PDA

View Full Version : Warren Spector Speaketh



DXeXodus
19th Jun 2008, 06:37
Iconic game designer Warren Spector has said he believes lengthy adventure games are "on the way out".

The Deus Ex creator, who now heads Junction Point Studios for Disney, believes game designers need to work out how to meet a new generation of demands.

"I love working with Disney because I'm so tired of making games about guys in black leather carrying guns. I don't want to make those any more," Spector told Gamasutra.

"Building a game is as complex as making as a Hollywood movie. We are in a business that is both software engineer and entertainment, and we have to balance it. It used to be that you could trade off gameplay for graphics, but you can't do that any more.

"100-hour games are on the way out. How many of you have finished GTA? Two per cent, probably. If we're spending USD 100 million on a game, we want you to see the last level!" he added.

However, casual games have their own set of problems, according to Spector, who said, "If you don't make it on the front page, you don't get your game seen."

Spector has yet to put his name to a project since Ion Storm (Deus Ex series, Thief: Deadly Shadows) was closed by Eidos in 2004.

All we've heard of his Junction Point project is a teaser quote from the man on the studio website:

"When we do announce what we're doing, half the world's going to think we're crazy and half the world's going to think it's the coolest thing since sliced bread - how great is that?!"

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=154065


"I love working with Disney because I'm so tired of making games about guys in black leather carrying guns. I don't want to make those any more,"

It is sad to hear the iconic DX creator speak of lenghly, involved games like this. Maybe he gave it all up after DXIW crumbled to the ground.

Welcome to the new world of gaming: Short and simple.

I personally hope that developers never stop making deep, involved and lengthly games that focus on hardcore gamers. Long live DX! And may DX3 not get the above treatment.

Lo Bruto
19th Jun 2008, 08:30
This is the sign of the end of civilization.
Soon the world will be dominated by 1337 who owns nbs.

jordan_a
19th Jun 2008, 11:40
100-hour games are on the way out.
It's not like we have not seen that coming. But I must say I don't agree: are GTA, The Elder Scrolls, Zeldas and Marios on the way out? No.

Tsumaru
19th Jun 2008, 12:09
I don't think that proves that they won't shorten them to 70 hour, and then only 50 hour by Elder Scrolls 6. You never know, really. But I know I've played FPS' these days which I finish and just say "...was that it?" Probably a reason I've always been a fan of the longer RPGs.

DXeXodus
19th Jun 2008, 12:43
Short games are a very common occurance lately. Look at Call of Duty 4, it is an awesome game and action packed from start to finish, but way too short IMO. There will always be a place for long games.

jordan_a
19th Jun 2008, 17:44
That's what the developers of Half Life 2 also did, short games, episodes.

AaronJ
19th Jun 2008, 17:54
"100-hour games are on the way out."

ENTER, POP CAP.

FrankCSIS
19th Jun 2008, 19:17
Not the first to mention this outcome. I know quite a few adventure devs from yesteryear who came up a while ago with the prophecy of webisodes as the only viable option for adventure games. The costs are too high and the risks too bold for anyone to invest in a lengthy adventure unless it's an established franchise with guaranteed pre-orders.

The problem I see now and the question I raised back when I first heard of this is how does anyone think they will get past a simple cult following if they try to build a series from scratch? Much like Fox tv, we can expect a lot of abandoned projects along the way, and a lot of trials and errors before we get to see a series from start to finish. The series that will succeed will most likely try to stretch it as long as they can before coming to an end, and the other ones we might get attached to will never get past the second or third episode.

Of course one might think it's better to have such projects than no adventure games at all, and I for one would certainly enjoy a series of Deus Ex episodes, but I'd be really disappointed if it were to be canceled in the middle of a cliffhanger.

rhalibus
19th Jun 2008, 20:23
I can understand the idea of eliminating 100-hour games if the gamplay is too monotonous...but DX's 30 hours of gameplay seemed a good fit to its epic story.

I'm finishing the PC version of Mass Effect now, and I realize I'd rather have more focus on the main story and less side-quests...Deus Ex didn't have many side quests, but the main story was so interesting and involving that it didn't matter...

I hope Eidos Montreal makes DX3 as epic as the original.

SomaMech
19th Jun 2008, 20:25
And this is the very reason I'm turning away from gaming.

AgnosticJive
19th Jun 2008, 20:54
Isn't that so sad,to see "Jesus" Spector (not my term,but one I've seen several times on here.) Turn his back on sadistic leather clad bad boys.
Now the issue, game length, mass effect being mentioned:the game can go on 30+ hours with side questions which are completely optional, focusing on core missions you can finish the game in 10-20 hours...less if you have no life. Personally I'm all for long games, but I also value replay value, so if a game is only 20 hours yet I can play it over and over and over I would take that over a 50 hour epic that I beat once then never touch again.

On a side note: The new screen shots for the new tomb raider game show a little more graphical prowess then I was expecting which is a good thing since this is the same engine that will be used to power the as-of-yet uncanceled Deus Ex 3 ___quel.

