not necessarily worth the effort of getting it all to work.

Yes you are correct my friend. Besides Dues Ex started out as a single player game and than the multiplayer version...which I have yet to play..thanks to this I cant use the Newest hacks like the one that improves the games graphics and augs/skills ect. Dues Ex was an fantastic game despite that.
plus wasn't it the best game of 1997?

Still even today we still play that game! Single player or not. Im playing it again through Realistic mode right now! Im up to the part where I have sent the message paul wanted me to send. Than im off to save his life!


Anyway I do not think they will bother with multiplayer....yet. Im sure the truth was told when the statment of them all knowing Deus Ex inside and out was true. Becuse of that im sure they will do a great job and keep it to its roots and concentraite on the single player first.

Bloodwolf806
11th Apr 2008, 19:24
Will never beat DX1, but they can at least make the 3 as good as the first.

+1... I think DX3 will be much better than IW, and will come close to DX1's greatness, but shan't surpass it.

c37579
11th Apr 2008, 21:15
plus wasn't it the best game of 1997?


I doubt that, it came out in 2000 didnt it :rasp:

c37579
11th Apr 2008, 21:38
I have to disagree with a couple of things


6. Return inventory. I mean with weights assigned to each item but preferably without need to constantly toss everything around.
7. More augs (12 sounds right with flashlight out of this number), more selections for each slot. More drones: concussion and scramble in addition to existing EMP, purely reconnaissance with ability to photograph both objects (as evidence for some quests, for example) and aerial view. Mind reading (high-level enhance enhancement for friend vs. foe), telekinesis, etc.


6. i likes the tetris inventory, it made the game (for me anyway) more real, as for a weight one, that could work, but i still think i would prefer the tetris one, maybe with an auto-sort function though, so id i have 2 spaces i can pick up a crowbar, because it will have sorted it out for me

7. I agree we need more augs, but 6 isnt enough i think, the origonal had 18 (i think) and those were great, and then people have come up with more augs to include aswell, so 12 wont cut it i think

as for the picture thing, i dont think it should be an aug, it should just be an item, but you can save the pictures if you want, and it shouldnt be part of a mission, that would seem to constricting, i dont think i would waste an aug spot for a camera aug because i needed it for 1 or 2 missions, and if it was an item i might just ignore it, thinking i couldnt pick it up


Average at best graphics, lousy implementation, plenty of inconsistencies in both plot and gameplay, etc. It was discussed many times in many places, no need to repeat it again. And developers are perfectly aware of that.


the graphics may not be amazing, but they will have been better when the game came out, not the top back then either, but still pretty good, and i never really noticed any inconsistencies, just a couple of minor things, like the gep gun being heavier when you hold it etc.

plus i dont think there is a perfect game, they all have problems, be it bugs, or gameplay, but i think DX is the closest we have to the "perfect" game

other than those few things, great suggestions, and i agree, but i prefer to be optimistic, because if everyone is pessimistic, the devs wont feel to great about the game, and it WILL suck, optimisim is the way to a great game :)

Larington
12th Apr 2008, 16:42
I think whats starting to bother me a little at the moment is that there are three active threads that basically amount to people arguing that they think the game isn't going to be great, usually because its a new team or because they just don't believe its possible to beat the original.

What bothers me is that they are doing so because of their perceptions of games development that have been formed from previous, err, dissapointments. On top of this, we've so far had, what, a teaser trailer, one piece of concept art and amongst them the suggestion that the game will be a prequel.
We haven't seen any info on gameplay concepts, samples of just how the story is going to work or any of that, yet it almost seems as though people want to write the game off already. I guess its a variation on celebrity syndrome, this nice juicy target that people can talk about and say stuff like "she'll be in rehab before the year is out"... And I wonder if this kind of pessimism could become a self fulfilling prophecy.

Sorry if this steps on anyones toes, but its how I'm beginning to feel reading some threads. Still if the criticisms are constructive, I don't tend to mind.

c37579
12th Apr 2008, 19:51
I think whats starting to bother me a little at the moment is that there are three active threads that basically amount to people arguing that they think the game isn't going to be great, usually because its a new team or because they just don't believe its possible to beat the original.

What bothers me is that they are doing so because of their perceptions of games development that have been formed from previous, err, dissapointments. On top of this, we've so far had, what, a teaser trailer, one piece of concept art and amongst them the suggestion that the game will be a prequel.
We haven't seen any info on gameplay concepts, samples of just how the story is going to work or any of that, yet it almost seems as though people want to write the game off already. I guess its a variation on celebrity syndrome, this nice juicy target that people can talk about and say stuff like "she'll be in rehab before the year is out"... And I wonder if this kind of pessimism could become a self fulfilling prophecy.

Sorry if this steps on anyones toes, but its how I'm beginning to feel reading some threads. Still if the criticisms are constructive, I don't tend to mind.

this is what ive been saying! we should be optimistic, they know what poeple loved about the first, what they didnt and the same about the second, they can only go up if they try, and they will because.. well they have to!
im glad someone agrees larington :P

Larington
12th Apr 2008, 21:32
Aha, here it is:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=16365


So how many developers will be working on the game? According to D'Astous, teams will stay small and dev cycles will be lengthier. He stressed, "We’re only working on AAA, major titles. We’re going to be developing only major AAA games, using only next-gen technology."

Therefore, he continued, "We will want to limit our dev teams to a human-sized team of 80 people at the very highest of the peak in the production cycle. We don’t want to become a huge studio where there’s over 100 people on a title. We want a smaller, multi-discipline group that are tightly knit together. But by doing so, we will give them at least 18 to 24 months for the production cycle."

