PDA

View Full Version : Overpowered Weapons



Fen
26th Jul 2008, 11:12
GEP Gun
http://www.gamebanshee.com/deusex/equipment/icons/gepgun.jpg

You can aquire the GEP Gun within seconds of starting the game and throughout the game, its basically an easy button everytime your faced with a difficult problem. Bot or MIB in your way, no probs. Got a door/wall that you need to get through, no probs. Ammo is also too easy to get your hands on.

Dragon Tooth Sword
http://www.gamebanshee.com/deusex/equipment/icons/dragonstoothsword.jpg

The legendary sword which kills pretty much everything with 1 hit. If you are able to get close to your enemy, the sword makes sure that your going to win in a fight. It also obseletes the Melee attack Aug, as its a 1 hit kill to most things anyway.


Explosives
http://www.gamebanshee.com/deusex/equipment/icons/empgrenade.jpghttp://www.gamebanshee.com/deusex/equipment/icons/lam.jpghttp://www.gamebanshee.com/deusex/equipment/icons/gasgrenade.jpghttp://www.gamebanshee.com/deusex/equipment/icons/scramblegrenade.jpg

Explosives were able to get you out of sticky situations. They all had their uses, from gassing entire rooms to prevent enemys from moving or to setting the enemy's bots on themselves.

However what makes these weapons totally overpowered, is the fact that they are completely useable with 0 skill points in their respective skills. Having powerful weapons is no problem. But the agent should be forced to have skill points in the correct spots for them to be used effectively. Take the pistol or the assualt rifle, and you will see that both of those weapons were useless if you were untrained, but were deadly when you were master. The same should go for every weapon in DX3. If your not trained in its use, using one effectively should be a really tough thing to do.

This forces people to focus on their skills more. Just dismissing low-tech weapon skills for example should mean that entering a knife fight with an enemy is a really dangerous idea. Players should be forced to play to their strengths, not have weapons that anyone can use regardless of skills.

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 12:19
Don't know about GEP rockets being that easy to get, as I could never have enough of them just to take out the cameras and a stray bot. In Vanderburg level, had to use the scrambler grenades, as there weren't enough rockets (white phosphorus just won't due on bots!). IIRC, there were 4 bots on the surface alone. Spiderbots later. Scramblers were too short supply (even had to buy a few).

Overall, the weapons still took planning to execute them, especially grenades/LAMs. Have to figure out the patrol paths so they could set them off, but even once the patrols are eliminated, turn a corner and you are faced with those IR fences and/or turrets.

Starting from Liberty Island, if you didn't have a GEP, you were SOL on that bot by the base front entrance. No 10mm or crowbar is going to take it down.

The skills should be more about proficiency, as there will be times where heavier firepower will be needed situationally. In game dev today, they love mobbing, and if you're going to have to face 3 bots and more, proficiency isn't going to be enough.

GruntOwner
26th Jul 2008, 12:32
The GEP gun was not really over powered. It was the only thing which could take on bots accurately, and anyone who did use it on humans was kinda a dumbass due to the effectit had on loot and what happens when the bot shows up and you're empty. It was also huge, so wouldn't go easilty in the inventory. The dragontooth was a bad idea against M/WIBs or bots due to the explosion. And it also took loadsa space again. The bombs were brilliant. with their stickiness because no other game in the woprld was so versatile. It's why I never used 'nades in IW, they were too fixed. They were exellant for setting up traps but given that traps were only effective some of the time, it really just became a watch your back sniping weapon or grenade.

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 12:54
and anyone who did use it on humans was kinda a dumbass due to the effectit had on loot

Yeah, considering that's how folks often got their ammo. There were some dry levels towards the end, requiring saving ammo. Made crawling around the shafts and all necessary looking for a stray box.

And before I forget: if you ran out of multi tools or lockpicks (I ran out towards the end), the only way around some of those turrets and/or IR fences were to blow them. LAMs were to precious to just waste (get 15 rockets compared to 1 LAM in caches).

Lady_Of_The_Vine
26th Jul 2008, 13:05
Damn, you made me remember how much I hated running out of multitools and lockpicks! :D

Blade_hunter
26th Jul 2008, 14:14
I think he doesn't accuse the weapon's power...
He maybe think like RPG games when a weapon is powerful we need skills to use it, like the game SS2

in SS 2 to use the assault rifle we need some skills to use this weapon
the pistol needs only one standard weapon skill level, and the AR needs the last standard weapons skill level
In SS 2 the weapon's skills have 6 levels ...

In SS2 the big problem was some weapons were useless, and some of those useless weapons needs a large amount of skills

For the standard and energy weapons, we have no problem in this game, but for the heavy and exotic skills that was another story, if someone never play to SS2 try it we find some similarities with DX 1

If no one plays to this game i can give some informations about the gameplay mechanics of this game, like the inventory system, the skills and other tips.


In the skill thread I asked the question about the fact weapons needs skills to be used, but most players can't imagine this kind of limitation ....

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 14:25
In the skill thread I asked the question about the fact weapons needs skills to be used, but most players can't imagine this kind of limitation ....

It's not that it can't be done, or folks won't mind it to be done (play MMOs and see how tough it can be to advance a skill, and folks buy subsciptions to do this even), it's that another trend in gaming is the "casual gamer". The "dumbing down" of games, first with consoles, and now with the casuals.

Instead of aiming deep for a niche market, publishers are casting a wide net to get even grandma to play.

The result is compromises on how the game will be played. Shorter durations. Quick games. Mobs to keep them entertained with heavy weapons (that won't take much skill to unlock). Smaller maps (as they can't stand travelling for long -- even MMOs now have some type of portal to get around). Just look at the BF series. With BF2 folks complained about how long it took to advance, so they made BF2142 and folks could be a general in about 8 days, with all the unlocks.

For hardcore gamers it's the death to gaming, but the hardcore gamer is that niche market. The same market the publishers will be overlooking, as the investors are looking for quick cash (what took $10,000,000 to make in 2000, is taking $50+ million today to make).

At the rate game development is going, we'll be getting films for games in the future. As the movie studios are already funding these game companies as it is -- good for production values, terrible for gameplay.

jordan_a
26th Jul 2008, 15:38
Fen is right about something, everything is too easy in video games, even in RPGS such as Oblivion and especially in recent games.

You get too many and too powerful weapons too soon.

The only answer the studio can provide is to introduce several difficulty levels with serious restrictions on skills, the number of weapons and ammo you can carry.

The key for DX3 is to please every audience, from the newcomer, the casual gamer to the guy who's willing to die every four minutes and wants challenge... (us? :rolleyes: )

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 15:45
You get too many and too powerful weapons too soon.

Play EQII.

They need too many and too powerful weapons. It's killing me literally that even the best drops or crafted gear aren't enough, because of the mob complex (yes, blaming WoW).


The only answer the studio can provide is to introduce several difficulty levels with serious restrictions on skills, the number of weapons and ammo you can carry.

The key for DX3 is to please every audience, from the newcomer, the casual gamer to the guy who's willing to die every four minutes and wants challenge... (us? :rolleyes: )

Then you'll see this forum light up with casuals complaining the leveling is taking too long (if it takes longer than 30 minutes, you will hear complaints). They want the goodies quick, and a game that can be finished in a night.

How can everyone be satisfied when half the gameplay will have to be cut to please them?

jordan_a
26th Jul 2008, 15:59
They want a game that can be finished in a night.I'm not sure about that. Players get what they are given, you have to blame the developers.

How can everyone be satisfied when half the gameplay will have to be cut to please them?
It won't. If you manage to implement restrictions on different features of the game wisely.

Blade_hunter
26th Jul 2008, 16:11
SS2 is a hard game even on easy mode, saving ammo, combat enemies use the skill points well, manage our inventory, combat enemies that will regenerate themselves is a bit hard on this game, I played DX before and this game is harder compared to DX

I don't know if the best solution is to make some customization of some options for some kind of gamers

System shock 1 have some of those options SOF 1 & 2 too

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 16:18
I'm not sure about that. Players get what they are given, you have to blame the developers.

It won't. If you manage to implement restrictions on different features of the game wisely.

Gamers were complaining of the length of games even back before 2003. It's truly a ADHD/ADD market. Remember how folks said that 35hrs to finish DX was too long. Then someone would come in and say they made it through in 15hrs (knowing full well he did nothing but run through the game).

Look at the Commandos series on YouTube. You're not going to see the "action" of the hours it may take to finish a map (completing those secondary objectives). Nope, you'll see the speed runs, instead.

It's why even some games now don't even have SP to them, they just offer MP, so the kids/casuals can have some 20 minute fragging a night. MMOs are even catering to them (MUDs are starting too). :mad2:

If devs put restrictions on features these run+gun types won't be satisfied, Jordan. See it too much in too many games, as soon as some barrier is placed in access, the "Waaaaaaah" starts.

Eight freaking days to be a general in BF2142 with all unlocks. Eight days. Where it may have took 8 months in BF2. Now they have the craziness of Bad Company for the kiddies.

The net is being cast ultra wide.

joejoefine
26th Jul 2008, 17:20
I think that, realistically, the GEP gun is as powerful as it should be, because it IS a rocket after all. I remember for the military bots, you would still need two, so I'm not sure that its overpowered. But maybe what the designers should do is reduce the quantity of ammo available throughout the game so that the player is forced to use other, less powerful weapons in a stealthier/more tactical way.

I'm honestly not too sure why Deus Ex was so easy to play. But I think it was just the AI that wasn't particularly bright. They would often run straight towards you and attack, using no tactics whatsoever. Or they would strafe sometimes, but that's the most I ever saw.

Also, there were many unrealistic components of Deus Ex that made it easy to accumulate goodies - like how you can blow up locked containers with a LAM and leave the contents completely undamaged, allowing you to rack up many lockpicks really easily. Or running straight towards someone with his back turned to you, then hearing "who's there", whacking him with a crowbar once, he runs away, then you run after and kill him. They should be able to hear you a little better, and maybe not run but instead shoot you point blank somewhere in your direction! (although I still enjoyed killing everyone on Liberty Island with a crowbar :) ) It was even easier to kill people in Deus Ex 2 - I think realistically they should have better reaction times and be more aware of their surroundings.

I'm just thinking now, that one should be fully trained in melee use, and then you could just whack someone unconscious with a single blow from crowbar, or a blackjack or whatever.