Addendum to my side note: My previous "knowledge" of the Tomb Raider: Underworld being powered by the same engine as Deus Ex 3 came from before further development had taken place, apparently at this point in time Underworld is using a brand new engine made specifically for the game and is not in fact the same engine, Deus Ex 3 using a more outdated and aged engine. Sad news for me =/.

jcp28
19th Jun 2008, 23:12
"I love working with Disney because I'm so tired of making games about guys in black leather carrying guns. I don't want to make those any more," Spector told Gamasutra.

Christ, I hope this doesn't mean what I think it means. I don't mind shorter games, but if they take a grand total of 10 hours to complete, that's a rip-off.

DXeXodus
20th Jun 2008, 04:04
Christ, I hope this doesn't mean what I think it means. I don't mind shorter games, but if they take a grand total of 10 hours to complete, that's a rip-off.

Thats exactly what you think it means. We still pay between R300 and R800 (depending on your platform) for a single game. That money now goes to expensive visual effects instead of prolonged and enriched gameplay.

As I have said before, there are still some gems. Even though they are quite short they still rock! Gears of War, COD4, HL2 Episodes, etc. In a sense I dont mind a short game, but only if it is of a high quality in terms of gameplay, controls, graphics, etc all together. Its like a good movie, except it cost like a million times more.

DX, however, is not a type of game that can be crammed into 10 hours IMO. A DX game should be intricate and involved on many levels that overlap and work with one another. Time is needed to build characters and deep stories. DX3 should at least be a 20 hour core game, excluding any side missions.

gamer0004
20th Jun 2008, 08:57
Addendum to my side note: My previous "knowledge" of the Tomb Raider: Underworld being powered by the same engine as Deus Ex 3 came from before further development had taken place, apparently at this point in time Underworld is using a brand new engine made specifically for the game and is not in fact the same engine, Deus Ex 3 using a more outdated and aged engine. Sad news for me =/.

I thought that D'Astous said that that DX3 was going to use the next-gen TR:U engine.

Deevian
20th Jun 2008, 10:07
Hell just froze.

foxberg
20th Jun 2008, 16:12
The society becomes dumber and lazier. They don't want to think or try hard. They want everything to be easy. Three cheers to Halo for not having a God mode! Playing DX was like living a parallel life. I don't mind having a 50 hour game though, as long as they release new mission packs ever other month!

Romeo
20th Jun 2008, 18:26
I am going to get BEATEN for this, but maybe we can hope Spectre isn't in charge of DX3 now... His current outlook may be ignored, and perhaps someone with a new vision could contribute something to the series...

AgnosticJive
20th Jun 2008, 20:42
I am going to get BEATEN for this, but maybe we can hope Spectre isn't in charge of DX3 now... His current outlook may be ignored, and perhaps someone with a new vision could contribute something to the series...

Ummm...Spector barely had a hand in IW, he hasn't even touched the building that Deus Ex 3 is being developed in, so assuming he's going to have anything to do with any eidos game is just stupidity.


I thought that D'Astous said that that DX3 was going to use the next-gen TR:U engine.

Alas,so did I,and when I saw the most recent screen-shots from Underworld I was put a little more at ease, however it appears that "the Senior Producer and External Designer separately confirmed that Underworld uses an all-new engine that was built especially for it." Whereas Deus Ex 3 "has been confirmed that the game will be developed using the Crystal Dynamics Engine, which was originally used for the games Lara Croft Tomb Raider: Legend and Project: Snowblind" an outdated and spotty (at best) engine that shouldn't still exist.
Sadly I've never been impressed by any eidos project (Deus Ex not counting since it was not really developed by eidos) so me even saying what I did about how Underworld looks took a lot from me...why not just be canadian buddies and give deus ex to Ubisoft Montreal who thoroughly impressed me with Assassins Creed and showed they can do the FPS part with Rainbow Six Vegas.

serene_chaos
21st Jun 2008, 02:33
well, this (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/12/03/tomb-raider-engine-to-power-deus-ex-3/) says that DX3 is using the old engine, but theyre going to develop it more. It also mentions that DX3 wont be using the latest Unreal engine (obviously), which kinda disappoints me a little. I mean, DX used the first incarnation of Unreal, IW used the second, DX3 should use the third to, you know, complete the circle.
It seems to me like not using a current engine is a little bit tabboo, and to be honest, i'd like to see DX on an awesome engine. I like the id Tech 4 engine (doom 3), partly because it runs on my **** computer and still looks good. I don't like the Havok engine (parent of TES:Oblivion and Source), and havnt played anything on the 3rd Unreal.
So, right now i'm half expecting Blade Hunter to open a poll about this.:p

AgnosticJive
21st Jun 2008, 06:50
They aren't using any outside engines they would have to license because they wanna keep everything in house, they think it would be easier to push an old shït engine past it's breaking point because they are more familiar with it and they don't have to shell out extra money for a decent engine. (by the way,havok is just a physics engine, source is the actual game engine.)

Point is, Deus Ex 3 basically already looks outdated. Awesome.