D'Astous believes that attitude will be appreciated on the local development scene and in the industry as a whole: "That's music to a lot of ears over here," he said. "Some developers are really trying to push titles out the door within 12-15 months; we're working on plans for our first few titles that will only be released after 24 months."

and something tells me another quote from D'Astous is going to get swear filtered:


Returning to the subject of his preference for a smaller team and a longer development cycle, D'Astous concluded, "We’re trying to be as transparent to our employees, as transparent to our external people of the studio – we don’t like bull****. We want to have a clear plan and stick with it. Too often I think products being delayed several times is a disaster for morale, quality and efficiency."

Yep it was... As the aging internet meme goes: LOLS

Smoke Screen
13th Apr 2008, 23:16
we should be optimistic, they know what poeple loved about the first, what they didnt and the same about the second, they can only go up if they try, and they will because.. well they have to!

Well,the same i thought about Bioshock or UT3 - before i played them myself.
I guess your are near the truth Larington.

pHdeus
17th Apr 2008, 11:20
The existence of this forum gives us a voice.
All we can do is provide the best and most thoughtful advice possible.
When we do this, we have done our best to impact the result.
I am glad to have a voice and this opportunity.

Aminevo
17th Apr 2008, 15:28
The existence of this forum gives us a voice.
All we can do is provide the best and most thoughtful advice possible.
When we do this, we have done our best to impact the result.
I am glad to have a voice and this opportunity.

True, we have to do the best we can.

Im not sure if they will be able to pull it off, we will have to see more.

Voltaire
17th Apr 2008, 20:25
Good grief I hope this game is good.
The development team would do the series an injustice if they were to churn out anything less than top-notch on this one, and that's not something I would normally say.
It might not have the same magic as DX1 did, but that's only because it was seemingly unprecedented in its whole mood and mindset towards intellectual gaming that is needed in these days of a new "soccer" game (and its spinoffs) being scraped out of the programming barrel every **** year.

minus0ne
23rd Apr 2008, 18:19
To anyone who still thinks piracy isn't as prevalent on consoles as it is on PC;

http://life.tweakers.net/nieuws/53125/illegale-versie-grand-theft-auto-iv-circuleert-op-internet.html
(It's Dutch, but you can translate using http://babelfish.altavista.com )

In short:

As of Wednesday afternoon an illegal version of Grand Theft Auto IV (X360) can be found on the internet. The actual game itself doesn't appear until next week, April 29. A group of hackers known as "Icon" cracked the game and put it on the internet by means of a torrent file.

Tracer Tong
23rd Apr 2008, 22:13
To anyone who still thinks piracy isn't as prevalent on consoles as it is on PC;

http://life.tweakers.net/nieuws/53125/illegale-versie-grand-theft-auto-iv-circuleert-op-internet.html
(It's Dutch, but you can translate using http://babelfish.altavista.com )

In short:

Talk about preemptive strikes...:nut:

Larington
25th Apr 2008, 18:26
But you still have to mod the console first don't you? In which case it takes more effort than merely downloading a pirated PC game which as far as I'm aware doesn't require as much effort to get running on the PC.

Not sure if I even care anyway, to be honest.

Necros
25th Apr 2008, 18:58
I hope this team can create a great sequel/prequel/whatever it is. Yeah, some games make me worried too, seeing how many of them are made for console kids or young gamers or just simply casual gamers. But I have hope too, because of developers like Gearbox, Junction Point (I have faith! :D) or games like The Witcher, Dragon Age (seems to be shaping into a great game) or The Experiment. And from what I know about the few developers revealed working at Eidos Montreal, they have good credits too, so I think they are talented and I like what I've read/seen from the director too.


IW was Harvey's fault, and he wont be working on this game.
Oh, man... How tired I am of reading this over and over again... Sure, you can blame Harvey but he had a major part in DX1's success too, so I wouldn't name him the public enemy. And he wasn't the only one working on DX: IW.

minus0ne
25th Apr 2008, 19:37
But you still have to mod the console first don't you? In which case it takes more effort than merely downloading a pirated PC game which as far as I'm aware doesn't require as much effort to get running on the PC.
Well modding is usually done by a third party, I think it's about 50€ with the chip included, also, it's a one-time thing (and many people nowadays actually buy the console already modded), not something to be repeated in various ways for every game.

Not sure if I even care anyway, to be honest.
It may be moot, but I'm just tired of people yelling piracy is killing pc gaming.

Larington
25th Apr 2008, 22:29
If I remember rightly, if Harvey hadn't been on the team of DX1 the game might never have had its skills system.

As for piracy problems on PC, I don't honestly know just how prevalent they are, what I do know is that the numbers of pirated copies of CoD4 were apparently "shocking" (Whatever THAT means) and that Epic in all their umm, wisdom (?) have decided to make the next Unreal Engine console centric because as far as they are concerned piracy is a problem on the PC.

Hasn't killed PC gaming, but it will forever tarnish its reputation, perhaps more so than is fair and this has the annoying consequence that the sales self-concious companies will flock to the safest bet which at the moment is the consoles - For now. Whether certain game companies are right to say that they were killed off by piracy on the PC or not, is probably an argued matter of perspective.

EDIT: I myself find this notion of PC gaming being dead somewhat insulting as well tbh, especially considering that the XBOX360 and PS3 have rightly been described by one of my games dev lecturers as basically being nothing more than a glorified gaming PC. Heck, its my understanding that its quite possible to plug mouse and keyboard into at least one of them.