There were many exploitable things in Deus Ex that made it easy. For the next Deus Ex they just need to focus on ensuring that it stays realistic, and that you can't, say, lose both of your legs and then regenerate them with the power of nanotechnology.

The real appeal to Deus Ex was its awesome integration of philosophy into the game and its villains; keeping that up, the stealth and tactics, better AI for sure, and it should be a pretty good game. From one side you really enjoy taking advantage of the AI in Deus Ex, but eventually you wish it were more challenging

Also..
The net is being cast ultra wide.
I think there are still companies that are willing to make quality games; I think you'll probably have to look at the independent developers. When Black Isle was first making games, it produced Planescape: Torment, and the two great Fallouts 1 & 2. I think there's still plenty of potential for new companies to create a niche market for themselves. Its the big "Bethesda's" that you can probably expect to make things appealing to a mass audience, just because they have that growing audience already. But I think Blizzard is an example of a company that doesn't care about mass appeal - but realizes that its income and reputation is based on making quality games, which is why they never release anything crappy. So I think there's potential for more companies to go in this direction, or at least see new Black Isle's creating our beloved games. Hopefully Eidos is like Blizzard and goes after quality more than mass appeal! (I think they will)

jcp28
26th Jul 2008, 17:30
LAMs were still much less common than multitools in DX 1, so it was never really such a big issue for me. But i concede that rockets are far too common. Even if they were used on pretty much every door without a key that could easily be found, you'd still probably have a few left. Then again, I think the rockets were a little easier to find in general.

SubTonic20
26th Jul 2008, 19:01
I'm perfectly happy with the availability of DX1's weapons and equipment, along with the easy use of them. Part of what made that game so great was being given all of that stuff, being given a task, then choosing how you wanted to go about completing it with all of that stuff you were given. If the game severely limited my equipment at the beginning, I'd find the experience much less satisfying.

Fen
26th Jul 2008, 19:35
Ok, I dont think I made my point very well in the OP.

My problem isnt due to the overpowered weapons themselves. Its the fact that they are the weapons in the game which are very effective regardless of your proficiency in that skill.

The GEP gun will take down everything but the large military bots in 1 shot. The Sword will kill everything in 1 shot apart from bots. I dont mind this. My sniper rifle also kills pretty much anything in one shot. However I've got to be a master in Rifles to do that. I dont need a single skill point in low-tech or heavy weapons to be deadly with the GEP Gun and Dragons tooth. This is why these weapons are overpowered.

I am totally against not being able to use a weapon without a certain proficiency. I think anyone should be able to pick up a GEP gun and have a shot. However an untrained Heavy weapon user should have the same difficulty killing something with a GEP gun as an Untrained Rifle user should have trying to snipe someone with a scoped sniper rifle.

SubTonic20
26th Jul 2008, 19:54
Eh, the GEP gun does in fact increase in efficiency as you put points into the skill, the most notable improvement being the amount of time needed for a shot to lock on. I think it was done pretty well myself. The only skill that raises an eyebrow for me is Demolition. The difference between Untrained and Master is non-existent. Disarming set explosives doesn't seem to have been made "easier", and throwing them definitely didn't change, so I really don't see the point in that skill at all.

Blade_hunter
26th Jul 2008, 20:30
I understand your thought

I take examples with DX weapons

Low tech weapons
Weapons that needs untrained skill
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/7505/combatknifeid2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/4016/batonju9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/9027/crowbarbf5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/9233/peppergunrq3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/5457/riotprodfo8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs trained skill
http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/1783/throwingknivesnv3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/359/swordco7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs advanced skill
http://img373.imageshack.us/img373/9020/dragonstoothswordtn3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Pistol weapons
Weapons that needs untrained skill
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/1909/pistolgx7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs trained skill
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/3236/ps20hn8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/444/stealthpistolnk2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs advanced skill
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/4460/minicrossbowfx8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Weapons rifle
Weapons that needs untrained skill
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/9594/sawedoffshotgunwt5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs trained skill
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3884/assaultriflexi7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/1535/assaultshotgunre8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs advanced skill
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7494/sniperrifleiu0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Blade_hunter
26th Jul 2008, 20:32
Weapons heavy
Weapons that needs untrained skill
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/9536/lawfc6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs trained skill
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/3733/gepgunln5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/7474/flamethrowerlu6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs advanced skill
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/7646/plasmarifleva3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Weapons Demo
Weapons that needs untrained skill
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/4676/gasgrenadece2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3714/empgrenadenu4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Weapons that needs trained skill
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/2603/lamfc2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/7673/scramblegrenadebm2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

It's difficult to use that kind of skills level requirements because the weapons have in low number to use them correctly and with balance, everyone notice the plasma rifle needs a high skill, and it wasn't a powerful weapon
For the rifle it's not logical if DX propose the rifle since the init of the game
And for the crossbow it's not because it's high tech, it's because it's the more powerful pistol weapons and because we haven't machine pistols or revolvers

I think it's something like this you want the same limitations as SS2

Fen
26th Jul 2008, 20:45
No. This is not what I want.

Every weapon should be useable at any skill level. Just because somone isnt trained in the use of a gun, doesnt mean he cant still have a go at shooting it.

What I want are skill proficiencys to be important for every weapon. Every weapon should be pure crap in the hands of an untrained agent, yet lethal in the hands of a master.

This didnt exist in DX1 with the GEP gun, Dragon Tooth and the explosives. Every other gun was fine. The stealth pistol was not so great as an untrained user, but the bomb when you had master pistols. The Assualt rifle went from being a spray and pray weapon to a lethal burst fire rifle with training. The Dragon tooth sword went from being a baddass sword which killed everything, to a baddass sword which still killed everything when trained. There was really no need for training in low-tech because the weapon was lethal regardless of your skills.

Its this factor which made the weapons overpowered. Because anyone could use them at their full potential without training. I just hope in DX3 we dont see this dynamic, because it undermines the whole skill system.

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 20:46
My sniper rifle also kills pretty much anything in one shot. However I've got to be a master in Rifles to do that.

I was killing the "ants" from the first building (where you get up on the ladder from the alley) into the Com tower, on the Warehouse district level, with just the trained skill.

It's fun knowing that those animations (when you startle a patrol) still work even THAT far away, too. ;)

Cleared most of the levels that way, with from like 86 to 93 7.62mm rounds to spare end game.

Unless I was in cheat mode, the highest I got the Rifle was advanced (as I had to use the skill points on that darn lockpick skill). :mad2:

Chemix
26th Jul 2008, 20:47
In large this comes from the nature of the weapon, a rocket is going to be easier to use at range because of the explosion it creates. I only really used rockets on bots, turrets, and MIBs if I had no tranq darts or was about to die. The other problem was that the levels were widely open, with high ceilings ( or none) and few obstructions, which means less claustrophobia, which is good, but it makes sniping very easy, but sniper ammo was one of the rarest ammos in the game, which meant, in lacking bullets, you had to use rockets, which were dead accurate and highly effective.

As for the dragons tooth, it's hard to say that it shouldn't be a one hit kill, it's effectively a lightsaber, and we saw how it went when they were everywhere in DX2 and weren't as effective. Getting in range without sneaking means getting shot in the face with an assault rifle, so that balanced out a fair bit.

I always play through DX on realistic, and it's not that easy. When I repeatedly get shot by stray grunt fire, or an instant kill sniper (apparently my bullet proof vest is worthless to even protect my chest in the slightest), it does piss me off, not because I don't like a challenge, but because I don't like being frustrated by having to do things a dozen times over. I like to do things at most 4 times, after that it's just tedious.

ALSO: Lockpicks were awful, as were multitools. Picking locks with a single lockpick (which is hard to "break" permanently) should be possible, none of this 5 lockpicks for one container crap.

Blade_hunter
26th Jul 2008, 20:56
Ah ok I think you wanted skill limitations ....
You want the guns like the dragon's tooth needs more shots to kill with an untrained user
And the GEP gun needs 2 shots to kill a large bot if we are untrained

It's right ?

Fen
26th Jul 2008, 21:05
Ah ok I think you wanted skill limitations ....
You want the guns like the dragon's tooth needs more shots to kill with an untrained user
And the GEP gun needs 2 shots to kill a large bot if we are untrained

It's right ?

Yeah, limitations for the untrained users so training in the weapon skill has a purpose.

Maybe the GEP gun wouldnt have the homing option with an untrained user. Maybe the Dragon tooth would have a really long swing when untrained.

When you scope with a sniper rifle, its very obvious the difference between an untrained user in rifles and a master. This should be a common theme for all weapons.

Cr4sh
26th Jul 2008, 21:09
I agree that the rocket launcher was far to good. I'd rather have limited its ammo an capacity than making such border with skills, because - let's be honest: we all surely would know how to throw a grenade or fire a sniper rifle without having touched one ever before (okay, i once threw a grenade, and it's as easy as throwing a rock, and that you need to pull the ring (i don't know whether you call it so in english...) everyone of us also will know - or if you want to go in the DX universe, if I wanted to use such a grenade, I'd think of pressing the two red button simultaneously or something like that... it surely would be easy...). It's only the question, whether you would hit anything. That the rifle swinged around like mad if you scoped untrained also wasn't very realistic. You just would not hit as you would ... (damn it's stupid to have such little vocabulary...) some kind of pull your aim away from the target the moment you pull the trigger. On the other side, with an assault rifle, this is way easier... but I'm getting off-topic.

To conclude this statement, I don't think it is very useful to limit the amount of useable weapons by the skill system, because it's less realistic than the DX1 system and would force you to play the game the same way all along, which could become quite boring or monotone.

Blade_hunter
26th Jul 2008, 21:27
The DX skill system give the freedom to use every weapon in game, regardless the skills
Fen wants to amplifies the fact we haven't some skills a powerful weapon from a specific skill needs to be difficult to use or causes an insufficient amount of damage when we haven't a good level on this skill
We keep the freedom of use but give more inconvenients to untrained soldiers

I thought at first time he wanted to use skill limitations like many RPG games (the game SS2 use the same system)
and those skills were to unlock the use of a specific weapon

Now I know what he wanted to say
We can use every weapon, but the use of some weapons must be awful or limited by their damage / accuracy when we haven't sufficient training in a skill

Chemix
26th Jul 2008, 21:36
I don't like the idea of tying damage to skill level, never did, a bullet is a bullet is a bullet and a rocket is a rocket is a rocket. Rather, the rocket launcher should have a strong knockback, perhaps knock you off your feet if untrained, and in doing so it can affect the direction of the rocket, forcing you to push your aim opposite the jerk of the knock back (opposite your shoulder that you're using to hold the weapon). This would lessen as skill increases.