Chemix
21st Jun 2008, 17:32
It is the way of humanity that the old always remark that the world or a "world" will die with them, as who knows how it will turn out without those who birthed it, it's a scary thought, one that is often dismissed by another thought along the lines of, "they can't do it without me". The cost of movie making is insanely high, yet movies are still made. They aren't half hour long episodes, they're full feature length, 1 hour 25 minute minimum, films. Games will vary in length, as they always have, but in the end, no one is going to pay for anything that doesn't last atleast 2 hours, $20 for 4 hours, and $50 for anything higher.

In short, long adventure games will not die just because Spector thinks they will.

jcp28
21st Jun 2008, 19:31
Maybe not die, but the industry model has been changing for a while to allow greater profiy by making more shorter games instead of a small amount of long ones.

On the subject of the engine: Look on the bright side. Graphics have come a long way since Deus Ex was released, so this game hopefully won't look too bad. I feel your pain as far how it'll stack up against bigger-name games, graphics-wise

Romeo
21st Jun 2008, 23:33
As much as I appreciate graphical prowess, I would much prefer resources dedicated to gameplay and story...

v.dog
22nd Jun 2008, 04:14
Christ, I hope this doesn't mean what I think it means. I don't mind shorter games, but if they take a grand total of 10 hours to complete, that's a rip-off.Guess you've never played Portal.

Shorter games are the way to go I think, as technology has made us busier (albeit not more productive)- a lot of people just don't have the time to invest in long games anymore. I'm finding just that; as I get older, other things have become more important- both from a financial and and chronological standpoint.

Smaller games (like Portal) can also be more innovative; spend less on development, and you've got less to loose if it all goes pear-shaped (this why most big budget games are part of a franchise or a well worn genre).

Short games are only a rip-off if they publishers make you pay full price.

AgnosticJive
22nd Jun 2008, 23:24
Guess you've never played Portal.

Shorter games are the way to go I think, as technology has made us busier (albeit not more productive)- a lot of people just don't have the time to invest in long games anymore. I'm finding just that; as I get older, other things have become more important- both from a financial and and chronological standpoint.

Smaller games (like Portal) can also be more innovative; spend less on development, and you've got less to loose if it all goes pear-shaped (this why most big budget games are part of a franchise or a well worn genre).

Short games are only a rip-off if they publishers make you pay full price.

You seem to be basing alot of this on portal, which didn't spend too long in development because it was basically already developed for them by the time they started working on the game. Again, portal is one example of an innovative small game, but I've gotta ask you for another couple of examples, because off of the top of my head nothing comes to mind.

And to Romeo...the only real gameplay element that requires actual CPU resources is enemy AI, which in most games isn't that great, however developers have started turning to the GPU to aid in processing elements like A.I. and such, which requires one to have a graphics card capable of handling graphics and spare cycles to gameplay, which requires a decent graphics card. Do I think that Deus Ex 3 will do this? No. Eidos hasn't shown that is has the ambition or even the ability to use techniques that haven't been commonplace for five years already.

That and again...I'm for long games, I agree that as I get older I don't have as much time to play games, but I still enjoy having to work towards the end of the game, not paying $60 for a game I'll finish in two nights (or for Portal and Gears of War, one night.) If you don't have the time to play long games then either make time, quit bìtching about it, or just play it when you can, it's not like you're losing anything.

Chemix
22nd Jun 2008, 23:28
Physics also relies on the CPU

AgnosticJive
22nd Jun 2008, 23:43
Physics also relies on the CPU

Yes, it does...however as the physics engines in games are getting more detailed and more demanding, some developers have turned to the GPU to alleviate some of the load from the CPU. Aegia also made the PhysX card solely to process physics however since it requires a separate card that is only being made by one manufacturer only a handful (albeit a growing handful) of games utilize it. The GPU method allows games to utilize preexisting hardware to accelerate processes while maintaining an equal or even lighter load then before, allowing the games to do more.

lightbringerrr
22nd Jun 2008, 23:54
ENTER, POP CAP.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrreat... :rolleyes:

Nothin' like plopping down 50 bucks for 10 hours of weak entertainment! ;)

Yep; let's just fire-up 'Mario Cart', put on 'Taking Retards To The Zoo' by the Dead Milkmen, and stick our fingers squarely up our butts...YEAH!!!!:rasp:

As to WS's comment about being tired of making games about guys in leather with guns etc;

Sir, that's strictly your business and if it's how you feel; then so be it. On the other hand, I happen to enjoy that kind of thing. And as I type, I've enlisted a digitial guru-friend to help put together my totally demolishing trailer for another round with Caleb.
That's Right; The specific concept for the trailer AND the game is done, and I dare say my brilliance regarding this matter( as it is a labor of love )will make people who get PAID to do this kind of thing commence to kicking themselves in the arse for months to come when I finally let fly.