HeliosHasSpoken2052
26th Apr 2008, 06:31
Before I share my thoughts on the topic at hand, I would just like to say this is a wonderful board. I've been a huge fan of the Deus Ex series since 2003 when I first played the original. I also enjoyed the sequel, Deus Ex: Invisible War. It's absolutely great to hear that Deus Ex 3 will indeed be made and I'm glad to see so many passionate fans of the games congregate on this awesome forum. Hello to everyone!

I am convinced that Eidos Montreal has the very best of intentions and they are going to put every effort into pleasing the fans throughout the course of development, but they maybe in over their heads. They may not yet fully realize the magnitude of these games and the discernment of the fans. As long as they do their best at creating a compelling, rich and thought-provoking story with intriguing characters, I will be happy. I see alot of optimism, creativity and sheer enthusiasm from them and that's a great sign.

jordan_a
21st May 2008, 13:06
This game will rock, in Canadians we trust! :D

sea
22nd May 2008, 12:15
To begin, I would like to state a couple of things. Deus Ex is an incredible game that has never been matched since its release in 2000. Deus Ex: Invisible War, meanwhile, is a disappointment for a number of reasons; while some believe that it's a good game when the original is ignored, I don't. Poor design ideas run like water through that game. If a new Deus Ex game is going to be a critical and commercial success, it must follow in the footsteps of the first title, not its sequel. This is absolutely key. Deus Ex is already very close to being a perfect game; it has its ups and downs, but it is mechanically sound and features gameplay that still has not been surpassed eight years later, much less properly emulated. A Deus Ex sequel doesn't need a fundamental change or gimmick, unlike some games that tend to stagnate. Simply put, it needs more: more conspiracies, more commentaries, more gameplay choices, more items, more environments. Obviously that doesn't mean I want part of the game to be a kart race through a fiery volcano; that "more" has to exist within the context of the game.

Eidos Montreal has a lot of talent under its wing, and while it isn't a proven studio just yet, it clearly understands the importance of their work to gamers and are passionate themselves about what they create. While I believe that the development talent is there to create a worthy follow-up with enough time, effort and guidance, market conditions are such that we likely won't see that worthy follow-up. With consoles more popular than ever, a simplified interface is absolutely necessary, and with that, usually, comes simplified gameplay. This is one of Invisible War's failings.

However, that doesn't mean that Deus Ex 3 will be another Invisible War. On the contrary, in fact; I think that Deus Ex 3 will completely trump Invisible War in every respect. Many of Invisible War's problems don't stem from its console development at all, and in fact, I find it rather hard to believe that someone could make the same mistakes twice. Things like universal ammo, a sterile, lifeless story, unlikable characters with poor dialogue that lacked the philosophical commentary of the first game, clunky interface, and bad AI were not flaws that came to be because of the game's console development; as we all know, conflicts within Invisible War's development team are what led to so many of its shortcomings. Eidos Montreal, meanwhile, seems to have a clear vision in mind of the game they want to create, which is absolutely the first step in the right direction.

I think looking to a game like BioShock is simultaneously a good and bad idea for Dues Ex 3. While BioShock was largely a success at launch and sold over two million copies across PCs and consoles, that was largely due to the large amount of hype, press and advertising that accompanied the game's launch. Let's face it, the reason most good games don't sell has nothing to do with complexity, and it has everything to do with advertising. Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4 are decent games, but their publishers spent millions of dollars promoting them. They could be junk and they would still sell, provided that they were advertised properly.

BioShock, although an excellent game, was also a victim of "market castration"; much of what would have made it an innovative experience was removed when play-testers complained that it was "too complicated" for them. I argue that that complexity is irrelevant. Gamers are the intelligent sort. Getting a game to sell isn't a matter of dumbing it down to the point where even the most booze-loaded Madden-playing frat boy can understand it; it's about knowing your target audience and delivering a quality product that caters to that audience, while at the same time drawing in new customers. The target audience, in Deus Ex 3's case, shouldn't be "males 15 to 35," it should be "Deus Ex fans." Deus Ex is a good enough game to stand on its own. It doesn't need to make concessions in order to sell. Gamers know quality, and they will come for it - provided they know it exists.

And of course, that's where advertising comes in. Deus Ex is a beloved franchise, but considering the exposure the first two games had, it'd might as well be a newcomer to the industry; if Eidos wants their iteration to be a financial success, they will need to slather on the hype, dote on the press (this shouldn't be too hard considering the first game's legacy), and advertise the hell out of the game. What's cool about Deus Ex? JC Denton is cool. He's got a trench coat, he's got guns, he's got mods. He's a badass with an intellect and doesn't take "no" for an answer. He's in a world where things are upside-down and secret plots are in motion, and it's up to him to expose the lies. Advertise the game in this vein and it will sell.

I realise I've gone a bit off the topic, but it should be clear that I love Deus Ex (unfortunately, this isn't the place to create a multi-part essay on steps for Deus Ex 3's success; I'm rather disorganised here, certainly). As one of my favourite games, it has a special place in my heart, and it saddens me that it has yet to have a worthy follow-up. If the developers or publishers of the game are reading this, I hope they take my suggestions seriously, because, as a gamer, a fan of Deus Ex, a critic, and an intelligent human being, my experience has shown me what works and what doesn't when it comes to videogames. I hope that Eidos Montreal's experience shows them this as well, and that they'll be bold enough to act on that experience.

jcp28
24th May 2008, 00:26
Who exactly does Eidos Montreal have working for them? I know they started out as a QA department from something a user said here.