Cr4sh
26th Jul 2008, 21:36
you could also reward skilling i.e. the grenade-skill with special abilities , such as maybe combining a grenade and some napalm ammo to an incendiary grenade. Or that you only have one type of grenades and later on learn that you can take out the 'black powder' and instead fill in pepper spray. Or that you can make it ecplode from distance and so on and on. There can be many abilities that can make the skilling of such talents cool and useful.

jcp28
26th Jul 2008, 23:35
Yeah, limitations for the untrained users so training in the weapon skill has a purpose.

Maybe the GEP gun wouldnt have the homing option with an untrained user. Maybe the Dragon tooth would have a really long swing when untrained.

When you scope with a sniper rifle, its very obvious the difference between an untrained user in rifles and a master. This should be a common theme for all weapons.


Yeah, those would be pretty good options. Once I think about it for a second, I remember that one could always have a homing target with the GEP regardless.

Still, if you're right up next to some guy with a Dragon's Tooth, you should be able to kill him with one hit as long as he doesn't move his head. Besides I wouldn't want to train up any more than Level 2 to get a guaranteed one-hit kill with the Dragon's Tooth. I'd say, just put it a little later if things seem a little easy where it is.

Demiurge
27th Jul 2008, 01:11
Fen, I see what you are saying, but sadly this is where the Balance VS Realism clasm comes in. If I threw a grenade, I probably couldn't throw it as accurately as a special forces bloke, but if somehow we each managed to land the thing next to some poor sod, he'd be screwed either way, there would be no difference in damage, same goes for a rocket launcher (which almost any moron can lock on and fire, those things are pretty much idiot proof nowadays) and same for a Nanosword (which is basically a load of pain if you were hit with it by a child because it doesn't require any strength). One solution to the problem with all weapons is to remove the crosshair, and as you get more skilled the weapon 'centres' more on a target you point it at (NOT AUTOAIM) (The Agent's hand moves or the gun changes position slightly), basically telling you when you should take the shot, don't see why it shouldn't work for swords or grenades though, but as for fire and forget rocket launchers, locking on with no crosshair and no indication will be trickier. I still want my GEP gun :cool:

Fen
27th Jul 2008, 07:26
But that totally undermines the skill system.

Everyone wants to see the skill system return in DX3. It was a great addition to the game in DX1. However a complaint that many have is that some skills were useless. Some of the most useless skills were Heavy weapons, Low-tech Weapons and Demolitions.

The reason being, they barely added anything to your character. An untrained user in Low-tech weapons could still destroy anyone with the dragontooth, so what was the incentive for the player to spend thousands of skill points on Low-tech?

On my most recent playthrough (realistic of course), my character is untrained in Heavy weapons and Low-tech Weapons. However when I had a look at my inventory and weapons that I use, I noticed that 50% of my kills will be with my Dragontooth. Any bots that I encounter, i'll deal with, with my GEP gun. This is when I realised that those weapons are overpowered. Anyone can use them to their full effect regardless of skills. And this screws with game balance a LOT. If the game is going to have a skill system, then it must have an impact on how the game is played.

Try playing through the game untrained in pistols, but only using pistols. You'll notice that its REALLY hard. It should be similar for all weapons.

Red
27th Jul 2008, 07:35
Regarding the GEP gun:

While untrained, you moved slower than a snail when you equipped it, plus the reload time was like 5-6 seconds, so...

iWait
27th Jul 2008, 10:03
I agree that the demolition skill is useless, and I think it should be taken out of the game.

Realistically though, anybody could kill with a sword. The damage should go up with skill level as in the first game. In addition if an untrained agent tries to kill someone with a melee weapon it will make noise, which will decrease with skill level.

Regarding the GEP Gun I found nothing wrong with it other than the abundance of ammo. You could use a Phosphorous Round to take out a room leaving their bodies intact, and to destroy doors. If you were untrained it was almost impossible to use it if you were already being attacked, as you moved oh so slowly and it took what felt like 10 seconds to reload.

Blade_hunter
27th Jul 2008, 10:43
I think he's a stealth player and a stealth player doesn't needs got too much combat skills, because they can find secure areas to avoid the danger

Ok with the dragon's tooth we can kill with one shot, but we can't use the sword if we are under attack by MJ12 commandos, their machineguns are too fast, we must attack them stealthy if we want to survive a front attack against them is a high chance for a quick death

When we are a combative player it's an other story we must upgrade the skills if we want to use combat tactics

Kevyne-Shandris
27th Jul 2008, 11:17
Fen, I see what you are saying, but sadly this is where the Balance VS Realism clasm comes in.

And the realism factor is: that special forces dude playing DX3 will just be better at using some weapons, naturally.

Change the game, the same natural skills will still be available across them. Just like in MP, some are just better at running+gunning than others. Where the guy above said it took a master level skill to hit a target, I was just at the trained level picking off "ants". It's because I specialize in doing just that as a minigame in itself in m-a-n-y games.

Grenades take no real skill, and even in basic training that course is quite brief -- unlike like 8 weeks of learning how to fire, clean, breakdown and repair a weapon.

Seems folks want fantasy and realism together, but penalizing players just because they think it'll add realism, doesn't help the realism argument much. Either it's real (and all the junk to go with it), or it's not.

Chemix
27th Jul 2008, 11:44
I like a skill system, but I still say that tying it to damage isn't a good idea, and furthermore, it's lazy. There are dozens of problems that can come from the improper use of a weapon in real life, and not one of them makes "damage" go down if it hits, and few will make an assault rifle so inaccurate that it's useless at over 10 feet away.

gameplay examples-

Heavy Weapons:
Rocket launchers have strong knockback if untrained, and can mess up the shot (you need to manually push the mouse opposite the way the rocket launcher throws itself away from the supporting shoulder) and if you fire while un-crouched you have a chance of knocking yourself off your feet, which is doubled if your moving while firing (so you will definitely land on your buttox).

Rifles:
If you're untrained, the assault rifle is going to pull upwards as you're firing, alot. If you have a strength aug, it's reduced, but it's not gone. Also, it's going to jam occasionally. Reloading also takes a while as you try and fiddle the magazine into place.
If you're untrained, the sniper rifle may knock you back, and if you're standing, it should knock you back more, and possibly cause the weapon to leave your hands from the jolt.

Kevyne-Shandris
27th Jul 2008, 12:45
Your examples are good, Chemix, but in reality mode they still don't apply, because some folks can pick up a weapon and be a darn good shot from the start. Remember when I first shot a .22, had zero problems hitting targets, on the first try.

Maybe a solution is like how SH4 has it: you pick the realism mode. Options 1-20 will define your overall realism score. Higher the realism more points (reknown) you can earn. That way those who choose to play most realistically can have the higher scores (both SP and in MP). So if a mission on 100% realism offers 2000 dollars and 2000 skill points, someone at 25% realism only gets 25% of it.

Then it wouldn't matter how easy it is to use a weapon, because if you choose to play at 25% reality, you can eat only 25% of the bounty.

Really prefer the skills to be more character than weapon based, like in RPGs. Someone with more strength could carry and jump higher; where someone with more intelligence can hack and crack faster, etc.. Add the biomods, and no 2 players will be much alike -- especially in MP (hate facing the same people with the same exact abilities over and over and over).

jordan_a
27th Jul 2008, 13:01
New! Overpowered weapons (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=78622)

Chemix
27th Jul 2008, 13:46
I understand that some people can be good shots from the start, which is why the problems can be bypassed with some manual countering. Also, handling a rocket launcher is something that extremely few people are just born with.

Kevyne-Shandris
27th Jul 2008, 13:55
I understand that some people can be good shots from the start, which is why the problems can be bypassed with some manual countering. Also, handling a rocket launcher is something that extremely few people are just born with.

If it's just point and aim, anyone could do it. If it's all the stuff to fire it (like in AA for the Javelin), yeah, that would take experienced folks using it. The extra steps would make fewer players using the big guns in MP, too (god I hope it's not just a missile/HE frag fest like the original DX).

jordan_a
27th Jul 2008, 14:19
I understand that some people can be good shots from the start.On still targets most people can. But on moving targets it's much more difficult, it's an entire different sport and I doubt that anyone can be good at it from medium distance right away.

Kevyne-Shandris
27th Jul 2008, 16:33
On still targets most people can. But on moving targets it's much more difficult, it's an entire different sport and I doubt that anyone can be good at it from medium distance right away.

If seeing is believing :rasp:

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t51/JCDentonII/BF2142_Takao_LongRange_Snipering.jpg

Got stuck up on a building because some RDX bunny blew me up there. No ammo but was left in the Takao underpowered pistol (and I didn't even get my pistol badge yet-- meaning green, green, green), with three choice targets. Two were more stationary, but the one in that pic wasn't.

Ants, ants, ants!

You can be greener than a pasture, and still hit targets. You can shoot and kill even out of stock ranges (and can barely even see the ants!) with a engineer rifle...

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t51/JCDentonII/Titan_Suez_PilumSnipering_Infantrya.jpg

You can throw a grenade (and get it right in a pocket, figuring the geometry of throwing it a long distance and the necessary bounce -- over and over and over) and kill jumping beans that's 95% invisible...

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t51/JCDentonII/Perfect_Titan_Defense.jpg

And you can be completely suicidal and try out for knife badges (mano vs. mano), and be really crazy to join a contest pitting you against the game's own developers (15 of their tags, and I never did get my gold knife badge)...

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t51/JCDentonII/Knife/BF2142_Knife_DICE_HATE_B.jpg

Whatever game it is, a gamer can still best it despite the limits.

This is why if there's going to be some skill system, if folks want skills = you're better, it best be applied on something that's just not weapon related -- reflexes; sight; perception, etc. Otherwise, folks are still going to best the weapon skill system, regardless.