IT'S. ON.

jamesthefishy
23rd Jun 2008, 06:35
Hell I just played assassins creed by ubisoft... Totally blew. Shorter then hitman, without trying I finished the game. It basically had 10-11 missions... kill 10 people then the game is over... How weak is that, WITHOUT CHEATS or anything I finished the game in under a full work day. When did video games become 10 dollars an hour. I bought Deus ex for 10 dollars and got a month of entertainment + playing it again. Assassins creed isn't even worth to play again. It's fun to run about and jumping on top of people with a dagger but as much fun as that sounds its really not all that entertaining. Games like deus ex make me happy to play. When games get cut short, it makes me sick. At the end of assassins creed I thought I was at the beginning of the REAL game. See your in the memory machine and you go into it to play as an assassin which was your ancietor (looks exactly like you, cheap modelers) anyways you go through killing a list of people and after you end up killing the person who sent you to kill his enemies basically the same damn story you hear every where. Its totally lame. Anyways the game totally sucks and didn't provide that much of entertainment, if they make a second one they should bundle both games together and spread there cheeks and stuff them selfs and eidos games has been doing the same thing. Hitman 4 was totally way too short and kane and lynch was short and unreasonible stupid, easy, hard and all sorts of messed up. We as action adventure gamers should DEMAND that they give us our games back. I want my no-sleep weekend of deus ex 3 not to be cut short because of the lack of play time.

lightbringerrr
23rd Jun 2008, 14:33
Shorter then hitman, without trying I finished the game. It basically had 10-11 missions... kill 10 people then the game is over... How weak is that?

Jason Statham should have been the Hitman.

AgnosticJive
23rd Jun 2008, 15:04
Jason Statham should have been the Hitman.
Jason Statham IS the hitman...you just don't know it.

MaxxQ1
23rd Jun 2008, 15:34
Physics also relies on the CPU


Yes, it does...however as the physics engines in games are getting more detailed and more demanding, some developers have turned to the GPU to alleviate some of the load from the CPU. Aegia also made the PhysX card solely to process physics however since it requires a separate card that is only being made by one manufacturer only a handful (albeit a growing handful) of games utilize it. The GPU method allows games to utilize preexisting hardware to accelerate processes while maintaining an equal or even lighter load then before, allowing the games to do more.

That may be changing in the near future. Nvidia bought Aegia a year or so ago, and is now ramping up to include physics processing on their graphics cards. The newest issue of Maximum PC (August 2008) has a good, if short, article about it.

Chemix
23rd Jun 2008, 17:39
How long before those cards become common in the average user's home though? These giant, power hungry, coolant fiend cards will take a while to come down in total price, including electricity, cooling, etc. etc.

AgnosticJive
23rd Jun 2008, 18:26
That may be changing in the near future. Nvidia bought Aegia a year or so ago, and is now ramping up to include physics processing on their graphics cards. The newest issue of Maximum PC (August 2008) has a good, if short, article about it.
Well it's something developers have been doing for years actually, I think they're just going to attempt to make it easier on the developers ends.


How long before those cards become common in the average user's home though? These giant, power hungry, coolant fiend cards will take a while to come down in total price, including electricity, cooling, etc. etc.
Ummm,you know you don't need the top of the line behemoth for games other than crysis...hell you can pick up an 8600 for less than an Xbox 360 game (and at 43 watts it'll consume less than your processor and won't need liquid nitrogen...or even an addition fan to stay cool.) Don't complain about not being able to afford the top of the line when you don't need it.

Chemix
23rd Jun 2008, 20:08
I'm talking about graphics cards that double as physics cards.

AgnosticJive
23rd Jun 2008, 22:51
I'm talking about graphics cards that double as physics cards.

Like I've said,they've been doing that for years, that's what all the streams on the card are for, to handle different processes at different times, the newer cards ususally have at least 16 separate streams going all the way up to 128 (or even more, not sure about the new nvidia 200 series) honestly that only part of the PhysX card that really aided in additional physics calculations was more on the software end sending the processes to the card, however some SDKs have been doing that on stock GPUs for years, and the introduction of CUDA has pretty much destroyed the market for PPU hardware and middleware.

MaxxQ1
24th Jun 2008, 02:40
Like I've said,they've been doing that for years, that's what all the streams on the card are for, to handle different processes at different times, the newer cards ususally have at least 16 separate streams going all the way up to 128 (or even more, not sure about the new nvidia 200 series) honestly that only part of the PhysX card that really aided in additional physics calculations was more on the software end sending the processes to the card, however some SDKs have been doing that on stock GPUs for years, and the introduction of CUDA has pretty much destroyed the market for PPU hardware and middleware.

Anyone interested should just check out this link:

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/unveiled_nvidias_next_gen_gpu

That's the same article from the magazine.

minus0ne
24th Jun 2008, 20:16
Jason Statham should have been the Hitman.
If you're referring to the movie, then no he should not have done that (not that it should've been made at all, but that's another matter). Statham (or the characters he's played so far) doesn't even remotely resemble anything about 47 in my opinion.

Jason Statham IS the hitman...you just don't know it.
Actually Jason Statham is The Transporter, but with fuel prices at the moment..

AgnosticJive
24th Jun 2008, 20:32
Actually Jason Statham is The Transporter, but with fuel prices at the moment..