Honestly though, I'm not sure if they are quite up to the task in making a game as complex as the original.

Nathan2000
24th May 2008, 11:27
Who exactly does Eidos Montreal have working for them? I know they started out as a QA department from something a user said here.

Check Employees' Testimonials (http://www.eidosmontreal.com/en/testimonials.html). Many of them worked on Ubisoft games like Splinter Cell, Far Cry (at least on XBox) or Myst. I stopped worrying when I read it.

JaYp146
28th May 2008, 15:33
I haven't been very impressed with their other games. Too "same-ish" and not very innovative, IMHO. Granted, with the DX franchise, they're given a bit more complexity in story/design to work with. I have high hopes, but am not impressed with their past work.

DLGenesis
12th Jun 2008, 10:40
voted for just a good game..

no sequel or prequel will beat DX1..
DX1 set the standard with which can only be compared to. the game was a legend and it will die in that fashion..


i feel the same way about unreal tournament.
all newer releases are just filled with crap and had lost its simplicity that made it the greatness that it was..

like the innocence of a child.. as it grows older it loses the essense that was

AaronJ
12th Jun 2008, 19:55
no prequel will beat DX1..

I've edited accordingly.

jordan_a
29th Jun 2008, 16:45
Vote. :D

Lady_Of_The_Vine
29th Jun 2008, 17:01
I voted for option one: "Complete trust. DX3 will be better than the first"

An obvious case of devoted belief/blind faith, I guess. :o :p

And better than the first?! :eek:
Yeah, why not. :)


The challenge has been set and they're not going to let us down. :cool:

Kevyne-Shandris
29th Jun 2008, 17:49
What's missing in the poll is: Skeptical.

After DX:IW and it's aftermath, that's my real choice.

Burned once, and not going down that path again. Heavy doses of salt on all official (and unofficial now) announcements about the game; concept art; interviews; trailers; and yes, even that teaser.

It'll get here when it gets here, and only then will anyone know if it's part of the canon or not.

ikenstein
30th Jun 2008, 08:26
Certainly true. Shootergames (and related games) that fall not into the fastfood
category are rare and mostly origin from eastern europe. Its anyhow strange
that those folks who have the longest experience are not able to get their ****
together and create something that goes beyond a level from years ago.
Its definitly not a technology related problem and not a lack of creativity,they just got owned by suits.

qft

in the old days games were made by people who wanted to make great games. now games are made by people who want to make money. decisions are made by suits in a meeting room -

suit 1 - 'we will get a bigger market share by removing anything complicated from the game. lets make the game real simple, so that even a two year can understand it.'

suit 2 - 'we can achieve synergies in a win win environment by reducing the number of levels to ten.'

suit 3 - 'our focus group says people like sports. lets turn it into a football game.'

suit 1 - 'lets touch base...'

and that is why most modern games suck.

AaronJ
30th Jun 2008, 17:38
What's missing in the poll is: Skeptical.

After DX:IW and it's aftermath, that's my real choice.

Burned once, and not going down that path again. Heavy doses of salt on all official (and unofficial now) announcements about the game; concept art; interviews; trailers; and yes, even that teaser.

It'll get here when it gets here, and only then will anyone know if it's part of the canon or not.

You are making the most sense here.

gh0s7
30th Jun 2008, 19:46
Going for the "neutral" vote on this one: "Just a good game".

Because I'll always hold the first as the best from the all DX' games. :D

Kevyne-Shandris
30th Jun 2008, 22:06
suit 2 - 'we can achieve synergies in a win win environment by reducing the number of levels to ten.'

Oh, that made my day. That's exactly how they talk too. Only thing missing is the catch all, "I'm excited"...

"I'm excited we can achieve synergies in a win win environment by reducing the number of levels to ten."

Very sad, but true.

Freddo
1st Jul 2008, 11:42
There isn't really any substantial information available yet to make a proper opinion.

However, Eidos should be well aware of the shortcomings of Deus Ex 2, and if they manage to just fix those and stay "true" to the game universe, then we will have a very nice game in our hands. It may not be as good as the first Deus Ex, but should give an enjoyable ride.

jamesthefishy
1st Jul 2008, 11:53
I have voted that the game will suck and fail. This way I won't be let down, only surprised happily.

Kevyne-Shandris
1st Jul 2008, 15:25
There isn't really any substantial information available yet to make a proper opinion.

However, Eidos should be well aware of the shortcomings of Deus Ex 2, and if they manage to just fix those and stay "true" to the game universe, then we will have a very nice game in our hands. It may not be as good as the first Deus Ex, but should give an enjoyable ride.

What we do know, from the basis of the status quo in gaming now (and now that gaming is more corporate, Eidos-Montreal isn't the cowboy studio like Eidos-Dallas and Eidos-Austin were) -- and Specter is out of the equation -- fans may just get what they feared: a 10hr game; no plot; disjointed storyline; nothing to read (as ADHD/ADD folks don't read anymore); no options but to kill-kill-kill; weapons before brains; linear gameplay (as casual gamers can't be bothered by any sense of nothing to do but, go-go-go); graphics before gameplay; godawful load times because of it; system specs of the Crysis level to play; and even generic music studios are pumping out even in AAA titles.

Want it sooooo badly, but know after DX:IW Santa Claus not only doesn't exist, he's a cruel thug in a red suit.

Balancing the want and reality IS the hardest part in this wait. In the meantime, it's low profile; no hype; it gets here and THEN we'll see IF it even lives up to it's namesake. If it's a Project Snowblind, put a fork in it, it's cooked.