Blade_hunter
27th Jul 2008, 17:19
It's for that reason a talk about stealth players

When we are stealthy we don't need to use the GEP gun for example, the EMP grenades are better for this kind of player, and even if they use the GEP gun, they use a cover approach

When we are combative the Heavy weapon skill must be upgraded to "Advanced" to be easy to use, to allow the run and quick reload with this weapon. when I reached the airport level my heavy weapon skill was to level 3, I killed the bots with my GEP gun without a much combative tactic, I take down 3 bots in front of the closed hangar door.
due to it's long reload time i take cover after each kill, but it was easier without this skill level

The only useless weapons are plasma based, and the AR primary fire (not very useless but when I have the rifle skill to master, i will be disappointed by this gun, because with my sniper rifle, I take down NPCs with more efficiency six MJ12 commandos with the sniper vs 2 up to 3 with the AR and aim the head well with each gun)

If the balance must be done we must increase the efficiency of some useless weapons ... because when our enemy use the dragon tooth they can kill us in one shot

Kevyne-Shandris
27th Jul 2008, 19:12
It's for that reason a talk about stealth players

When we are stealthy we don't need to use the GEP gun for example, the EMP grenades are better for this kind of player, and even if they use the GEP gun, they use a cover approach

When we are combative the Heavy weapon skill must be upgraded to "Advanced" to be easy to use, to allow the run and quick reload with this weapon.

Which means what we got from our first meet with Paul on Liberty Island (or something similiar). And the GEP was slow to use (especially reload on lower skill levels). But because I didn't use the GEP but for bots and cameras (and sometimes the IR fences when LAMs were low), never needed to upgrade the skill past trained.

That's what I love about DX. You really didn't need to skill up weapons too much, trained would've been enough. Some skills like computers and lockpicking had to be skilled, but the weapons didn't (which is nice, because the computer and lockpicking skills really did need those skill points). If I had to use them all on 2 weapons, I'd be in more than a hole, especially with ammo and those mods in lockers that would've required 4 lockpicks to open -- and you only have 7 left. :mad2:

jordan_a
27th Jul 2008, 20:12
If seeing is believingIn reality I meant.

HouseOfPain
27th Jul 2008, 20:26
In reality I meant.

Forgot to mention that eh ;)

Blade_hunter
27th Jul 2008, 20:44
Hopefully we don't need too much skills, because the game was made to allow to pass through a situation even if we haven't the skills
Disabling the LAMs with the low skill level can be made regardless the demo skill

But this kind of suggestion confirm my though about the game itself, we need to fit some gameplay options to allow each kind of player to play, but the main problems are:
-We must find a main concept to allow some moving options
-The difficulty of this system is we must use different options
That can change the around gameplay, but not the core by some options, or find the best core to allow less options and keep the gameplay base ....
A difficult thing ....

HouseOfPain
27th Jul 2008, 20:48
I always wondered why hacking was so EASY.

Skill 1: Cant hack
Skill 2: Can hack
Skill 3: Can hack faster and longer
Skill 4: Can hack faster and longer

I would have it be more like

Skill 1: Can't hack
Skill 2: Can only hack ATMs (and the like)
Skill 3: Can hack terminals
Skill 4: Can hack terminals and ATMs faster and longer.

because hacking in Deus Ex 1 is so... so easy!

And in Deus Ex 2 lol.. dont get me started on the stupidity.

AaronJ
27th Jul 2008, 20:54
Well that's where it gets difficult. How would someone actually go about doing a good hacking puzzle?

HouseOfPain
27th Jul 2008, 20:59
Well that's where it gets difficult. How would someone actually go about doing a good hacking puzzle?

Bleh, Bioshock shows us that can get old

AaronJ
27th Jul 2008, 21:07
Never played it. There is a difference between a unique story and absurdity.

iWait
27th Jul 2008, 21:12
Something I liked about IW was that when you went to a terminal it didn't go to a full-screen thing like DX. I hope DX3 does not implement the full-screen menu when you use terminals or ATMs.

Blade_hunter
27th Jul 2008, 21:12
You forgot to say we can change the turret state with the level 3 hack level ;)
In DX we can't change the turrets state when we haven't the level 3, this make the level 3 interesting and when we have the level 2 using the code is a better way :)

HouseOfPain
27th Jul 2008, 21:28
(on DX:IW about screens, I didnt like how it paused the game when you opened a datacube, and that it had PAGES of information I didnt feel like reading)
So yeah please dont pause gameplay when hacking/reading. =)

Fen
28th Jul 2008, 09:02
oops, message deleted

jcp28
28th Jul 2008, 15:33
Teh feature of bringing up a full screen whenever you hack a terminal was supposed to increase immersion.

But I could certainly see how that could get annoying. On the other hand, there's realism in that you can be attacked while hacking a terminal. I don't see any reason why that shouldn't still be in there. If you haven't taken care of nearby enemies beforehand, your loss, unless you anticipate their patrol patterns to where you can hack the computer and run out in some situations. Still, full screen is bad idea.

AaronJ
28th Jul 2008, 15:39
I liked Doom 3's computers. There was actually a mod for DX that included the same kind of screens.

Kevyne-Shandris
28th Jul 2008, 19:59
Teh feature of bringing up a full screen whenever you hack a terminal was supposed to increase immersion.

But I could certainly see how that could get annoying. On the other hand, there's realism in that you can be attacked while hacking a terminal. I don't see any reason why that shouldn't still be in there. If you haven't taken care of nearby enemies beforehand, your loss, unless you anticipate their patrol patterns to where you can hack the computer and run out in some situations. Still, full screen is bad idea.

For a login screen, yeah, when it filled the whole monitor it lost the immersive effect. A small box would suffice.

Chemix
29th Jul 2008, 01:48
Well when you're looking at your monitor, is your peripheral vision nearly as high as when not focused on it? While full black screen with a login key was fairly much, it should mostly be the computer terminal on screen.

jcp28
29th Jul 2008, 01:53
Naw. My peripheral vision kind of sucks.:o But It's not really a huge issue, I guess.

Lilith
11th Jan 2009, 17:54
Hey, first legit post. So be nice :P

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet here.

JC -was- a rookie. THIS, is indisputable.

1) - It was his first active day.
2) - Countless of you will have heard 'We can get this guy, his just a rookie'.

The point is his 'natural' *cough* abilities.

JC was as such the thing you described in saying 'Some people just pick it up and own'. DX1 and DX3 learning from the mistake of DX2, put you behind a some-what specific person.

With JC, his abilities allowed him to be able to overcome highly trained opposition. This is setting you, the player. Up from a unfair disadvantage in one sense. 'They can kill you with a single blow', 'THEY' are highly trained special agents, so, we. duh.

Now, I'm sure you picked off the 'ants' without any issue, but, had you been fully trained you could have done that with much more both 'ease' and 'time'.

----

Basically, what Deus Ex did not do in DX1 was punish you for using strong (special) weapons on mediocre crap.

GEP Gun.
If you picked the GEP, and unless you had a good reason almost EVERYONE picks it on their 2nd and beyond play through, and you didn't toss it - restricting you a lot (I'll come back to that) - then you carried around a I WIN button. Not a damn thing can stand up to the GEP gun and some competence, not even a lot. Basically anything gets single shot by it, meaning the large reload time only becomes an issue if you're a total moron, in which case you're meant to be dead. The slow moving aspect meant that you merely had to give yourself a second of cover + time to aim before you shot.

Grenades.
Ok, this is where the game really showed you some POWERFUL stuff.

LAM, the lame was brilliant, it bounces it sticks its, its just sexy.
Its flaw was that it was TOO sexy, it was another I WIN for breaking open just about anything (hello Smuggler). As for real life applications?
Well an idiot without real life training would under estimate the distance one needs to throw one and hurt/maim/kill themselves. To in-game balance, this brings up the large issue that its a mistake you make -once-, you don't suffer the same cutback in a game as real life, its why its a game.

SCRAMBLE, I actually have no issue with this grenade, its pleasantly hard to obtain, rare, and nicely circumstantial. As for training? Same deal as the LAM, too close bye bye bioelectrical energy, one time mistake.

GAS, it was powerful, would've hurt you more IRL but one time mistake there too.

Dragon's Tooth
Here, this, this thing is the problem.
You cannot nerf this weapon without causing storyline issues. It, NEEDS to be godly. That said in balance it was too strong, a little bit of sneaking, i.e open a door two facing the other way dash and double strike = win. Trained it became brilliant and any deeper was pointless. This is a weapon that used correctly, which was simple to work out i.e don't stand in front of anything with a gun. And you became super lethal without training, or only a little.

So, a solution?

Basically, it needs to bring together the correct blend of real life applicability and in game balance.

A solution would have been simple; create bonuses for those whom train, whilst at the same time creating difficult and (this is where I step into somewhat touchy ground) frustrating obstacles for untrained. If you're untrained you NEED to be punished for using it in some way, because the game is open ended, and it was good, but made it easy in that you can train yourself to be a killing/stealth machine, and then without too much issue step into the shoes of the other for a moment.

The way I saw DX1 was that you brought JC up to a level where in he could handle anything without death and then created the path you wished to step into. First time through you were balanced evenly generally, stealthy - few kills early on, then more and more lethal and violent as the game went on, I've watched a lot of my friends play this and most of them went that way.

So you could adjust like that.

Stealth was harder but more rewarding in the sense you saw more of the locations.

So, back on topic - solutions that could have been.

GEP Gun - Untrained;
You still would know, pick this up, point it and pull the trigger. So, logically, what wouldn't one know? Firstly kick; i.e make this not a fire and forget, HOWEVER this doesn't solve the issue of a semi-stealth player making a single shot then moving on. So you need something uncontrollable whilst sticking to a weapon with a lot of built in functions.

This isn't a solution for the DX1 world, we're going back into a earlier time, so solution? Make the lock-on function a pain, in, the, ass i.e NOT user friendly at all, have it mess up on, annoy the crap out of the player. As I see it, you want to force them to WANT to train or to NOT want to use the weapon, basically make it like a gamer, someone who has theoretical base knowledge, but no practice.

Grenades - Untrained;
You, cannot, at all fix this problem with a simple untrained how far to throw.
What you can do, is again taking some control away, have the character lack knowledge on the grenade i.e HOW to throw it, be unsure of the weight, how it bounces how hard to throw it. Mess around with the consistency of throws. How it bounces back. For example the LAM was a sorta flatish thing, with odd sides an untrained (or unfamiliar person) with it might have it hit a weird angle and bounce off stupidly.

Dragon's Tooth - Untrained;
This, this is a son of a ***** to control.

Simple, it wouldn't exist.