No...he is the hitman. He kills people in just about every movie he's in, and if he doesn't kill someone, he at least beats them to a pulp. Plus, in the first transporter he was in France...and Europe's petrol prices make $4.50 a gallon look like nothing. People really need to learn to stop complaining about gas prices and either get a car with better mileage or stop driving everywhere.

Blade_hunter
24th Jun 2008, 21:53
I hope DX 3 will be an ambitious game like some games from warren spector (DX 1 and the System Shock series)
Theses games are the bests games ever played to me, because they are rich and enjoyable to me.

I don't know if some guy's in DX forums have said the DX interface is complacated before they make DX 2, because I sew it on the French game press (web sites) and I never know if this thing is true or not because this interface was easy to use for me ...
And the fact the game developers wants to make games for consoles breaks the games themselves like the DX series.

To make a game with a good gameplay the games must be rich, and with an easy access to the rich content.
The AI, and some other elements must work well of course....
I've played some rich games with a laborious interface, thats not very funny of course, but DX is a rich game with a good interface.
I think the community are here to propose ideas and suggestions to don't make the same mistake of DX 2, to correct some little errors of DX 1 and enhance the game.
Because actually, I don't know if most persons thinks the same as me, the actual games are too simple compared to old games, most of them have only great graphics and a fluid gameplay, but the rest isn't really changed since games like unreal, duke nukem, quake, system shock, soldier of fortune, deus ex, red faction, and half life.

The technologies are higher than old games and the great evolution is on graphics, and physics

jcp28
25th Jun 2008, 20:50
Wow, a thread about Warren Spector has now turned into a political argument.:rolleyes:

Can we just let this no-good thread die now? I mean, it's been said before that politics turn friends into enemies, and enemies into really fierce enemies. Though that might not matter when applied to certain elitists, let's just stop, please.

AgnosticJive
25th Jun 2008, 21:40
Can we just let this no-good thread die now?
NO!
I love seeing people argue.

minus0ne
25th Jun 2008, 22:49
Wow, a thread about Warren Spector has now turned into a political argument.:rolleyes:
Hey this is a DX forum, one should be allowed some degree of off-topic discussion ;) Besides, we're all adults here - no one's calling each other names. Besides it pretty much stops here (not because it's dictated by me, but rather it wasn't that much of an 'argument' to begin with).

Can we just let this no-good thread die now? I mean, it's been said before that politics turn friends into enemies, and enemies into really fierce enemies. Though that might not matter when applied to certain elitists, let's just stop, please.
Whoever said that was clearly mistaken. Politics is the basis of human interaction, and just because there's a possibility of friction due to differing views doesn't mean people should avoid discussing it, that's just the coward's way out, and not very healthy. The Dentons sure aren't afraid of a little political discussion ;)

DXeXodus
26th Jun 2008, 04:06
Hey this is a DX forum, one should be allowed some degree of off-topic discussion

True. But somehow this thread has gone wildly off topic :scratch:

AaronJ
27th Jun 2008, 02:21
I cannot wait to find his next game in with my Froot Loops.

Necros
30th Jun 2008, 01:45
It is sad to hear the iconic DX creator speak of lenghly, involved games like this. Maybe he gave it all up after DXIW crumbled to the ground.
In an other interview he said he wants to get back to the Deus Ex-style games. :)

Kevyne-Shandris
30th Jun 2008, 20:53
It is sad to hear the iconic DX creator speak of lenghly, involved games like this. Maybe he gave it all up after DXIW crumbled to the ground.

It's been the writing on the wall for some time. Read an earlier interview, and he still refuses to claim responsibility for the DX:IW failure. It's like, you admit you were wrong; and I'll admit some of what I did was wrong deal.

That was really a kick in the stomach.

Think the DX:IW crash really hurt him. In return, he's trying to wipe that history off the map.

Watching Specter over the years, you'll see him "grow" across the medium. Some good, some bad. But nothing since DX has he made that ever was special. Like the experiment worked, and unlike trying to understand how and why it did work (beyond the demographic studies), the "God" wants to destroy that machine.

The problem with Specter is he's "right now". The DX series were all his frustrations in gaming at the time, and he hodge-podged it together, thinking "this is great, you'll love it". Problem is he didn't realize how deeply people got hooked into the world and characters (a problem devs try to stop now with faceless pointmen and all), and how changing that world so much, felt like it was being written off. HE didn't like all the ammo in the game = unified ammo. HE thought an easier type of UI would be better = XBox menus. HE wanted a gender neutral pointman = Alex the Metrosexual.

The "God" ordained it, but the mortals revolted against it.

Specter hasn't been the same since.

The guy is a walking wealth to game design. But like all gurus, they can and do go off on tangents (which is what he's doing now).

JulianP
1st Jul 2008, 05:22
It's been the writing on the wall for some time. Read an earlier interview, and he still refuses to claim responsibility for the DX:IW failure. It's like, you admit you were wrong; and I'll admit some of what I did was wrong deal.