Freddo
1st Jul 2008, 18:58
and Specter is out of the equation
That may be a good thing, considering he was in the equation for DX:IW.

The current devs don't have to look far to see what went wrong with DX:IW. If they just study Deus Ex and what made it great, reshape it with new levels, better graphics, improved gameplay and a slightly worse story (don't think they will beat the DX story no matter how hard they try); it will turn out to be an enjoyable game.

HouseOfPain
1st Jul 2008, 19:52
If they **** this up I will be so pissed. There is SO MUCH POTENTIAL for this game. SO MUCH! I wish I could just go in there and be like "Ok dont **** THIS up, and dont mess THAT up, and oh.. it isnt a prequel, noob!"

But alas...

Kevyne-Shandris
3rd Jul 2008, 02:02
If they **** this up I will be so pissed. There is SO MUCH POTENTIAL for this game. SO MUCH! I wish I could just go in there and be like "Ok dont **** THIS up, and dont mess THAT up, and oh.. it isnt a prequel, noob!"

But alas...

If we were only there during DX:IW. ;)

To think of it, some of this new team were but kids 8 years ago.

But they have to do it their way, and if done well they'll get the kudos; fail, feel the burn.

Would make many gamers happy campers if they pull off the impossible. It'll be a Christmas present of the decade for gamers, as it'll have the elements you read on dozens of game forums that they cry that's missing. A little of the old, with a little of the new and it's a hit. Continue the franchise on theme, and Eidos can get out of the rut. If the videos show that they keep true to the world, it'll be a first for me to even pre-order (and I'd buy more than one). Reward good development always!

Nanite
3rd Jul 2008, 05:28
It will probably be an utter failure. Not in the sense that the developers aren't organized or run into technical troubles, or because they are running out of money - they are probably in good condition. Infact, they will probably construct a solid game since they are using a game engine that *they* are familiar with. All the game 'features' will be implemented flawlessly It will probably be a little bit better than most other games on the shelf at the time.

However, it will be failure in the sense that the game has a new development team, they decided to use another engine besides the unreal engine which only so few people already can use it. There's a reason why the unreal engine costs almost 1,000,000$ to license because it's constructed well, powerful, can run efficiently and still look nice on low end systems, cross platform, and has a great SDK and features which extends its capabilities beyond many other game engines. Had this Eidos Montreal team decided to use this engine, I probably would have purchashed this game regardless of how terrible the content was because I know we have a veteran community who can make something of the DX universe with the Unreal engine. Now, I'm just going to wait for others to voice their opinions after its release and if it's negative like DX:IW, I'll just wait until the price is a bargain or when the shipping is a few dollars more expensive than the game itself. We shall see if they can restore the look and feel of DX1 with their engine. Not to mention, it's pretty obvious this won't be for PC only and this will have a strong, and unfortunately, blatent influence on the game.

It's sad considering Eidos really has only one shot at getting this right. DX1 may have not have been an instant success, but now there is a large audience and fan base patiently waiting for this title to reappear again and Eidos can really pull together and try to grab them.

Kevyne-Shandris
3rd Jul 2008, 05:48
Modders aren't going to like the new engine, as they'll have to learn a new way to mod (IF they can get the tools).

The beauty of DX is that you can use almost any 3D animation software to edit it, too (especially Milkshape3D or even Wings3D). My biggest beef with these new ***gled engines is the REQUIREMENT to use 3dsmax or Maya (programs I'll never afford getting, being long out of school for a student edition) to mod -- then forget to offer an exporter/importer (or severely limit it, as the F.E.A.R. franchise did it -- and why that mod community is basically lifeless, even if the MP is offered for free).

Devs REALLY need to offer a exporter/importer that can be used on more affordable 3D programs. Or just allow a common universal format like .3ds, so modders can easily import/export the models. Animations I don't know a solution for, and that's a saddest one to lose of them all. Can't combine animations or even reduce them, as the import will remove the keys. Proprietary 3D programs SUCK for this. :mad2:

Don't know if DX3 will suffer the same fate, but crippling modding can impact the utility of DX3 over time, on either end.

AaronJ
5th Jul 2008, 02:56
But the easier solution for the devs is to not support the modding community at all.

Ergo, I have constructed a diagram of the Tomb Raider: Legend engine and its effect on me.

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w234/GlobalNode/crash-plane-car.jpg


=Edit= I just read through that interview.


D'Astous: We're working with the PR department to make sure that we time releases of trailers and information in coordination with the production cycle. I would like to say that by summer next year we'll have a couple of big things to show. It wouldn't be in our favor to wait until 2009 or whatever to show something. We're confident in what we're doing, so we'll definitely want to release some content eventually. So fans shouldn't despair, I'd expect more information on what we're doing next summer.

SEE I TOLD YOU ALL. HALLELUJAH. All this time spent locked in my basement with a computer and a bucket of raisins will not go to waste.

Romeo
8th Jul 2008, 07:40
Modding is one of the absolute best ways to keep a game going long past it's prime (Total Annihilation, FarCry and StarCraft come to mind).

Nanite
9th Jul 2008, 02:20
Modding is one of the absolute best ways to keep a game going long past it's prime (Total Annihilation, FarCry and StarCraft come to mind).

I'm sure the engine they are using for DX3 will have an SDK for the modding community but ask the modding community from DX whether they care about that engine over the unreal engine. How many are going to bother to learn it or tolerate it? Maybe they need to advertise their engine like Unreal has: http://www.unrealtechnology.com/

jordan_a
9th Jul 2008, 02:32
I'm glad to see that 60% of the voters think the game will reach or surpass DX1. That's the spirit!!!! :cool:

HouseOfPain
9th Jul 2008, 02:38
I HATE the unreal engine when its not used in Epic games.

