PDA

View Full Version : DX:IW is like Windows Vista



gamer0004
14th Jun 2008, 14:45
Today I suddenly realised that DX:IW and Windows Vista are very similar in their approach. Both try to improve graphics - IW ended up with techinaclly better graphics than DX, but what had happened to the gritty look of DX?, Vista ended up with technically better graphics to, but (IMO) it is kind of bulky. What happend to the simple look of the previous Windows versions?
Both try to be more user-friendly, but (IMO) end up being less wasy to use than previous versions/games. And (because of that) both were seen as worse than their predecessors.

jordan_a
14th Jun 2008, 15:07
Frankly I don't understand the point of this thread nor why it has been posted in the Deus Ex 3 forum.

gamer0004
14th Jun 2008, 15:16
Pick option 4 :rasp:

serene_chaos
14th Jun 2008, 16:05
Option 4, sorry buddy.

gamer0004
14th Jun 2008, 16:10
Damn - and I thought it was such a briliant comparison :nut:

Tracer Tong
15th Jun 2008, 08:33
You have some point there.. Tried to be new and innovative and ended up gimpy and lame.

Tsumaru
15th Jun 2008, 14:23
I can see where you're coming from, but I think its an oversimplification and a bit of a generalisation. Just about every game tries to improve graphics, and I don't think that's something we should look down on; unless it is at the expense of quality in other areas. Also, isn't there only *certain* versions of Vista which have their funky aero graphics etc? My friend got himself an illegal copy which looked pretty plain and simple, only a little bit flashier than XP. But still, I do remember a lot of the marketing at the start was about how nice and shiny it was! *shrugs*

jd10013
16th Jun 2008, 20:50
I get it. I'd say there the same in that they both tried to improve things that didn't need improving, and in the end made those things worse.

Blade_hunter
16th Jun 2008, 22:34
I can't compare an OS than a game
Like windows XP they we must wait for the service packs to get a correct work even if win XP sp3 and the sp1 of Vista was a piece of crap.
now we have some users that wait for the famous windows seven, I wait for an other OS than windows, that can run windows programs.
I know some projects and I wait with hope their development.


For DX 2 it wasn't the same I waited for a game that innovates on the DX concept a sort of true sequel, but the development with the Xbox breaks all of my dreams and reduces most of game parts.
We have a story, but the gameplay were drop on a bean. We have anly a little part of DX gamplay. We have a reduced DX gameplay instead of an extended.
I think I didn't like DX 2 because I knew DX 1 and SS2, thats the possible reason.
got recent games with most reduced gameplay than older games it makes the same feeling as Bioshock compared to SS2 even if the universe is completely different, we have some common things.
I play Bioshock on a console, but it's not because the fact it's on a console, it has a great story, and the immersion is good, the physics are good and the graphics too. some interaction with the water is the best.
But the game uses a technology of the Unreal engine, and I don't think if we don't look to the engine's technology used by the game. Bioshock has no real inovation in the gameplay.
Guns with multiple ammo were in SS2 like the upgrades
The hack by mini games is on SS2 too or on Chrome
The sort of powers were on an old FPS called requiem we can use magic powers and guns
SS2 have Psionic powers, DX have biomods
The sort of craziness is on SS2, the AI were crazy (on the story of course)

I think thats all but some games like bioshock were considered to be the best game, and don't have so much features when I compare to DX 2