IW wasn't Spector's failure. If you want to blame someone, blame Harvey Smith. It was his project. He was the one who wanted to change Deus Ex and ended up changing it for the worse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGIdYl2oN74

chip5541
1st Jul 2008, 05:59
Good morning everyone. Lovely thread we have here. I just went through and deleted almost 3 pages of flaming. I was going to PM everyone that posted with just a friendly reminder to report, there is a button for it, posts that are flame bait or go against the usage rules that you agreed to be able to post on these forums but HOLY COW people. That is too many and I don’t have the patience. I will break it down for you. No flame baiting, no talk of politics, religion, political parties or elections and DO NOT derail threads. At this moment everyone is on notice. Continue with this line of posting and there will be consequences.

SageSavage
1st Jul 2008, 06:44
No flame baiting That's fine but

no talk of politics, religion, political parties or elections and DO NOT derail threads.
Come on... this pretty much sums up all the interesting topics the franchise has to offer. Don't you see that?

chip5541
1st Jul 2008, 06:55
I do and I realise that games like this can evolve into discussions of politics, religion, etc. however we cannot allow threads to devolve into what I just deleted. The rules stand.

Freddo
1st Jul 2008, 11:41
I love working with Disney because I'm so tired of making games about guys in black leather carrying guns. I don't want to make those any more
I can understand where he's coming from here. Deus Ex aren't the only "black leather carrying guns" games he made. There's CyberMage too, for example. I remember during the development of DX:IW that his favorite game was Ico for the PS2. Sure, Ico is a great game, but I found it a bit surprising he didn't make games like that then, but rather things like Deus Ex.


Welcome to the new world of gaming: Short and simple.
He already said the games were too long during the development of Deus Ex: Invisible War. Something about statistics showing that most people never finish the games they buy, and only play thru 3/4th of it.

Which I can imagine to be true too. About a decade ago, gaming went major mainstream. Back then, those who played games were mainly hardcore gamers. Now everyone play, and it's mostly causual gamers. Today it cost many million US dollars to develop a game, so making something to only please the hardcore gamers is quite a risk. Many games today that targets hardcore gamers tend to have a much smaller budget so they don't look as fancy as the big-budget games. That way they won't lose as much money if something goes wrong.

Ever since Max Payne was released, we seen a lot of short shooters. But they still get good reviews and so on, even Portal which was extremly short.

Kevyne-Shandris
1st Jul 2008, 14:32
I can understand where he's coming from here. Deus Ex aren't the only "black leather carrying guns" games he made. There's CyberMage too, for example. I remember during the development of DX:IW that his favorite game was Ico for the PS2. Sure, Ico is a great game, but I found it a bit surprising he didn't make games like that then, but rather things like Deus Ex.

That's what's ironic about Specter. He heaps praises on many games, and claim he wishes he thought about it and all. But for some reason, I think he did already, and just never took it down the path.

I think he's more complaining about the process of making the average shooter -- how bland the final product can be. DX was unique, as Specter tried to remove the usual out of a shooter, giving other options for players. But, it was a grueling time for him. If the side dev politics of that time didn't sour him (especially all that went on with the Dallas office, which had to affect the Austin office), things today may have been different. Fans don't know the real story, but the bickering had to be universal, and in it, creativity (which seems to be Specter's M.O.) was killed.

Now Specter is out of usual gaming all together (except for some side jobs), and persuing his 'toon fascination. The meatgrinder may have done it.



He already said the games were too long during the development of Deus Ex: Invisible War. Something about statistics showing that most people never finish the games they buy, and only play thru 3/4th of it.

Which I can imagine to be true too. About a decade ago, gaming went major mainstream. Back then, those who played games were mainly hardcore gamers. Now everyone play, and it's mostly causual gamers. Today it cost many million US dollars to develop a game, so making something to only please the hardcore gamers is quite a risk. Many games today that targets hardcore gamers tend to have a much smaller budget so they don't look as fancy as the big-budget games. That way they won't lose as much money if something goes wrong.

Which is why indie development will be the last reserve of creativity in gaming, as corporate takes over -- the guys more interested in pleasing shareholders than gamers.

Casual gaming is just the evolution that had to come. Mass computing = mass of new people to the medium. But it's a loss to everyone to have only ADHD type games, that's so linear it's like playing in a straightjacket. This is the dilemna that the MMOs are even facing -- and all the things Specter highlighted almost a decade ago rears it's head again: things like freedom of movement; freedom of how to solve a puzzle/problem; freedom to be more than a killer.

Gaming is, in effect, returning to the "old days" (and more than redoing old IP) and it's problems, and it's repeating it's same problems today.

That's not evolution, it's de-evolution.

Kevyne-Shandris
1st Jul 2008, 14:59
IW wasn't Spector's failure. If you want to blame someone, blame Harvey Smith. It was his project. He was the one who wanted to change Deus Ex and ended up changing it for the worse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGIdYl2oN74

It may have been Harvey Smith's project, but Specter was the brains behind it. What we take for granted in DX came from his genius, and willing to buck it all to push it through.

He didn't buck enough in DX:IW, he even dictated. That dictation caused a revolt, and that revolt is how and why this franchise has to start all over again (much like a 80's rock band has to go through the grimy club scene again to be noticed).