The biggest issue I have is the texture load speed.


I HATE GOING into a level, and sitting there WATCHING all the textures load up for about 10 seconds. Its so sad!

Epic themselves barley have this problem, but other companies that use Unreal usually do a horrible job with it****

Nanite
9th Jul 2008, 02:53
I HATE the unreal engine when its not used in Epic games.

The biggest issue I have is the texture load speed.


I HATE GOING into a level, and sitting there WATCHING all the textures load up for about 10 seconds. Its so sad!

Epic themselves barley have this problem, but other companies that use Unreal usually do a horrible job with it****

I don't think I ever had this problem or any other problem with an Unreal based game. What computer do you run?

HouseOfPain
9th Jul 2008, 03:15
Not computer :rasp:

But games like Mass Effect I know have this problem for both P.C. and 360.

HouseOfPain
9th Jul 2008, 03:19
By textures I mean details, like check this video out (watch the walls)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTkbvZpsOfA

also

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDUkgxNkCBk&feature=related

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_34ripPuCk&feature=related

Kevyne-Shandris
9th Jul 2008, 03:49
I'm sure the engine they are using for DX3 will have an SDK for the modding community but ask the modding community from DX whether they care about that engine over the unreal engine. How many are going to bother to learn it or tolerate it? Maybe they need to advertise their engine like Unreal has: http://www.unrealtechnology.com/

IF the engine runs the game fine, and modders see it can make their job easier, even they wouldn't mind it in the end.

The way F.E.A.R.'s SDK was distributed should be a model for other publishers -- comes complete with video tuts (and that game is a heck a lot easier to mod than most, as the tools make editing NOT a chore. They don't crash, and work as intended!).

Romeo
9th Jul 2008, 03:56
Not computer :rasp:

But games like Mass Effect I know have this problem for both P.C. and 360.

Actually, Mass Effect is about the only one that does, and that's because the outside layers of characters and environments in Mass Effect have so much detail, both computers and the 360 struggle to load them quickly.

Nanite
9th Jul 2008, 06:08
By textures I mean details, like check this video out (watch the walls)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTkbvZpsOfA

also

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDUkgxNkCBk&feature=related

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_34ripPuCk&feature=related

You just helped the argument for PC > Console lol

HouseOfPain
9th Jul 2008, 09:02
Perhaps I have, but seriously, no Unreal engine ;)

DXeXodus
9th Jul 2008, 09:55
I am personally quite happy that they are not using the Unreal engine. it's an expensive engine and Eidos Montreal are on a tight budget at the moment. The Crystal Dynamics engine is an in-house engine and therefore the support is easily available and obviously free. That means that they can use the extra money that is available to make the game better. :)

gamer0004
9th Jul 2008, 15:36
I don't think I ever had this problem or any other problem with an Unreal based game. What computer do you run?

It's in GoW on the 360 too.

Kevyne-Shandris
9th Jul 2008, 19:00
I am personally quite happy that they are not using the Unreal engine. it's an expensive engine and Eidos Montreal are on a tight budget at the moment. The Crystal Dynamics engine is an in-house engine and therefore the support is easily available and obviously free. That means that they can use the extra money that is available to make the game better. :)

For a publisher it would make more sense in the long run to design an engine for it's own games. Yes, initially it's more expensive than the off the shelf type, but devs can customize it in real-time with inhouse support, than getting the usual business turn-around-and-wait problem. That offsite support is okay in the beginning, but during crunch time it's a mess.

How it'll perform versus the Unreal engine is something we'll just have to find out. Hopefully it's mod friendly, knowing how deep modders got into this game and want to continue the tradition.

All I want in a engine...


Import/Export model converter that allows using a common format (e.g., .3ds), without losing keys, model settings and UV. Major help if there was a MilkShape3D mod, since that 3D proggie is being used by many modders as a converter.

Editors that work, and carefully documented on their use (e.g., how the F.E.A.R. SDK is distributed).

HouseOfPain
9th Jul 2008, 19:53
(e.g., how the F.E.A.R. SDK is distributed)

FEAR!!!


FEEEEAR!!!!!!
:nut:
-implodes-

sorry. That was way off topic but FEAR!! EVERYDAY! YOU + FEAR = Marriage + Children e.o

jcp28
10th Jul 2008, 02:27
I still wished that they used an engine a little newer than the Crystal Dynamics one. I'm not up on game engines like I used to be, but I would think Eidos would have something with a little more power. I don't need a beutifu-looking game. I just need one that can hold it's own against the best-loooking games of today. But I suppose if it lengthens the development cycle too much....:rolleyes:

GoranAgar
10th Jul 2008, 06:09
I think it is going to be quite cool. :)






http://www.catagar.com/load/EidosCanada.jpg

DXeXodus
10th Jul 2008, 06:48
^^ I lol'd :D

Yeah, thats kind how I picture Eidos Montreal right now.

jcp28
10th Jul 2008, 15:43
^

Well sure, but anybody notice that the igloo appeared to be melting? Maybe that's a representation of their psyche from listening to people express their rather large concerns.:scratch:

René
10th Jul 2008, 18:42
We do not live in igloos! :mad2:

HouseOfPain
10th Jul 2008, 20:15
Then what if not igloos? Tents made of ice? Frozen water huts? huh?