More detailed, if something like it did. Pressure point, knowledge of where to hit, how to hit. But more specifically again with loose of control. An untrained person would just swing it, a trained person would know. Say for example, Japanese culture the Katana, correct form wasn't just swing it, one would flick their wrist at the last moment and drag the sword through, i.e large amount of force, then pull - cutting sword.

So this does come down to increased damage, but with correct explanation and implementation it would work. i.e something like damage spikes, an untrained agent has NO chance to correctly strike, whilst a trained has some, a advanced large/full and master full/special (something like using the body for something after).

That all said, I believe this is a moot point as such a system isn't being implemented?

gamer0004
11th Jan 2009, 20:53
I'm responding to several of your arguments. I do not agree with what you came up with, and I'll show you why:



JC -was- a rookie. THIS, is indisputable.

1) - It was his first active day.
2) - Countless of you will have heard 'We can get this guy, his just a rookie'.

The point is his 'natural' *cough* abilities.



Just one thing: inexperienced does not have to mean that he's incapable of doing anything. People with a hell of a lot of training can be pretty good soldiers. And I think that a multi-billion project would get that bit of training.



With JC, his abilities allowed him to be able to overcome highly trained opposition. This is setting you, the player. Up from a unfair disadvantage in one sense. 'They can kill you with a single blow', 'THEY' are highly trained special agents, so, we. duh.


The idea is that, by the time you actually encounter such highly trained opposition, you're ready for it because you have become a very experienced fighter. NSF troops are almost untrained (two weeks training in a militia camp) and often have no experience. Only when you encounter the MJ-12 troops the resistence gets more tough; but to be honest I don't think that the normal MJ12 troops were very well trained, because training is very expensive.



Basically, what Deus Ex did not do in DX1 was punish you for using strong (special) weapons on mediocre crap.

GEP Gun.
If you picked the GEP, and unless you had a good reason almost EVERYONE picks it on their 2nd and beyond play through, and you didn't toss it - restricting you a lot (I'll come back to that) - then you carried around a I WIN button. Not a damn thing can stand up to the GEP gun and some competence, not even a lot. Basically anything gets single shot by it, meaning the large reload time only becomes an issue if you're a total moron, in which case you're meant to be dead.


Actually, you're only a moron when you actually use the GEP gun against troops. Saving your rockets for bots is very important. If you don't you'll run out of them. I actually did on my first runthrough, even while I only used them on bots.

Besides, maybe you should try playing Deus Ex on realistic difficulty. Trying to kill several groups of enemy troops with a GEP gun is suicide, because they headshot you after you've fired the first rocket.



Grenades.
Ok, this is where the game really showed you some POWERFUL stuff.

LAM, the lame was brilliant, it bounces it sticks its, its just sexy.
Its flaw was that it was TOO sexy, it was another I WIN for breaking open just about anything (hello Smuggler). As for real life applications?
Well an idiot without real life training would under estimate the distance one needs to throw one and hurt/maim/kill themselves. To in-game balance, this brings up the large issue that its a mistake you make -once-, you don't suffer the same cutback in a game as real life, its why its a game.

Once again, you had to save LAMs for worse times. Besides, not all doors could be destroyed with LAMs. I do agree that they took a little bit too little inventory space, and might have been a bit too abundunt. But why make it less powerful? Explosives simply are powerful. But haven't we all had a LAM which bounced back to us? Yes, you can load your savefile again, but that is the same with every weapon. Getting killed by your opponents because you missed doesn't result in the same "cutback" as in real life either.



A solution would have been simple; create bonuses for those whom train, whilst at the same time creating difficult and (this is where I step into somewhat touchy ground) frustrating obstacles for untrained. If you're untrained you NEED to be punished for using it in some way, because the game is open ended, and it was good, but made it easy in that you can train yourself to be a killing/stealth machine, and then without too much issue step into the shoes of the other for a moment.


I think that indeed the Dragon's Tooth sword was a bit too powerful. It would've been better if you had needed like two strikes on a commando when you're untrained. But it wasn't always useful. It took quite a lot of inventory space and wasn't very versatile. Trying to take out enemies more than 5 feet away from you was suicide.



This isn't a solution for the DX1 world, we're going back into a earlier time, so solution? Make the lock-on function a pain, in, the, ass i.e NOT user friendly at all, have it mess up on, annoy the crap out of the player. As I see it, you want to force them to WANT to train or to NOT want to use the weapon, basically make it like a gamer, someone who has theoretical base knowledge, but no practice.


Wow this really sounds like fun :hmm:
I mean, I'm not a player who goes in and kills everybody. I'm more the stealthy type. However, I do need a weapon which I can use once in a while to destroy some bots, and that should be possible. Making things in games frustrating is always a bad thing. Making things hard or impossible is fine, as long as it makes sense. But a crappy lock on function? Well, the government wouldn't buy it. Simple. Those things get tested thoroughly. Secondly, if I were an agent. I would simply shut it off and directly fire at the enemy. If that's not even possible in a game it's very frustrating in a very not fun way and it breaks the immersion badly.
Personally, I don't really think there was anything wrong with the GEP gun. It took a hell of a lot of inventory space. Sometimes I dumped the GEP gun and simply used grenades and the assault rifle grenade launcher.
They should simply make the rockets a bit more rare.



Grenades - Untrained;
You, cannot, at all fix this problem with a simple untrained how far to throw.
What you can do, is again taking some control away, have the character lack knowledge on the grenade i.e HOW to throw it, be unsure of the weight, how it bounces how hard to throw it. Mess around with the consistency of throws. How it bounces back. For example the LAM was a sorta flatish thing, with odd sides an untrained (or unfamiliar person) with it might have it hit a weird angle and bounce off stupidly.


This sounds pretty nice. When I would throw such a thing, it would indeed go in different ways every time I throw it. But I'm not so sure whether it would actually change enough to actually become a problem. Besides, people who can throw a ball in a proper fashion will have no problems at all.

Second problem is that fighting in DX3 will not depend on skills.



Dragon's Tooth - Untrained;
This, this is a son of a ***** to control.

Simple, it wouldn't exist.


Of course, it shouldn't exist. But this is DX3, and don't glowing swords look cool? Star Wars had them, and that was a big earner, so DX3 will feature some kind of light sabre.



More detailed, if something like it did. Pressure point, knowledge of where to hit, how to hit. But more specifically again with loose of control. An untrained person would just swing it, a trained person would know. Say for example, Japanese culture the Katana, correct form wasn't just swing it, one would flick their wrist at the last moment and drag the sword through, i.e large amount of force, then pull - cutting sword.


The DTS would be like a hot knife through butter, so just hitting the enemy would be enough. And even I, without any training, can damage a person quite badly with a really sharp sword. You really shouldn't underestimate that.

This might sound all very negative, but I appreciate your post and I think that you actually put quite a lot of thought into it, which is good. It just doesn't appeal to me very much.

Lilith
11th Jan 2009, 21:37
I'm responding to several of your arguments. I do not agree with what you came up with, and I'll show you why:

Rawr, heya. I think you've misunderstood some of my points. The quoting on this forum is a little weird so hopefully this will be understandable.


Just one thing: inexperienced does not have to mean that he's incapable of doing anything. People with a hell of a lot of training can be pretty good soldiers. And I think that a multi-billion project would get that bit of training.

Actual what I was pointing out here was that JC has a knowledge base. So whilst you lack the skills so you can train them up. JC from scratch even without basic training would be miles above you or me.
The point is his 'natural' *cough* abilities.
That's the point I was leading to, dismissing the bit before.


The idea is that, by the time you actually encounter such highly trained opposition, you're ready for it because you have become a very experienced fighter. NSF troops are almost untrained (two weeks training in a militia camp) and often have no experience. Only when you encounter the MJ-12 troops the resistence gets more tough; but to be honest I don't think that the normal MJ12 troops were very well trained, because training is very expensive.

This is true in the sense that JC has seen a good deal of combat action between the NSF and MJ-12. But even the NSF operations are not exactly easy. And even with the under-trained level on the MJ-12. The MiB and Commando's are far beyond what JC seen in the combat. I think before you face Commando's you're maybe 12-20 hours into the game so, including flight time you're looking at 30 hours? Its not a lot really.

And I'm not saying that you should be unable to take them down. But rather that they're are highly trained opposition, so its not outrageous that a highly trained MiB will take you out in a few hits.


Actually, you're only a moron when you actually use the GEP gun against troops. Saving your rockets for bots is very important. If you don't you'll run out of them. I actually did on my first runthrough, even while I only used them on bots.

There are two levels to complaints about the overpowered nature of this weapon. There is enough ammo that you can deal with most if not all bots. That's the first level, not to be honest a huge one. Then there is the more major issue, that you can do that at untrained, and going beyond trained is a moronic move.


Besides, maybe you should try playing Deus Ex on realistic difficulty. Trying to kill several groups of enemy troops with a GEP gun is suicide, because they headshot you after you've fired the first rocket.


This is when I wag my ego around, ;P jk.
Yes, I've beaten the game on realistic mode about 4 times I've played this game a lot, and I've played through mostly stealthy, once with only one kill to see if I could do it. I don't like the GEP Gun to be honest, it takes too much space, its too situational and I dislike killing more then is needed because most of the time payoff vs risk isn't worth it.



Once again, you had to save LAMs for worse times. Besides, not all doors could be destroyed with LAMs. I do agree that they took a little bit too little inventory space, and might have been a bit too abundunt. But why make it less powerful? Explosives simply are powerful. But haven't we all had a LAM which bounced back to us? Yes, you can load your savefile again, but that is the same with every weapon. Getting killed by your opponents because you missed doesn't result in the same "cutback" as in real life either.

Quick-Save means that you can try anything and you'll be able to load back, there isn't any controlling that. That sucks on a few levels, not as much as restricting it would though, its just the nature of games like these.
No not all doors need to be picked, but I didn't use the LAMs except for a few times when its just silly not to, and I ended latest play through, with killing - stealth. Advanced Lock picking and Trained Electronics and I think I had about 13 and 15 left over respectively. Admittedly I remembered which things are not worth opening.



I think that indeed the Dragon's Tooth sword was a bit too powerful. It would've been better if you had needed like two strikes on a commando when you're untrained. But it wasn't always useful. It took quite a lot of inventory space and wasn't very versatile. Trying to take out enemies more than 5 feet away from you was suicide.