It's also not just what he did in DX:IW that infuriates people, it's what he has said years later. Playing hostage with responsibility didn't help, either. Fans had no choice in the matter, we were told to take it or leave it -- and given such a choice it created the meltdown many of use don't want to repeat again.

DX3 has to succeed or what IS DX is dead. Can't just rubberstamp this game, it's not a clone (like 20 Deer Hunter games), it's unique among games, and because it's so unique, the fight to keep it so is fierce.

Specter didn't understand fully his creation (it was just a job to him to solve gameplay issues; and only later can he or did he come to understand what happened -- much like the Star Trek actors, who at first rejected the fandom as a quirk or worse, but later in their retiring years, come to reflect better on it, as it wasn't just a fad). The "God" gave us what we were seeking, but "God" also went back to try to destroy it, during the process (DX:IW) and later (in interviews). In a psychological sense, the father is beating his kids over liking his own work -- and the kids have had enough.

He needs to come back to the fold, and SEE his creation away from the throne. And to see the fans are not just some numbers in some demographic, and despite not being "all knowing" of game development, liked the game, it's quirks, it's imperfections, as it's unique. Star Trek was unique, and the same applies to Deus Ex. Instead of being Gene Roddenberry, Specter, abandons the show, disses it, and now burned by the process creates cartoons.

How do you think Deus Ex fans feel after all that?

I realize it was a team process at Ion Storm, Specter couldn't do it all. But it's the sum of the whole, and that sum is reading years later interviews like above.

It hurts.

Freddo
1st Jul 2008, 18:51
That's not evolution, it's de-evolution.

Perhaps so, but this is exactly what happened to Hollywood back in the early 1900s. In the beginning of 1910 there were a lot of smaller studios available, trying their own thing and innovating the medium.

During the next 20 years, the studios were merged and bought a lot and eventually there were only 6 noticeable studios left, and they were very big. Universial, Warner Bros, MGM, Columbia Pictures, Paramount Pictures and Fox, focusing on what was popular.

Now the game industry is almost the same. Back in the 80s there were a ton of studios, doing their own thing. Games had a small budget, and were usually done in less than half a year, so risks could be made. They were doing their own thing and innovating the medium.

Now we have a couple of large companies left. EA, Activision Blizzard, Eidos, Square-Enix and so on that focus on making things popular and sell money. Not that I blame them, it's the purpose of a company after all, but it's a bit of a shame.

Still, to make Deus Ex sell well, it has to be a good game. So I'm hopeful :p If it's not, then it will be a large outcry from the fans of the first Deus Ex yet again, and few will buy it.

HouseOfPain
1st Jul 2008, 20:00
It may have been Harvey Smith's project, but Specter was the brains behind it. What we take for granted in DX came from his genius, and willing to buck it all to push it through.

He didn't buck enough in DX:IW, he even dictated. That dictation caused a revolt, and that revolt is how and why this franchise has to start all over again (much like a 80's rock band has to go through the grimy club scene again to be noticed).

It's also not just what he did in DX:IW that infuriates people, it's what he has said years later. Playing hostage with responsibility didn't help, either. Fans had no choice in the matter, we were told to take it or leave it -- and given such a choice it created the meltdown many of use don't want to repeat again.

DX3 has to succeed or what IS DX is dead. Can't just rubberstamp this game, it's not a clone (like 20 Deer Hunter games), it's unique among games, and because it's so unique, the fight to keep it so is fierce.

Specter didn't understand fully his creation (it was just a job to him to solve gameplay issues; and only later can he or did he come to understand what happened -- much like the Star Trek actors, who at first rejected the fandom as a quirk or worse, but later in their retiring years, come to reflect better on it, as it wasn't just a fad). The "God" gave us what we were seeking, but "God" also went back to try to destroy it, during the process (DX:IW) and later (in interviews). In a psychological sense, the father is beating his kids over liking his own work -- and the kids have had enough.

He needs to come back to the fold, and SEE his creation away from the throne. And to see the fans are not just some numbers in some demographic, and despite not being "all knowing" of game development, liked the game, it's quirks, it's imperfections, as it's unique. Star Trek was unique, and the same applies to Deus Ex. Instead of being Gene Roddenberry, Specter, abandons the show, disses it, and now burned by the process creates cartoons.

How do you think Deus Ex fans feel after all that?

I realize it was a team process at Ion Storm, Specter couldn't do it all. But it's the sum of the whole, and that sum is reading years later interviews like above.

It hurts.

You are, perhaps, the most Educated fan of Deus Ex I have ever seen.

Kevyne-Shandris
1st Jul 2008, 21:10
Still, to make Deus Ex sell well, it has to be a good game. So I'm hopeful :p If it's not, then it will be a large outcry from the fans of the first Deus Ex yet again, and few will buy it.

The outcry will be heard around the net, as it would've been a double whammy. Eidos couldn't resurrect the franchise for decades.

Don't think (or should I say want to believe) they would go down that road. That's just suicide.