Least you're keeping your CPU's nice and cool =D

AaronJ
10th Jul 2008, 23:19
Us Canadians band together while defending our country! The first "milk in bags" comment I see will be dealt with Gunther Hermann style.

btw, milk in bags doesnt exist. You heard it from a Canadian.

HouseOfPain
11th Jul 2008, 00:33
What aboot that damned Canadian Bacon?

eh?

Romeo
11th Jul 2008, 00:41
Just as everyone knows, Candadian Bacon is the best. And I've slept in a igloo... They were quite wet. Pretty sure a high-voltage electronic device in one could be considered a "hazard". lol

GoranAgar
11th Jul 2008, 08:55
Ok, all I have to say now: The beaver is a proud and noble animal!

My wife is Canadian, I am allowed to say these things. http://www.catsuitandponytail.com/files/canadaf.gif

gamer0004
11th Jul 2008, 14:47
btw, milk in bags doesnt exist. You heard it from a Canadian.

It does exist in Holland... Well, you could consider it a bag :scratch:

jordan_a
12th Jul 2008, 15:10
http://www.catagar.com/load/EidosCanada.jpgAnd a nice canadian
http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/1852/poutineyl6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/1852/poutineyl6.0ecff4651f.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=501&i=poutineyl6.jpg)

jcp28
12th Jul 2008, 18:24
^
Naturally, that kind of thing just makes me more eager.:D

We want more game!

Oym
14th Jul 2008, 18:27
I'm not sure if I should trust Eidos Montréal nor keep this faith that drived us all around here , considering that I don't have that much to work on ..

However , I'm a little pessimistic , I don't think they will be able to create a game as deep and intelligent as Deus Ex 1 ..

In my opinion , what Deus Ex 1 created was unique , something close to what we could call a " bliss " , something that left us all mad ( or at least some of us ) .. Something that I had never felt in other games ..

Something bigger than awesome graphics which explains why so many people consider it as one of the best game ever made , and why a tribute for deus ex is always worthy ..

Actually I'm afraid that a focus on graphics and gameplay will only affect the rest .. But I could be wrong , what else could I say ?

It's up to them ..

So I think it will be a good game , but not that good .. Let's hope for it .

jcp28
15th Jul 2008, 00:26
That's pretty much what I and a few other people I don't really know by name here think. It won't quite be as good as DX1. But hey, it could still be better than IW.

Vasarto
15th Jul 2008, 00:41
Well as I have said before. I am putting every single ounce of my trust and my faith in them that they will create a game even greater than that of DX1...hm..well ok that might be a little bit impossible but lets just say it better be as good at least.

Oym
15th Jul 2008, 08:23
I believe they'll do a great job , but If I were you, I wouldn't have any illusions , we're talking about matching one of the best game ever made .. With a different team and a considerable failure with IW .. It proves that it's not that simple .

I don't know if they can , I doubt it because the original team knows how to make a deus ex ( 1 ) in every details , they don't ..

But we'll see ..

SubTonic20
18th Jul 2008, 15:02
I think DX3 will just be decent. Warren being gone leaves me very skeptical about the possible quality of this game. The teaser looks pretty cool, but it shows nothing of the game itself, so an opinion can't be formed just from that. I think it's best for me and the entire community to do their absolute best not to overhype this game. This is Deus Ex we're talking about. I highly doubt the genius of the first game could be matched, let alone surpassed.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, however. I'm looking forward to another installment just as much as everyone else. I just hope E-Mont knows the masterpiece they're building this game from.

Oym
18th Jul 2008, 15:45
I couldn't agree more ..

El_Bel
18th Jul 2008, 17:02
If it ends up crap, we can blame Canada :D

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/428397/south_park_blame_canada/

Oym
18th Jul 2008, 17:06
South Park :nut:

CarloGervasi
18th Jul 2008, 17:10
This will sound really stupid, but yes, I do have faith in them, simply because they used the theme from the first game in the trailer. I think that gives a good idea of what they intend to do with the game.

Oym
18th Jul 2008, 18:09
No offense but the trailer means nothing .. It's only a video and that's all .

It was more to annouce the project than to reveal what deus ex 3 will be made of .. Of course there're some clues and hints , I don't deny it , but it's still not concrete , you'll agree ..

CarloGervasi
18th Jul 2008, 18:25
It's not concrete, but it's not something to throw away either. I doubt they put together the trailer on a Sunday afternoon and just threw it out onto the web.

Oym
18th Jul 2008, 19:24
I never said it was to be throwed away :) .

Romeo
19th Jul 2008, 08:10
If it ends up crap, we can blame Canada :D

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/428397/south_park_blame_canada/

God... We're always to blame. lol

Oym
19th Jul 2008, 08:39
It's human I guess :)

Romeo
23rd Jul 2008, 08:37
We Candadians are (mostly) human too!

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 08:44
God... We're always to blame. lol

Probably because Canadians depend on Americans so much. :lol:

Romeo
23rd Jul 2008, 08:45
Hey! We have wood... lol

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 08:55
Hey! We have wood... lol

When I buy wood it must have Georgia-Pacific stamped on it. Anything else is tariffed city, and money not supporting locals.

Canada will become the 51st state, sooner or later. 30,000,000 can be absorbed into 300,000,000 quite easily. :D

Romeo
23rd Jul 2008, 08:56
Yeah right, we're bigger, older and we're on top. Prison rules. :rasp:

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 09:17
Yeah right, we're bigger, older and we're on top. Prison rules. :rasp:

Let's see...What is the number of residents of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut (the old District of Franklin)?

50,000?

