PDA

View Full Version : Enemy Variety



jcp28
21st Aug 2008, 02:49
In the original DX, there were three basic categories of enemies: humans, robots, and transgenics. While there was a fair amount of variation in each catagory, I always felt like there weren't enough human enemies.

You spent all your time killing identical MJ12 troopers, occasionally engaging in shootouts with MJ12 commandos(I know they were cyborgs, that's not the point), and every so often fighting a man or woman in black, but they were all iidentical looking. Why this isn't a big deal for aliens and monsters, this really sucks when modeling human enemies.

I always liked FPS games like Half-Life and Duke Nukem even though they really didn't have the category classification like DX had. Between them, I think they had about 7 or 8 different kinds of enemies. From Octobrains and pigcops to headcrabs, Vortigaunts, and those hounds, there was enough to keep me satisfied.

Now I really think DX 3 should have a fairly good amount of enemy variety. I don't want to feel like I'm fighting what amounts to the same 5 guys over and over again. I know that we could end up fighting many different groups in DX 3, but I still think we should have some sort of system where we have uniformed officers representing NSF, MJ12, and the other factions, just assuming this is a prequel.

Okay, that example sucked, but I just think that variety as far as it comes to humans needs to be improved. I don't care if the humans have only slightly different amounts of health, I just want to kind of feel like I'm fighting different people.

minus0ne
21st Aug 2008, 03:08
I agree it'd be nice to break this wall in fps gameplay where there are dozens and dozens of the same type of enemy. Even in expansive games like Oblivion there were only a few types of enemies (and lots of variations of those types for each level, but it still becomes tiresome), although on the up-side their faces were all different (semi-randomly created I assume), albeit still suffering from OPFS (Oblivion Pasty Face Syndrome).

It's a lot of work creating so many different models, but it's well worth the effort. In DX they tried to overcome this issue by unique conversations (that you overhear), which gave at least some of the enemy NPCs a bit of uniqueness, but I believe DX3 can overcome this on other fronts as well.

CJRamze
21st Aug 2008, 03:23
I'll agree,
I did find that most enemies looked the same, and at times it could seem mundane and boring.

However obviously for a certain group like the NSF this seemed appropriate, Its a tough one, I think the deus ex series pulled it off but games like oblivion really didnt.

So I hope this doesnt happen!
One thing I would like is if they had a level that was packed full of SSC or WTO or NSF guards that they had like a randomiser, so You have big ones small ones fat or thin ones etc.

If you can do it for your character it'd be cool if it randomised it for the enemies.

I'm fedup of all guards being the same height all male, and looking the same.

Spiffmeister
21st Aug 2008, 05:14
More models = more megabytes. That could of been a limiting factor for why there were not a lot of models.

More models would be nice, but really, fire fights should be intense enough that half-way through you don't stop and think hey didn't I just kill him?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Aug 2008, 07:11
DX1 had the right amount of enemies - humans/bots/animals etc., in my opinion.

I definitely do NOT want any kind of spawning. I hate dealing with the enemy and then leaving an area, only to return again to see all have resurrected themselves. :(
Spawning is a lazy way to make the game last longer... and a sure way to make me lose interest. :rolleyes:

Absentia
21st Aug 2008, 07:52
This is a good point, but I think this kind of problem was probably mostly to do with the 'standard' of games at the time of DX's release. It wasnt necessary to have lots of different models then, there werent that many games that did, and as mentioned earlier it takes up more space. Nowadays it can be seen as a little more of a necessity, with games like Bioshock which have varying enemies (although tbh i notice a lot of new games still suffer from enemies that look exactly the same, or they try to get away with it by having enemies in full-body armour and helmets).
As far as ENEMIES go, I don't see it as a huge priority, mind you, but all these little things like variation all add to the immersion of the game. One of the things that made the first game so great was indeed the small details, and varied enemies would definitely still go a long way in my opinion.