Yes, rushing with it was risky, but not suicide if you were fast enough within reason. Realistic + Pistol at pointblank = Death. No way around that one. But the problem again is that its deadly at untrained. Two hits on one of the hardest non-full bot enemies with untrained skill provided you can get in melee range which if you can use vents/shadows and crouch isn't that hard. That is the issue, so there needs to be in DX3 which shan't have a weapon storyline requires to be godly proper scaling of weapons.



Wow this really sounds like fun :hmm:
I mean, I'm not a player who goes in and kills everybody. I'm more the stealthy type. However, I do need a weapon which I can use once in a while to destroy some bots, and that should be possible. Making things in games frustrating is always a bad thing. Making things hard or impossible is fine, as long as it makes sense. But a crappy lock on function? Well, the government wouldn't buy it. Simple. Those things get tested thoroughly. Secondly, if I were an agent. I would simply shut it off and directly fire at the enemy. If that's not even possible in a game it's very frustrating in a very not fun way and it breaks the immersion badly.

I think you over-estimate what a gov. will do, look at Iraq and the body armour. Also, remember there are a lot of complaints and issues with currently existing technology. I'm not saying make it unable to hit the side of a barn. I'm not even saying make it BAD. What I'm saying is don't make it idiot friendly, no claymore 'point towards enemy'. It should be a highly specialized and possibly a still in design weapon with a tricky interface (not ingame, but use) that an untrained person would make mistakes with.


Personally, I don't really think there was anything wrong with the GEP gun. It took a hell of a lot of inventory space. Sometimes I dumped the GEP gun and simply used grenades and the assault rifle grenade launcher.
They should simply make the rockets a bit more rare.

Yes, but again. Its a matter of a weapon being too deadly and training it becoming a non-issue. The space is a def issue, but its power means that it balances. The skill issue doesn't.



This sounds pretty nice. When I would throw such a thing, it would indeed go in different ways every time I throw it. But I'm not so sure whether it would actually change enough to actually become a problem. Besides, people who can throw a ball in a proper fashion will have no problems at all.

Of course, its a matter of gameplay vs realism.


Second problem is that fighting in DX3 will not depend on skills.

Aye, this is established. This is more a theory debate and the a bit of putting down WHY there isn't a skill system.


Of course, it shouldn't exist. But this is DX3, and don't glowing swords look cool? Star Wars had them, and that was a big earner, so DX3 will feature some kind of light sabre.

Honestly, I hope not. I hope they don't insult our intellect like that, we're not a bunch of drooling fools that want sexy things....mm....sam...ca..r....ter....



The DTS would be like a hot knife through butter, so just hitting the enemy would be enough. And even I, without any training, can damage a person quite badly with a really sharp sword. You really shouldn't underestimate that.

Of course, but the point is lethality. In the hands of a trained, advanced and master the level of damage and how quick a person would be killed changes. You might get a kitchen knife and go crazy cut a persons face to hell but they can still shoot you. Or with training you'd know, something like stabbing them in the armpit to disable the arm, something along those lines. And have the skill to be able to do it very quickly.


This might sound all very negative, but I appreciate your post and I think that you actually put quite a lot of thought into it, which is good. It just doesn't appeal to me very much.

Thank you, hopefully I've cleared up the misunderstandings.

gamer0004
12th Jan 2009, 16:10
I'm not going to respond to every single element of your post again, because that would be useless. I just want to remark again that every idiot can kill something with a weapon. That's the way weapons are. If Eidos Montreal would make it harder then that would mean that the weapons in 2027 are actually worse than the ones we use today. Even I could fire a rocket after a few minutes of instructions, and it would result (in many DX situations) in the death of several if not all opponents. That's the problem (or advantage) with explosives. You don't have to be accurate at all to destroy the enemy.

Voltaire
12th Jan 2009, 16:34
I just want to remark again that every idiot can kill something with a weapon. That's the way weapons are.

I agree with this whole heartedly. There is little chance of stuffing up when it comes to tossing a grenade (which is why I never level up my demolitions skill- on that note, how would that skill work? It seems that learning the skill makes your rockets explode better, something that i was unaware could be learnt...). In short, yes, some weapons should be idiot proof.

I don't think that the Dragon's Tooth Sword was over powered. It was of limited use against mibs, wibs and robots. The skill development and the Aug was helpful too, as some doors could be battered down either with explosives or the most powerful melee combo (i.e. DT sword, level'd up combat aug, developed lo-tec skill).

Spiffmeister
12th Jan 2009, 17:56
Who uses the GEP gun seriously any way? I don't think of the GEP gun as an OP weapon, the pistol scoped with max pistol skill is enough, and I just avoid bots.The GEP gun is just a fun weapon :D , the GEP guns downside is that close rage + fire button = dead.

The Dragons Tooth, you had to get close to people to use it (melee weapon, duh) so the trade off of having to get close to people is to kill them quickly.

And grenades are well... grenades :p . If you want to cry about OP grenades go play CoD4 TBH.

But seriously these weapons all classify under "fun weapons" not OP :D . It's single player, if you think they're OP, don't use them, simple as that.

El_Bel
12th Jan 2009, 19:03
2 words. Shifter mod.

cjc813
12th Jan 2009, 20:15
While you've got a point, you make it sound as though OP weapons ruined the game. Which they very much didn't.

People claim the same crap about the pistol in Halo 1. And that's retarded.

Being OP aginst super-human enemies is kinda what makes it fun. It's just, undeniably badass.

I would agree to some slight nerfs along the lines you mentioned. Those wouldn't be unreasonable.

But surely you realize that the more you change the balance the more you risk screwing up an element of what made the first game fun.

First game did have a ton of useless skills though, didn't it? (For example, melee weapons or swimming.)

Like I said, you've got a point, but it doesn't seem like huge deal to me personally.

EDIT:


Starting from Liberty Island, if you didn't have a GEP, you were SOL on that bot by the base front entrance. No 10mm or crowbar is going to take it down.

I lol'd.

EMP Grenade, UNATCO Com van. Problem solved.

TNT Crate, right by the stinkin' south docks. Problem solved.

Avoiding a slow moving robot, easy as hell. Problem solved.


Oh yeah, and that GEP gun thing... it works too.

spm1138
13th Jan 2009, 00:09
The GEP gun is "balanced" through it's ammo supply, inventory size, noise, movement penalty etc. etc.

You can get by OK without it anyway.

Anything that isn't a bot you can handle with the autoshotty / AR / pistols easily enough. Some things that are bots, too. The MiBs are wimps.

Bots you can handle with grenades.

This isn't Quake we're talking about, anyway. "Balance" on an individual per shot basis isn't a huge priority in design terms. We don't need rocket-launchers that make the bad guys go "OW!". A LAW should turn most bad guys that aren't tanks into puree.

What I would like to see is consequences for violence as a "balance" for going in like Vin Diesel. There's lots of reasons why you don't murder everyone between you and your whatever your objective is on a day to day basis.

Malah
13th Jan 2009, 01:25
What I would like to see is consequences for violence as a "balance" for going in like Vin Diesel. There's lots of reasons why you don't murder everyone between you and your whatever your objective is on a day to day basis.

Hitman Blood Money used a notoriety system. If you left witnesses, forgot to remove security tapes, people began to recognize you in the following missions.

I didn't like the simplistic way it was solved, though. Bribe someone and everything goes away... In DX3, a game that emphasizes decisions and consequences, you should be forced to use smugglers to move from country to country, your movement would be limited to "unofficial passages" or sth.. Think Vampire Bloodlines - playing as a Nosferatu.

Then again... It would be too complicated. Which, I assume, is why Hitman got the one click get-out-of-jail-free card.

Spiffmeister
14th Jan 2009, 04:14
There's lots of reasons why you don't murder everyone between you and your whatever your objective is on a day to day basis.

THERE IS?!?!?!?!

Other then its more fun to sneak around them :cool: .

A semi reward system would be good in that case I think. In the first mission in DX1 the only thing you got for not turning liberty island into an NSF bbq was Paul Denton going, "Omg your awesome you didn't kill stuff". Were as every other person on the Liberty Island went "KILL THEM ALL".

Something a little more rewarding then one character telling me I did well wouldn't go astray.

Necros
17th Jan 2009, 02:34
I don't think that the weapons were overpowered at all. All of them had their advantages and disadvantages too. And you don't have to use all of them, like many others I only used the GEP gun a few times, and even most of those were just for fun. I prefer grenades and other ways to deal with the bots. :)

Dragon Tooth Sword
Hmm, maybe in close range it was a bit overpowered but that was the whole point of this weapon. It won't be in DX3 sadly but maybe we can see some early prototype.

KaiTenSatsuma
17th Jan 2009, 03:10
Why are we arguing about explosive skill and throw distance?
The most obvious answer to "how far do I throw this thing" is " as FAR AWAY from yourself as possible!" The explosives were handled the best in DX1: if you didn't train at least a bit and didn't notice that lam behind those pipes you just walked by... ehehe panic time.

PugPug
17th Jan 2009, 17:15
The GEP Gun was a heavy weapon. It was supposed to deal a lot of damage; it's a rocket for chrissake. Though perhaps "run speed" wasn't enough of a reason to put points into Heavy Weapons, I admit. Still, against the heavier bots, having the skill came in pretty handy.

The Dragon Tooth Sword was just dumb. I understand that a melee weapon should be a one-hit kill, but not when you have 0 skill in it.

Grenades were balanced perfectly. I suspect the OP never tried them out with max demolitions - the difference was night and day, especially with EMP and Scramble 'nades.

El_Bel
17th Jan 2009, 18:23
Ok, about grenades. Since most of people havent noticed what i said..


Shifter mod!! Try it. On realistic, you have to spend at least a few points, even from beginning, or else you are denied entry from several entrances and you have to go another way in. If you are untrained, you cant disarm grenades, unless you are The Superman. Yes they explode that fast. If you are just trained, you can disarm them, but still you dont have enough time and if you panic you are dead.

Now if only the AI could disarm grenades, the skill would be THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII(*99999)S much more interesting. If you had higher level, it could give your oponents less time to disarm them. Like the multiplayer.

I know a lot of you will say "Oh that doesent sound good. Why are you not supposed to go through certain areas?" Well it does work. Pretty good. I dont know how it sounds on paper, but it works flawlessly!! And it forces Stealth players not to give all their skill points on Low tech.

