PDA

View Full Version : Deus Ex Postmortem



B0b_P@ge
9th Feb 2008, 23:50
COPIED FROM: http://nuwen.net/dx.html
On December 6, 2000, Gamasutra released a summary of Deus Ex's development process written by Warren Spector.

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20001206/spector_01.htm

Xcom
10th Feb 2008, 00:33
You shouldn't copy-paste entire articles here.

Angel/0A
10th Feb 2008, 03:42
Still, that's a cool article. I've never read that before.

Papy
10th Feb 2008, 04:21
Actually, I think the Invisible War "Post Mortem" I read here (http://pc.ign.com/articles/444/444433p1.html) was far more interesting.

My opinion on this is it really shows that Warren Spector has become another George Lucas. "Games are games and gamers are gamers"... Yeah, right. Let's all play Peggle!

AgentSmithereens
10th Feb 2008, 09:19
Wow, so DX was originally called Shooter? Great article.

Red
10th Feb 2008, 11:25
Erm... 20 people made Deus Ex? (+ 6 contractors)

20??!?!?!?!

Ai karamba!! I appreciate this game even more now. To create something like that with only 20 people on the team... It's almost unbelievable. Respect!

Red
10th Feb 2008, 21:02
Sorry about the double post here, I just want you guys to know I wrote something new...

I have a problem. I switched to Vista and I have problems with both DXes... IW refuses to work (all patched up to 1.2) and DX1 works but it's unplayable because the performance is choppy and somewhat slow... (slow as in slow-motion, no difference between d3d and oGL ) - also patched up to 1.112f.

So... I hope someone had the same problems before _and_ he had solved them. ;)

B0b_P@ge
11th Feb 2008, 03:27
Erm... 20 people made Deus Ex? (+ 6 contractors)

20??!?!?!?!

Ai karamba!! I appreciate this game even more now. To create something like that with only 20 people on the team... It's almost unbelievable. Respect!

The article doesn't mention it but I've read elsewhere that a majority of the development staff was fresh from MIT and had no serious experience in major video game development.

OuttaZyme
11th Feb 2008, 05:23
Actually, I think the Invisible War "Post Mortem" I read here (http://pc.ign.com/articles/444/444433p1.html) was far more interesting.

My opinion on this is it really shows that Warren Spector has become another George Lucas. "Games are games and gamers are gamers"... Yeah, right. Let's all play Peggle!

I'd read this article when it first came out back in '03, but rereading it now made me feel kind of sick.

You're right; he sounds exactly like Lucas. (He, himself, doesn't know what makes his own stuff cool.) Rolling the skills and the augs into the biomod system in order to make the game more "accessible?" Accessible to whom? Chimpanzees?

No one can read this "post-mortem" (take the phrase at face value, it's especially apt in the case of IW) and maintain the opinion that IW didn't suffer for its Xbox development. It wasn't dumbed down so much as it was hit in the head with a crowbar and left to drool on itself in a corner while twitching spasmodically from time to time.

Reading through as he justified every Xbox-based design decision with phrases like "unnecessarily complex" and "smaller, deeper maps" frankly made me kind of mad. There are those of us who like complexity in a game, who aren't afraid of an extra UI screen or two, and who appreciated the opportunity of player expression afforded by the skill system. (Player expression, ironically enough, being their stated reason for introducing unified ammo.)

Spector's assertion that they made a game with more freedom than ever before and more character customization options is nothing short of laughable.

Xcom
11th Feb 2008, 05:49
Give the man some credit. It's not his fault that the industry changed, that technology changed, that markets changed, that consoles became more important in gaming that PCs. If you want to blame someone, blame Microsoft... or something. :whistle:

Lucas is the emperor of his own self-made empire, and Spector isn't.

Angel/0A
11th Feb 2008, 06:22
Wow, so DX was originally called Shooter? Great article.

Well that was their working title, not the final name. :p



I blame Microsoft for buying Bungie and perverting Halo as well... ;)

DXeXodus
11th Feb 2008, 09:00
I have never read either of the articles before. But after first reading the DX 'Post-mortem' then reading the DX2 'Post-mortem' it really seems as though Warren Spector became a different person before making the second game. I say he must of been abducted by greys and taken to a secret lab where they removed all of his common sense.

I became quite sad reading the DXIW post mortem as it led me to realise that there is a strong possibility that this might happen again.. and this time it will be a nail in the DX coffin....

DX was the beautiful birth, DX2 was where it got driven over in a drunken rage and DX3 will be the point where they either save on it's death bed or it flat-lines.... I sincerely hope that it is the former.

What struck me as interesting when comparing the two articles was the complete contrast between the philosophies found in the development process of the two respective games. The first Game was lovingly conceptualised by six guys in a room... placing careful consideration on the important aspects and paying special attention to the finer points. The second game was kinda like: 'well, lets take this thingie and put a new engine in it and slap that thing in there and then rip out this and that and then lets make it shiny..... Great'

Disgusting :mad2:

SageSavage
11th Feb 2008, 14:31
That's the problem with follow ups of successful stuff... It's very different from creating something from scratch and I believe Spector isn't good with being bound to a existing formula. The longer I think about it the more I tend to believe he wanted Smith to be in charge for IW because he was too frightened to do it himself. I still think Spector deserves most of the respect he is getting but unfortunately IW stand out as the dark spot of his career.