However, I am a bit more particular about NPCs. It bugged me a fair amount at how many NPC models they recycled, in particular, the model for Janice Reed was used as just about any secretary or any business woman for the rest of the game. Or someone with exactly the same face as her, pasted onto say, a scientist's coat. Or a bum. As you will interact and converse with NPCs more than you will with enemies, it makes a bigger impact when you realise "This guy used to be a bum, now he talks educated and he's a scientist?!"

So yeah, I think NPC model variation is more important.

imported_van_HellSing
21st Aug 2008, 08:19
As games become more complex and graphics more realistic and defined, the "clone wars" effect becomes more and more jarring, seeing two identical characters tends to easier destroy the suspension of disbelief.

I think the first time something like this happened to me was the first Half-Life, where you had like three models of scientists and one model of security guard that populated the whole Black Mesa facility. While most of the time you didn't notice anything strange while just shooting enemies, be it Xen aliens or gas-masked marines, it was the friendly NPC's where the game became somewhat silly.

The aforementioned gas-masks and other type of headgear that covers the whole face (NSF balaclavas and goggles, etc.) is a simple way to somewhat reduce the need for differentiated enemy models. Yup, simple. And cheap ;).

The most plausible way to deal with this problem today is making the character models modular, having a number of variations for different parts of the model, especially the head (this is the most important, should be differentiated even more: face, eyes, hair/hats), and giving them different accesories. Not just different weapons, mind you, but stuff like glasses, badges and insignia on uniforms, etc. etc.

Necros
21st Aug 2008, 09:06
In the original DX, there were three basic categories of enemies: humans, robots, and transgenics. While there was a fair amount of variation in each catagory, I always felt like there weren't enough human enemies.
I didn't feel like that. There's no need to make you fight agains the whole world, just the people you pissed off. :) The only thing that has to change is the model's variety, I don't want to meet the same people over and over again. :D Though I could get over it/used to it, this wouldn't be a big negative factor for me but I'm sure the game would get a lot of criticism for it from reviewers and other gamers.

CommanderHomer
21st Aug 2008, 09:43
I do kinda see what you mean, but to be honest i wasn't really that bothered, as long as they fought in different ways with different weapons i was happy and i don't really want Eidos to go to too much effort in putting this in, ie i'd rather they used the time and space on more important things like gd multiplayer, weapons, etc etc.

Freddo
22nd Aug 2008, 00:56
I think the first DX did this rather well. Lots of different kinds of civilians and enemies for the various locations. Of course more is better, but DX was good enough.

Compare that to FEAR where pretty much every enemy look the same. Sure, the plot explained it, but still very little variation. Didn't stop the game from being a fun shooter, though, at least in my opinion.

TrickyVein
24th Aug 2008, 16:50
one thing DX2 improved upon i believe was the variability in sex of your enemy - every combatant minus the wib's were male in dx 1.

Jerion
24th Aug 2008, 20:26
one thing DX2 improved upon i believe was the variability in sex of your enemy - every combatant minus the wib's were male in dx 1.
Anna, Maggie, Maggie's friend who keeps showing you the door out of maggie's apartment, the secretary in the MJ12 lab under UNATCO...okay, so few and far between, but they were there.

Freddo
24th Aug 2008, 20:45
Anna, Maggie, Maggie's friend who keeps showing you the door out of maggie's apartment, the secretary in the MJ12 lab under UNATCO...okay, so few and far between, but they were there.
He's talking about the "fightning" enemies, and not specific NPCs. All the patrolling UNATCO soldiers you meet are men. All the NSF terrorists out patrolling you meet are men. All the Versalife guards are men. And so on.

TrickyVein
27th Aug 2008, 00:20
Yeah!

rockyrr
18th Dec 2008, 19:48
DX1 had the right amount of enemies - humans/bots/animals etc., in my opinion.