:rasp:

That's after the horrid forced transplanting (Labrador Inuit to Resolute saga -- did you think the Inuit there are locals? Not even the Inuit inhabitated that area, why John Franklin died) even. Most of Canada isn't even habitated (which is going to be a problem, when other nations eye the North for oil and minerals, as Canada can't even defend that area, they relied on the US to do so -- remember all those DEW stations?).

51st state, 51st state...

Romeo
23rd Jul 2008, 09:21
Nah, you Americans have those Cruise Missiles and Nuclear Warheads, but we in Canada have the tried and true B.A.A. Weapons System.

René
23rd Jul 2008, 12:24
Ok this thread is going waaaay off topic but in response to Scadvid's 51st state comment, Canada is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy, with Queen Elizabeth II as its head of state (source: Wikipedia). So actually, Britain and the US can fight over us!

But in terms of one's faith in Eidos Montréal, the studio is made up of senior and very experienced industry veterans with a track record of working on huge and successful games at various companies. I'd say Deus Ex 3 is in very good hands.

DXeXodus
23rd Jul 2008, 12:35
....I'd say Deus Ex 3 is in very good hands.

I couldn't agree more. I am thouroughly looking forward to an amazing game from the boys and girls in Montreal.

And thanks for bringing this thread back on topic :)

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 13:40
Ok this thread is going waaaay off topic but in response to Scadvid's 51st state comment, Canada is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy, with Queen Elizabeth II as its head of state (source: Wikipedia). So actually, Britain and the US can fight over us!

And no identity. Not British. Not French. But awfully too American (BTW, I listen to Blue Rodeo; Great Big Sea; and some Michael Mitchell music, so not so out-of-touch about Canadian's identity woes).

Which may mean Britain may even be willing to give Canada away. :D


But in terms of one's faith in Eidos Montréal, the studio is made up of senior and very experienced industry veterans with a track record of working on huge and successful games at various companies. I'd say Deus Ex 3 is in very good hands.

Ion Storm had a good team, too.

So make DX3 that masterpiece, not a mantel piece!

Where's the whip smilie??!!

Romeo
23rd Jul 2008, 14:36
...Or the dancing banana?

On topic however, I think most of the community has faith in Eidos, the only real danger will be if we start holding the game to an impossible standard, and then whine and moan if it doesn't achieve such a feat. But within realistic expectations, I have absolute faith in Eidos, personally.

jcp28
23rd Jul 2008, 15:27
^

That's probably where the real problem will lie. We shouldn't think this game will be some kind of masterpiece, but on the other hand, it appears that Eidos Montreal is up to the task of making at least an above-average game, if not one of excellent quality.

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 15:53
...Or the dancing banana?

On topic however, I think most of the community has faith in Eidos, the only real danger will be if we start holding the game to an impossible standard, and then whine and moan if it doesn't achieve such a feat. But within realistic expectations, I have absolute faith in Eidos, personally.

Nothing I ever said was impossible, it's very doable (just revamping the textures and 3D models would've sufficed -- to all the modders delight!!).

But will Eidos have the will to do so?

That's the real question. The real answer is when we see the content.

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 15:56
^

That's probably where the real problem will lie. We shouldn't think this game will be some kind of masterpiece

:cough: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/deusex/player_review.html?id=491753 :cough:

jcp28
23rd Jul 2008, 16:02
Um, I merely mean to say that DX3 won't have the same impact as the first game did. I'll just be happy if most or all of IW's problems don't show up here.

Kevyne-Shandris
23rd Jul 2008, 16:19
Um, I merely mean to say that DX3 won't have the same impact as the first game did. I'll just be happy if most or all of IW's problems don't show up here.

Picasso painted how many masterpieces?

It's possible that DX3 can equal DX -- IF there's a will to do so.

IS the will there; or are there more ghosts to be chased down?

Hope it's the former!

jcp28
23rd Jul 2008, 16:42
^
No doubt D'Astous and his team are dedicated. But I don't think they will hit the same sort of stride Ion Storm did in terms of immersion at the least. I don't expect to see anything like "Who will help the widow's son?" for example. We could see some good story twists and manipulative enviroments, but I'm not sure if I would go much beyond there.

CJRamze
20th Aug 2008, 20:52
Providing that they produce a better game than IW,
I'll be happy, even if its not as good as the original

ewanlaing
20th Aug 2008, 23:05
I think it can be better than the original. In fact, I went back to deus ex 1 straight after I finished IW (for about the tenth time) and although it WAS better than the sequel, I did find myself getting frustrated at certain things missing from the original that were included in the sequel.
Perspective is a funny thing....

gamer0004
21st Aug 2008, 05:22
I did find myself getting frustrated at certain things missing from the original that were included in the sequel.


Like what? Only mantling was extra.

minus0ne
21st Aug 2008, 06:06
Like what? Only mantling was extra.
Custom weapons were also a good idea, although the execution wasn't that well done (also, they should be harder to find).

gamer0004
21st Aug 2008, 10:15
Custom weapons were also a good idea, although the execution wasn't that well done (also, they should be harder to find).

What? Custom weapons? You mean the secret weapons?

jordan_a
10th Oct 2008, 09:43
UP! For the many newcomers's votes I hope.

rynn taylor
10th Oct 2008, 10:26
I think its too early to say whether Eidos will be able to make a game as good or better than DX1. They appear to have put a lot of thought into the trailer and it looks like shaping up as a game with many interesting themes. Whether or not it will have gameplay to match is another question. Only time will tell but I wish them all the best and I certaintly have my fingers crossed.