Download and install Shifter mod now!!

sakurai
18th Jan 2009, 06:54
I really like the idea of requiring skills to use certain weapons. On a side note, like in my main threads. I simply feel melee is underpowered. The dragon tooth's sword is what most melee weapons should be like. Just tell me you are still run around and fire a weapon at me after I stab a knife into your chest. Melee should be extremely lethal as its main disadvantage is it requires you to be adjacent to your enemy before you can utilise it unlike firearms.

However, with skills as requirements, perhaps this would only allow the the non-lethal weapons to be used early on and the most lethal aka 1-hit kill to be used later on. It does make sense too. You need to be trained in something to fully utilise it. Swinging a sword isn't going to kill the enemy easily. You have to be trained to attack vital spots etc.

Same with firearms. Perhaps they could make it such that you need to 'clean' your weapons? If not it would induce jamming etc. And high skill would reduce jamming frequency and the speed at which you clear a jam. This would definitely reflect real firearms skills other than just accuracy, reloading.

iWait
18th Jan 2009, 07:21
I really like the idea of requiring skills to use certain weapons. On a side note, like in my main threads. I simply feel melee is underpowered. The dragon tooth's sword is what most melee weapons should be like. Just tell me you are still run around and fire a weapon at me after I stab a knife into your chest. Melee should be extremely lethal as its main disadvantage is it requires you to be adjacent to your enemy before you can utilise it unlike firearms.

If someone is stabbed in the neck they can easily live for up to 6 minutes unaided, so yeah, I'd shoot you if you stab a knife in my chest. Especially since most stab wounds to the torso and upper chest are not fatal if treated properly within 20 minutes.

Melee shouldn't be a one-hit kill kinda deal, look at the dragon tooth's design, It's not built for slashing, and yet it can kill most enemies within 1-2 hits. Now, what would be a lot better, in my opinion, is if they disabled opponents based on damage. Say for instance you shot someone's knee. They're not gonna be walking on that leg, and they'd probably fall down, but they could still shoot you. Now, if you chopped someone's leg off, they're gonna be on the floor, loosing a lot of blood, and probably couldn't be able to shoot you, either because of shock or blood loss, and they'd eventually die within a couple minute's time.

Romeo
18th Jan 2009, 07:33
Dude, I wouldn't say they'd "easily live unaided". You might survive, but you'd be spewing blood and panicking like crazy. Within seconds, you'd most likely pass out. While it's technically possible to survive torso shots as well, you have to bare in mind, the Dentons were bred to know how to strike in a lethal manner, and our newest protagonist is a security officer, meaning he should know how to handle a blade as well. As such, I don't think enemies should be hopping along merrily after being shanked.

spm1138
18th Jan 2009, 10:59
According to that FBI report on handgun wounding psychology plays a huge role in how people respond to being wounded.

Would that be an interesting gameplay feature?

Like some of the AI would be more about self preservation, some would be fanatics and some would just be dumb?

Maybe how "ruthless" you'd been previously could factor in too.

"I heard what you did to that SWAT team! I ain't surrendering! I'm taking you with me!" *primes grenade*

Blade_hunter
18th Jan 2009, 14:54
Many games introduce some elements like weapon jamming, maintenance and they weren't realistic at all, in SS2 for example when I need to repair a weapon, they used the same hack system in an other form to repair weapons.
For the maintenance they used a tool as a ressource to make the weapon more reliable, some weapons were unreliable like the pistol and the EMP rifle is one of the most reliable of them.

Some limitations are made more about a gameplay issue than a realism issue, and some realistic things aren't aren't the best way to make a cool gameplay, but it depends what gameplay players wants. be forced to one style or allow more play styles in the same game ?
Many players wants only one style, and mainly the infiltration, it's like the main reason this suggestion was made, to force more the infiltration by having much more difficulties to use weapons.

sometimes in DX the infiltration is impossible, because we need to find some "resistance" (I don't talk about the bosses) even if we can avoid the combat by running away after the encounter with Dowd we got some troops that come shortly after...
Sometimes the brute force isn't a good way to accomplish a mission, like in the gas station for example...

And DX uses some handicaps to avoid an easy use of ranged weapons, even if the Dragon's tooth it a bit ultimate, but it was the objective of that weapon, no ?
Most weapons in DX were sized by the value instead of the weight, the dragon's tooth have take the same room as the sniper rifle ...

Necros
19th Jan 2009, 00:42
According to that FBI report on handgun wounding psychology plays a huge role in how people respond to being wounded.

Would that be an interesting gameplay feature?

Like some of the AI would be more about self preservation, some would be fanatics and some would just be dumb?

Maybe how "ruthless" you'd been previously could factor in too.

"I heard what you did to that SWAT team! I ain't surrendering! I'm taking you with me!" *primes grenade*
That sounds great! :thumb:

OShifter mod!! Try it. On realistic, you have to spend at least a few points, even from beginning, or else you are denied entry from several entrances and you have to go another way in. If you are untrained, you cant disarm grenades, unless you are The Superman. Yes they explode that fast. If you are just trained, you can disarm them, but still you dont have enough time and if you panic you are dead.
Thanks, but no thanks. :) You are a well trained agent who shouldn't have problems like that. If you want to make the game harder for yourself, go ahead but I wouldn't call it better or more realistic. This Shifter mod has some good ideas but most them go against what the devs did and I think I'll stick with what Warren, Harvey and the others came up with. :)

Tstorm
20th Jan 2009, 22:36
Making skill levels required for grenades would be like having to get to a certain level in games like Runescape (which is a complete waste of time) to actually talk to someone, completely unecessary. Why? I think I could manage to throw a grenade if I was a 50 billion dollar government created super soldier. You could get upgrades in the gep gun to increase targeting speed. Limiting ammo would be an ok idea if the player wasn't frustrated that he has the gun for the entire game and gets to use it once. If you still want to go through with this then I suggest skill points for activities such as sitting, the agent will learn proper techniques in the way of resting on his ***. The agent will discuss the history of the chair and the chair appearing in modern culture. How about that? Sounds just as useful as teaching someone to throw a rock, or in this case a grenade.

spm1138
21st Jan 2009, 13:24
Making skill levels required for grenades would be like having to get to a certain level in games like Runescape (which is a complete waste of time) to actually talk to someone, completely unecessary. Why? I think I could manage to throw a grenade if I was a 50 billion dollar government created super soldier. You could get upgrades in the gep gun to increase targeting speed. Limiting ammo would be an ok idea if the player wasn't frustrated that he has the gun for the entire game and gets to use it once. If you still want to go through with this then I suggest skill points for activities such as sitting, the agent will learn proper techniques in the way of resting on his ***. The agent will discuss the history of the chair and the chair appearing in modern culture. How about that? Sounds just as useful as teaching someone to throw a rock, or in this case a grenade.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/paragraphs.html

NK007
21st Jan 2009, 15:51
Making skill levels required for grenades would be like having to get to a certain level in games like Runescape (which is a complete waste of time) to actually talk to someone, completely unecessary. Why? I think I could manage to throw a grenade if I was a 50 billion dollar government created super soldier. You could get upgrades in the gep gun to increase targeting speed. Limiting ammo would be an ok idea if the player wasn't frustrated that he has the gun for the entire game and gets to use it once. If you still want to go through with this then I suggest skill points for activities such as sitting, the agent will learn proper techniques in the way of resting on his ***. The agent will discuss the history of the chair and the chair appearing in modern culture. How about that? Sounds just as useful as teaching someone to throw a rock, or in this case a grenade.

While I can see your point, I wish you not have spent experience in the writing and reading skills. You're taking this to a different (exaggerated) level.

Instead of making the pistol a pea shooter and the assault rifle a fast pea shooter, the whole limiting idea was so that the weapons could be stronger but still balance it out. Imagine if shooting the pistol would rock the screen a bit, make a big noise and would still make a big hole in somebody up close, and then the GEP gun would be really exhilirating. It's all about balance.

Tstorm
22nd Jan 2009, 00:17
@ Nk007: I know its all about balance but theres a point where balance and realism have to come together."I wish you not have spent experience in the writing and reading skills" Thanks for the tip, I see you need a lesson with spm1138, maybe he can help you out. Worked for me.

@spm1138: Well well well. Looks like my english teacher has discovered this forum and has decided to analyze it in order to find my weakspots and design a test that I will never be able to pass. So? Whats your point? You can't read just because it isn't in seperated little paragraphs for your eyes? Would you like me to send you some Visine and Johnsons "No more tears" shampoo?

iWait
23rd Jan 2009, 08:05
Would you like me to send you some Visine and Johnsons "No more tears" shampoo?

I would like to point out that Johnson & Johnson "Tear-Free" shampoos are not, in fact "Tear-Free". I would also like to point out that Visine brand eye-drops do not aid you're eyes in the reading of text.

spm1138
24th Jan 2009, 17:43
@ Nk007: I know its all about balance but theres a point where balance and realism have to come together."I wish you not have spent experience in the writing and reading skills" Thanks for the tip, I see you need a lesson with spm1138, maybe he can help you out. Worked for me.

@spm1138: Well well well. Looks like my english teacher has discovered this forum and has decided to analyze it in order to find my weakspots and design a test that I will never be able to pass. So? Whats your point? You can't read just because it isn't in seperated little paragraphs for your eyes? Would you like me to send you some Visine and Johnsons "No more tears" shampoo?

Now you're thinking with portals!

Blade_hunter
30th Jan 2009, 00:30
I don't know if Tstorm have played to SS2, because in this game skills are required to use weapons and sometimes we need to make some reseaches on it, to make it usable

Caradoc
30th Jan 2009, 14:17
You can aquire the GEP Gun within seconds of starting the game and throughout the game, its basically an easy button everytime your faced with a difficult problem. Bot or MIB in your way, no probs. Got a door/wall that you need to get through, no probs. Ammo is also too easy to get your hands on.

Actually I liked that. It was great to have such an insanely powergun to play with. I mean don't recall any other game that lets you blow locked doors with explosives instead of finding a key, picklocking or something else. Its called freedom. If you want to be stealthy sure ok, if you want to go guns blazing sure go ahead..as long as the objective gets done :). Deus ex was such a masterpiece because it allowed multiple routes to solve probelms: violence, stealth, diplomacy, hacking etc. Besides the gep gun was heavy burden and had a very long reload. Still agree they shouldn't have given it right from the start. Because for a heavy gun user there wasn't nothing better to look for after that point and like you said it was a bit unbalanced..still heavy gun needs to be frakking powerfull, agreed?