I definitely do NOT want any kind of spawning. I hate dealing with the enemy and then leaving an area, only to return again to see all have resurrected themselves. :(
Spawning is a lazy way to make the game last longer... and a sure way to make me lose interest. :rolleyes:

i agree whit you :cool:

spm1138
18th Dec 2008, 20:42
The thing that I think was missing back then was easy ways to add separate elements to models. So for every variety of enemy they made there'd have to be a different model.

Nowadays there are skeletal animation systems and they have plenty of time to do the art so there's no reason they can't a) have more variety of mooks and b) have some system for procedurally adding variety to them.

You could give them different gear, clothing, hats, equipment etc. within the same general template.

I think they should have more types though.

It's a bit 60's James Bond having all the bad guys wearing natty matching uniforms.

Digitaldruid
18th Dec 2008, 21:32
as a 3d modeler for video game assets i would like to share some insight into game characters.
firstly in todays technology market you have middleware which help you generate faces procedurally on the fly and the process of painstakingly modeling out each face is out of the question since each character is a procedural template.
secondly most 3d character models for a game are not more than 4-5 MB of data each (this is just a conservative estimate) plus a few more megs if you include the textures thrown in. so hypothetically if a game has 100 unique characters in it should not exceed 1-1.5 GB all inclusive(mesh + textures). In todays games 1.5GB is just a small portion when you have games that are as large as 10-15 GB when installed on HDD.
I personally felt DX1 had enough variety in NPC and hostile characters. many people skip the part that you could engage in a fight with the thugs in the abandoned metro station, the triad members in hong kong, riot police in NY etc. sure MJ12 was you primary opponent but you did have variety.

K^2
18th Dec 2008, 21:45
Druid, keep in mind that if you want to have quick access to these 100+ meshes, they must reside in memory. And when you talk about memory, 1GB is a lot of space. At least 750MB of that will be textures that have to reside in video memory, and there aren't a lot of people with 750MB+ out there yet.

You can stream the characters, of course, but that causes problems. E.g. 15 copies of the same character walking about at a time. Take a look at GTA games for a good example of that.

Procedural is the only way to fly here. With procedural you only need one highly detailed mesh and a few textures for different kinds of skin. Plus, you need morphing rules to get to whichever character you want, but that takes up almost no memory to define. What it does, is requiring a bit of extra processing. Again, if you can stuff it into the shader, you're golden. It can all be done fast and seamlessly. On the down side, you restrict yourself to Shader model 3+, but Crystal Dynamics engine already is Shader 3 exclusive.

And this is where we get to the engine at hand. I have taken a look at the way CD runs, and I don't think it is flexible enough to include procedural characters without some very serious growing pains. I really don't think EM is going to bother with this.

What you are saying is precisely how it should be done and precisely how it won't be done.

Digitaldruid
18th Dec 2008, 23:10
Druid, keep in mind that if you want to have quick access to these 100+ meshes, they must reside in memory. And when you talk about memory, 1GB is a lot of space. At least 750MB of that will be textures that have to reside in video memory, and there aren't a lot of people with 750MB+ out there yet.

You can stream the characters, of course, but that causes problems. E.g. 15 copies of the same character walking about at a time. Take a look at GTA games for a good example of that.


K^2 i think you almost understood what i said. let me say that npc placement was almost perfect in DX1 and let me elaborate it a bit. in most areas you had 5-10 unique NPC's + the generic clone trooper/commando/solider which was a instanced character. and in single area in dx1 or dx2 for that matter had more than 15-20 characters (all inclusive npc + troops) in a area. and if I'm not mistaken instanced characters like identical looking troops dont take up much memory since they use the identical geometry and textures. also there are many memory saving techniques for most real time engines like Multi LOD geometry and texture Mip-Mapping. in my opinion that should be enough.

just a little snippet. Alyx from HL2 was a little less than 9k triangles and during a seminar back in dec 2007 i heard a employee from epic say that the polygon count for a ut3 characters is upward of 15k triangles.