I don't think anybody has to fear this will happen again with DX3 since there's this whole new team behind it and expectations are lowered (at least on my side). It may still suck but if that's the case it's not because of Spector or Smith.

Xcom
11th Feb 2008, 15:58
That's the problem with follow ups of successful stuff... It's very different from creating something from scratch and I believe Spector isn't good with being bound to a existing formula.

Very true.

They also seemed to have underestimated the significance and "weight" of the first game. Interestingly, the DX team including Warren Spector never really considered Deus Ex to be some kind of holy masterpiece. They all had pretty critical, down-to-earth views; Harvey, I believe, even said it was overrated. So, when they went on with the sequel, they tried to improve things, try new concepts, etc. which is natural for developers (or any artists who create something and consider it their own), but for some fans it was like they were desecrating a monument. Heh! Personally, I think it wouldn't have mattered if IW didn't have loading times or universal ammo, or other supposedly "bad" stuff. I think some people would have found reasons to dislike the game no matter what. Sad, really.

By the way, that IGN article is not really postmortem, at least not in the way the first one is. It's something IGN just glued together and I believe the texts came from DX:IW Dev Diaries which were originally posted in 5 parts. Spector just addresses "consolitis" issue there because of the critique (read: flak) he got after the demo was released.

DXeXodus
11th Feb 2008, 18:20
I agree that Spector deserves the credit that he has achieved thus far. He is the genius behind Deus Ex. And even though he played a large role in screwing up the franchise I respect someone that can come up with such an original concept as he did with the original DX.

I think that, because as mentioned before, he struggles to stick to a formula, the game is better off in the hands of a fresh dev team. They, no doubt, will have their own ideas, but maybe they will be able to listen to the fans and include some of the suggestions on this and other forums. Good luck Eidos Montreal :thumbsup:

jd10013
11th Feb 2008, 19:06
And even though he played a large role in screwing up the franchise :


spector didn't have much to do with IW. He put Harvey in charge of that, and it was his first game I think. He could have been more active in it'd development though. I seem to remember an interview he did where he said there were several things Smith did that he wasn't sure about. Not sure what all of them were, but I know he was against the universal ammo idea, but let smith do it.

anyhow, IW wasn't terrible. It just failed to live up to the first.

OuttaZyme
11th Feb 2008, 19:23
Very true.

They also seemed to have underestimated the significance and "weight" of the first game. Interestingly, the DX team including Warren Spector never really considered Deus Ex to be some kind of holy masterpiece. They all had pretty critical, down-to-earth views; Harvey, I believe, even said it was overrated. So, when they went on with the sequel, they tried to improve things, try new concepts, etc. which is natural for developers (or any artists who create something and consider it their own), but for some fans it was like they were desecrating a monument. Heh! Personally, I think it wouldn't have mattered if IW didn't have loading times or universal ammo, or other supposedly "bad" stuff. I think some people would have found reasons to dislike the game no matter what. Sad, really.

It wasn't simply the load times, or the universal ammo, but many individual decisions that cumulatively eroded the overall IW experience. And desecrating a monument? Meh. They simply made a game that wasn't as fun as its predecessor.

Spector has talked numerous times about wanting to give the player the power to craft his own experience within a tightly paced narrative, which is what DX was all about. It was, after all, an RPG, and that it stands up today as well as it did at its release is a testament to just how well it was done and to the state of current gaming in general.

But what happened to the much vaunted player-crafted experience in IW? It was streamlined down to a shadow of itself, with fewer choices and fewer options, smaller maps, fewer biomods, fewer weapons upgrades, and less overall game, ultimately resulting in fewer player decisions and for me, less fun.

Sometimes less is, in fact, more. And sometimes it's just less. With Deus Ex, it was like Ion handed us a huge box of crayons; one of those monster, 64-color affairs with the sharpener on the back, and then with IW we got the cheap-ass eight pack, with the thick crayons and no sharpener. Which will allow you to be more expressive? So what if the crayons are thicker in the eight pack, where's my friggin' Burnt Sienna?

It's not that IW is specifically a bad game, especially when considered on its own; it's just that it's difficult to consider it on its own with its more-ambitious sibling looking over its shoulder at every load screen.

Unzerpum
11th Feb 2008, 23:02
The article doesn't mention it but I've read elsewhere that a majority of the development staff was fresh from MIT and had no serious experience in major video game development.

You're thinking of Looking Glass, I think. Most of the DX devs had worked on at least one title before (random examples include Ultima, System Shock, Thief and Unreal)...

B0b_P@ge
12th Feb 2008, 19:24
You're thinking of Looking Glass, I think. Most of the DX devs had worked on at least one title before (random examples include Ultima, System Shock, Thief and Unreal)...

hmmm, I may be mistaken on this ... I think you you're right on this one.