The legendary sword which kills pretty much everything with 1 hit. If you are able to get close to your enemy, the sword makes sure that your going to win in a fight. It also obseletes the Melee attack Aug, as its a 1 hit kill to most things anyway.


But you do realize..you didn't get that sword untill mid part of the game. Before that you had to rely on knives, baton and prod. And those were pretty useless unless you put some training on low tech. Besides when going melee you always had to get close and when playing realistic setting one headshot was always leathal, so it was pretty risky at times. And like someone mentioned it wasn't always practical (bots, turrets, commandos mibs, bosses). Not to mention when there were sometimes groups of 5 or 6 enemies you had to be quite smart and stealthy to take out them without resorting a handgun.



[b]However what makes these weapons totally overpowered, is the fact that they are completely useable with 0 skill points in their respective skills. Having powerful weapons is no problem. But the agent should be forced to have skill points in the correct spots for them to be used effectively. Take the pistol or the assualt rifle, and you will see that both of those weapons were useless if you were untrained, but were deadly when you were master. The same should go for every weapon in DX3. If your not trained in its use, using one effectively should be a really tough thing to do.

This forces people to focus on their skills more. Just dismissing low-tech weapon skills for example should mean that entering a knife fight with an enemy is a really dangerous idea. Players should be forced to play to their strengths, not have weapons that anyone can use regardless of skills.


You raised many good points. Skills should always matter. It made deus ex 1 such a memorable game and removing skill was some of the biggest flaws in IW.

Toivoton
2nd Feb 2009, 12:46
I find it strange that people who complain about having a 50 million dollar supersoldier cyborg be proficient (or even quite good) with weapons without actually having any combat experience being unrealistic, don't complain about being able to get better with weapons in a few hours without even having the weapon being trained..

The weapons are overpowered only if you think the system is more important then the gameplay itself. Yeah within the system the weapons are too powerful since you can use them for almost full effect without the invested skillpoints. However if you for example made the damage contingent on having ranks in the skill, you would end up in a situation that someone is hit by a rocket and goes "ow!". Yeah that is balance. That is also the moment I stop enjoying the combat since it is almost the same as if the game was trying to build atmosphere and suddenly there was a fullscreen goatse picture and "IT'S ONLY A GAME!!!" blasted out of the speakers.

I think that realism overall shouldn't get in the way of a good game as long as the game is logical within itself. As in it would be ok if Denton wouldnt know how to hold a rifle and then learn it in a few hours if he was rushed out before he was rdy and was "downloading" the skills while he was going, but since there isnt one (he had had a lot of training and was learning normally), it just kills immersion.

Dx broke logic several times imo. For example you start as this 50 million dollar cyborg and you are immediately tasked with clearing a terrorist force that shoots on sight. Ok so far so good. Except you are not only not given almost any augs to use that 50 million dollar frame with, but you are (even more astonishingly) given strange weapons with almost no ammo. (I dont consider a pistol, a crossbow and a ROCKET LAUNCHER standard issue for taking out some poorly equipped, but trigger happy terrorists and even if you go for the only remotely sensible one - the sniper, you are given almost no ammo for it)

I mean thats like having the US airforce routinely sending all rookie pilots solo into enemy territory armed with a spoon and untrained to capture themselves an airplane and then start issuing them some gear (that they have to learn how to use themselves) only giving them the F15's after a few thousand sorties.

I also despise the way resource management is used when it is not the point. I mean it's ok to have to be constantly low on ammo if you are playing a zombie survival game since that's the point - you are intended to have to think if you can afford to use ammo or do you have to run. It is however just stupid when the player is the abovementioned combat cyborg.

In my opinion the first zone should have been a sort of a tutorial and there shouldnt have been any challenge from the untrained, poorly equipped terrorists. The powerlevel of the character should be about the level of the Denton at the end of the game. It would have given the player the feeling of Denton being a really badass combat cyborg like he was supposed to be (?) and you would have learned to use his abilities. Then afterwards you should start to encounter real resistance from other cyborgs and highly trained and equipped soldiers. And not because you are running out of ammo, but because they fight smart and use strong equipment.

My reasoning is that everything in the game promotes certain types of playing. If you punish people using weapons (like having them break down or having encaunters that you really need the weapons in and having limited ammo), they will try to not use them if they can. If you have limited, nonrecharging energy for your special abilities, the players will try not to use them. As in the wrong style of play style for a dx game.

It is possible that I'm being overly annoyed about this because of the way I play a game with resource management the first time - I only use a resource if I REALLY have to or if I know that using something nets me something of more value. As in if I run into a foe I cant get around, I use the weapon with no ammo usage a few times to see if I can do it without getting damage (loading a save every time if I do) and only when I deem it impossible, do I start trying other weapons (starting from the crappier ones).

For example I cleared the first few levels of SS2 almost exclusively with the wrench and even afterwards I tried the wrench always first. I didn't want to, but I wanted to ensure that I had ammo for anything too hard for the wrench.

It is imo most important how something feels and I want dx3 to feel like my character is a very powerful cyborg that explores a great conspiracy. Not a weak man that kills some other weak people with a crowbar.

Now if someone says something along the lines of "Man thats stupid - if you had unlimited ammo, you could just use the GEP gun on everything and there would be no challenge!", my response is this: Read the entire post. I said that the enemy after the first zone would start using smart tactics and good equipment. Denton has an aug that lets him blow up approaching rockets right? What is to prevent them from using a piece of gear that does the same thing and shooting some rockets back? Would actually make sense since denton is supposed to be a cyborg so you'd think they would break out the big guns.

Sorry for the numerous typos and errors - I'm not a native speaker.

GmanPro
2nd Feb 2009, 15:06
In the end you've gotta think about the gameplay. Having low skills at the start of the game is not only a hallmark of any real RPG, but it is also a system put in place to get the players to think more about their situation. I don't care how epic of a super-cyborg killing machine you are, you are not going to bust into a military complex, guns blazing, and expect to take everyone down. If you could, then that would be very UN - Deus Ex.

Toivoton
2nd Feb 2009, 17:55
In the end you've gotta think about the gameplay. Having low skills at the start of the game is not only a hallmark of any real RPG, but it is also a system put in place to get the players to think more about their situation. I don't care how epic of a super-cyborg killing machine you are, you are not going to bust into a military complex, guns blazing, and expect to take everyone down. If you could, then that would be very UN - Deus Ex.

Since when do skills have anything to do with roleplaying? Most RPGs use them to force you to select a playstyle and stick to it. If you can do the same with augs, the skills are pointless and limiting.

I meant that in dx1 you are the 50mil cyborg and considering you are tasked with killing lots of lots of enemies, your superiors think you are badass. The thing is that you arent. For the 50mil they put into you they got virtually nothing back. I mean a single special forces soldier would be better! That is why I said that the first mission should be against badly equipped and trained militia so you as the player believed that you are badass.

After that you should start to run into unaugmented humans with good equipment and training so that just charging blindly on would get you killed since tho you can take out a single unaugmented human easily no matter how well equipped or trained they are, a team would still cause you trouble.

So the challenge would be unaffected after the start. However at least I felt very weak for a badass combat cyborg the entire game and that would let you actually feel like you are one. Not a human progressing with the awesome power of save and load.

GmanPro
2nd Feb 2009, 18:17
I'm not really getting this argument. You're saying that JC wasnt a uber badass at the start of DX1!?

How many special forces soldiers can hack into anything they want to, pick any lock, instantly heal damaged body parts on the run etc. The point of the skill system was to slow down the players. They wanted the pace of the game to pick up over time as the story did. The two work hand in hand.

You need both skill points and augs if you want the game to have the same feel as DX1. Otherwise your going to run into a plateau sometime in the middle of the game when it reaches saturation/things stop becoming 'better'. Augs need to be only things that are otherwise humanly impossible to do. Besides, are you saying that people don't get better over time with real-life experience and practice? It happens all the time, soldiers fresh out of training get into their first real firefight and just freeze up. Training is great, but people are still only just people, there will always be room for improvement.

Toivoton
2nd Feb 2009, 19:16
I'm not really getting this argument. You're saying that JC wasnt a uber badass at the start of DX1!?

How many special forces soldiers can hack into anything they want to, pick any lock, instantly heal damaged body parts on the run etc. The point of the skill system was to slow down the players. They wanted the pace of the game to pick up over time as the story did. The two work hand in hand.

You need both skill points and augs if you want the game to have the same feel as DX1. Otherwise your going to run into a plateau sometime in the middle of the game when it reaches saturation/things stop becoming 'better'. Augs need to be only things that are otherwise humanly impossible to do. Besides, are you saying that people don't get better over time with real-life experience and practice? It happens all the time, soldiers fresh out of training get into their first real firefight and just freeze up. Training is great, but people are still only just people, there will always be room for improvement.

I'm pretty sure everything JC can do at that point would be done better by a special forces dude. The hack everything part could be a bit hard, but other parts were done mainly by items. Yeah you could get better at them, but that just made you use less of them. The hacking part is true tho - it would take decades of training to be able hack into anything and even then it would normally take ages for a normal person. Then again maybe you could use some of the cash saved to buy some ammo for the dude so he didnt have to get some from the enemies?

The feel part is something I cant really say nothing against the same as someone could say that they must not change the graphics since they are a huge part of the dx experience for him. It is subjective. I want a new semi-cyberpunk game with a big conspiracy to solve and a lot of freedom on how to do it since that is what the original was for me. There is very little in the game mechanics that are must for me for it to be a dx game.

Yeah I know nothing is really comparable to having real combat experience. However other then that, most game training has virtually nothing to do with the real thing. I mean having JC clean up the statue and getting better with say pistols and lockpicking if he did a lot of those makes sence since those are the first times he does them. However the skill goes from not hitting a wall while standing inside to being able to pick off a bugs balls in a few hours (and possibly not even having the weapon in question) which I consider "slightly" unrealistic.

However I consider that beside the point - The gameplay is a lot more important then realism. You are saying that there will be a point where the augs are "hitting a plateau" and skills are the things that keep improving. I would be really interested in why. I mean you would think that skills can only get better for so long until you run into limits of whats humanly possible and then you only have the augs that provide the superhuman boost that there are no limits to.