Big Orange
19th Dec 2008, 01:40
I don't mind MJ12 troopers looking very uniform, since it makes them more intimidating with their black body armour and goggles, but we can make many MJ12 soldiers female and/or non-white, with some variation in their height and width. They could have fifthteen to twenty different voices.

singularity
19th Dec 2008, 02:04
Look at Perfect Dark on the N64. The game is a decade old, and you didn't run into the same person twice in the whole game. Period.
Grand Theft Auto IV and Fallout 3 are even better (and more modern) examples. you don't have to have everyone be unique. But if you have 10 different faces with 4 different skin tones, 20 different torso outfits with 3 different colors, and 16 different pant outfits with 4 differnt colors, and mix-match them randomly, you are going to have a hard time finding 2 people who look alike, and this is using technology that is 10 years old. You don't need 100,000 unique design models. You just need clever programers and designers.

In this day and age, using this technology, we should be hard pressed to find the same "person" twice in a crowd. But that being said, I think that DX1 had a fair amount of variation between the types of enemies you faced. It wasn't a world that allowed for a lot of monsters and creature types. Most of the enemies you shot at were humans, robots or a mix of the two, and it made a lot of sense in the context of the game. They didn't throw in something that didn't make sense just for the sake of having a "cool" enemy, and I prefer it that way.

K^2
19th Dec 2008, 02:31
K^2 i think you almost understood what i said. let me say that npc placement was almost perfect in DX1 and let me elaborate it a bit. in most areas you had 5-10 unique NPC's + the generic clone trooper/commando/solider which was a instanced character.
Right. If you have only about a dozen unique characters per environment there is no problem with there being a hundred or more different ones in total.

The problem arises when you do away with zone=environment structure, like CD engine does. There are still loading zones, but any NPC character can cross from one zone to another, just like the player can. The level geometry is streamed in, but the environment remains fixed. So you still run into possibility that for some reason a bunch of unique characters decide to gather in one area. You start out with 5-10 in each area, than something scares them, they all run away from that something and gather in a hub area. Suddenly you have 40+ unique characters surrounding the player at once. At this point your engine either crashes right away, or attempts to load all characters at once, runs out of memory, and then crashes.

Granted, this is somewhat unlikely, but such situations are bound to arise in open environment games. That's why games like GTA don't have a persistent world. If it did, it would be impossible to prevent crashes like the above. Deus Ex relies on persistent world, so this is not a solution. You have to be able to load majority of characters into memory at once. So I can pretty much guarantee you that we'll be running into clones in DX3. A lot.

rhalibus
19th Dec 2008, 02:36
In this day and age, using this technology, we should be hard pressed to find the same "person" twice in a crowd.

I agree--we've come to a point where we could have hundreds of different faces and clothing types; we just need to cut back on the ridiculously detailed bump maps, normal maps, and ultra hi-res textures for each character that look great for screen shots but puts only a few unique characters in the game.

Please Eidos--we'll take the graphics hit if we can be immersed in a world filled with individuals! :D

K^2
19th Dec 2008, 05:46
even more stupid than "dude we know we've just been through a global Collapse but we still pwnzored weapon technology so that micro particles in these cartridges can transform into bullets, darts, napalm or rockets depending on the weapon"
I'm perfectly Ok with the story-concept of universal ammo. If they can make micro-particles that create a remote drone that shoots EMP, why not bullets and rockets? What bothered me is if we have that super ammo that can transform into anything, why the hell do I even bother carrying ten different kinds of guns? Shouldn't a single gun then fire any type of ammo I want?

But maybe that's just me.

GmanPro
19th Dec 2008, 05:47
I don't think that we are going to run into very many identical models in DX3. Well, you're going to see troopers in uniforms and helmets that all look alike, but that's still realistic and doesn't bother me at all. Those MJ12 commandos and mib dudes sounded awesome btw. We need more dudes who sound like that :cool:

Blade_hunter
19th Dec 2008, 05:58
In DX there is a lot of human enemies even if some of them have always the same face like NSF and MJ12 troops, Unatco Troops, but many games used enemies with masks or sunglasses to avoid the use of multiple faces, but in DX overall we have a lot of faces and skins, even if sometimes they can mix a bit more the faces and the bodies this keeps a lot of memory and multiply the variety

DX was a big step for gaming, now we can improve this, even if we haven't the graphic quality of the game Crysis, we can add a lot of variety, mixing eventually most body parts ...