Kevyne-Shandris
2nd Jul 2008, 17:57
While getting sick with DX:IW cut scenes, watched the Harvey Smith interview (is that guy on Red Bull or what? He looked like he'd jitter out of the chair!). No rocket science there to figure out.

Common mistake is to make cyberpunk into Sci-Fi (and the Sci-Fi channel airing both as such doesn't even help). This is what exactly happened in DX:IW - Star Trekish. Great for gadgets and Data like entities, but DX is cyberpunk and more tuned to the post nuclear fallout world. Dirty, grungy, and basically urban decay (F.E.A.R. even done that well in it's Urban Decay level!). Folks can clearly see it in the Hell's Kitchen level in DX.

Major problem in both games is that the levels were piecemeal. They didn't always fit into the world. The Paris scenes were too clean. With all that decay around, the streets were free of the unkemptness -- even the subway. This disjointness doesn't go unnotice.

Now DX3, I have no idea how the world would look beyond the sterileness of that concept art piece. But if the next game is sterile/clinical, it'll repeat the Star Trek route again.

Watching that interview also sealed my ideas of the process itself. Afraid it was like that, and it's sad that such ideas are true (can't make games for hardcore fans, but it's the hardcore fans that keep the franchise alive -- don't they even understand it? Or, what is their idea of "hardcore" is, perfectionism to every detail? No, hardcore is trying to keep the universe intact, so that the "creativeness" of devs don't go overboard and change the genre even). Put pieces together, and hope it works out -- even if they don't belong to the theme. The one good thing I can say about the F.E.A.R. franchise is, the "look and feel" theme went throughout the game -- even into MP. If we get sterile/clinical/bright environments and grunge/dirty/dark mixed together, the theme is broken, continuity is lost.

The main running theme in almost all criticism between the worlds is that "look and feel" was destroyed in DX:IW. Will DX3 do the same? If it does, fans won't be happy, again. That's the major issue -- don't change the formula so much, that DX that we know lost for "creativity" and newness. Sure be creative, but don't destroy the old world, as if it never mattered. It matters to fans, worts and all, it matters.

Coliphorbs
2nd Jul 2008, 18:57
I could live with the "Jetsons" futuristic look of DX:IW, though I much prefer the original's, which makes a lot more sense in the context of the game. But then, DX:IW and sense don't go well together. At any rate, I think IW's failure at grasping the feel had a lot more to do with the plot and story.

You get thrown into this nonsensical Tarsus Academy thing - there is no indication as to how it works and how it is justified within the world. There are people speaking/watching through a device in your skull - nobody actually tells you how and you don't seem too bothered about it, either. The plot focused on having betrayals for the sake of betrayal, the 'conspiracies' were half-baked - you developed no sentiments to any of the characters because you didn't actually get to know them. All they did was boss you around, usually not really explaining why.

Those were the big mistakes of DX:IW. Everything was being taken for granted or as plain obvious. There were no real ethical, moral or hard questions asked.

Of course, the game itself sucking didn't help much.

gamer0004
2nd Jul 2008, 19:14
You know what really bothers me in DX:IW story-wise? There are 4 main factions (Omar, WTO, Order, Templars) and they're the main factions everywhere in the world. In DX we had things like the Triads, Silhouette, NSF and so on. No way will everyone in the world belong to one of only four factions.
What's more, the Templars are supposed to be a splinter cell of the Order. But near the end of the game it is almost powerfull than the WTO AND the ORder COMBINED. That doesn't make any sense at all. And it's supposed to be a quite new faction, so how could they have that many well-equiped well-trained soldiers?
And BTW: the Templars attacking Chicago and Tarsus in Seattle were wearing Order uniforms. Why? Arming an army of Templars wouldn't go unnoticed, especially since they have their own recruiting stations in enclaves and they aren't exactly hiding their intention. If you combine that with the target (Tarsus, with biomodified agents) and what they said when they were occupying the building it is very clear who they are. So why would they wear Order uniforms? It doesn't make sense. There is only one reason to it: to deceive the player. So it's indeed really like "having betrayals for the sake of betrayal".

Kevyne-Shandris
2nd Jul 2008, 19:18
The plot focused on having betrayals for the sake of betrayal, the 'conspiracies' were half-baked - you developed no sentiments to any of the characters because you didn't actually get to know them. All they did was boss you around, usually not really explaining why.

Those were the big mistakes of DX:IW. Everything was being taken for granted or as plain obvious. There were no real ethical, moral or hard questions asked.

Read the Look and Feel thread. Characters in such games are aloof, as they too have secrets, and they react accordingly. Even in DX, there was a detachment from everyone. The closest I got to feeling any of the characters had any warmth was with Jaime. But even he was sly behind the smile.

No warm and fuzzy characters. They eat the dirt and wallow in it.

It was the theme that set it off wrong. It didn't fit in the DX world. In a Star Trekish world we don't expect cyperpunk, we expect the humor and oddity of Data, and the interaction of the USS Enterprise crew. That's not the DX world.

Setting up such a world, designed it to fail when compared to it's origin.