LatwPIAT
19th Dec 2008, 11:00
I don't think that we are going to run into very many identical models in DX3. Well, you're going to see troopers in uniforms and helmets that all look alike, but that's still realistic and doesn't bother me at all. Those MJ12 commandos and mib dudes sounded awesome btw. We need more dudes who sound like that :cool:

"Checking sonics"
"We've got visual."
"Target aquired."
Those we're awesome. Especially when you dissappeared again, and the MJ12 Commando would complain about his cybernetic ears being defect.

The odd thing about having a large, randomized face pool is that if you pick at random, it will be real odd when you kill someone's identical twin, especially if you remeber that you killed that guy before, when everyone else is distinct. If everyone looks the same, we don't care too much, but when everyone are different, similarity breaks willing suspension of disbelief.

Big Orange
20th Dec 2008, 02:03
The National Sessionist Forces (if featured as allies or antagonists) should have very varied uniforms and gear due to them being a guerilla resistance force organized on a local level - most of them wear pragmatic civilian clothing, although you can get some who are in stolen US Military/law enforcement fatigues, with weapons ranging from legally bought hunting rifles, Russian/Chinese small arms smuggled in from Mexico, and even firepower looted from Army/Air National Guard depots.

Necros
20th Dec 2008, 08:20
I definitely do NOT want any kind of spawning. I hate dealing with the enemy and then leaving an area, only to return again to see all have resurrected themselves. :(
Spawning is a lazy way to make the game last longer... and a sure way to make me lose interest. :rolleyes:
It's tricky but I think some spawning could be good in a DX game. Not everywhere of course and not the same amount of enemies should be respawned but in some situations it could work. We know that we'll be breaking into companies to find/steal more info/stuff and there it is possible to have reinforcements arrive after some time. So you either secure the part of the complex you leave (hacking turrets and doors or something) or you get in and out quickly. :)
But certainly nothing like in Far Cry 2, that's the worst thing about it IMHO, the constantly respawning enemies. :mad2:

rokstrombo
20th Dec 2008, 16:42
Look at Perfect Dark on the N64. The game is a decade old, and you didn't run into the same person twice in the whole game. Period. [...]

Yep, and GoldenEye 007 had random faces three years before that! I think another reason why both games gave the impression of more resources is the significant number of quality animations (motion captured, IIRC) displayed by the guards (and Perfect Dark added even more). There were at least two responses for every hitbox, multiple aiming and shooting animations, multiple location-based death animations, as well as animations for reloading, drawing and dropping a weapon, searching for a weapon, picking up a weapon, grenades, melee, tumbling, falling, running, limping, turning, stopping, etc. In combination with the random faces, and differing weapons and uniforms, the player was much less likely to notice that the guards were virtually exactly the same. And this is in a game that was designed to be played over and over (and there were even points where the enemies continually spawned!).

In Deus Ex however, the animations were much less realistic and considerably fewer in number. For example, guards responded the same way by being shot in the arm as they did by being shot anywhere else. The player had experienced virtually every animation in the entire game at least a couple of times, in just a few minutes of play.

IMO, in addition to the small number of NPC skins and models, the inappropriately small number of distinctly awkward-looking animations gave the impression of a small variety of enemies too.

rokstrombo
20th Dec 2008, 17:36
It's tricky but I think some spawning could be good in a DX game. Not everywhere of course and not the same amount of enemies should be respawned but in some situations it could work. We know that we'll be breaking into companies to find/steal more info/stuff and there it is possible to have reinforcements arrive after some time. So you either secure the part of the complex you leave (hacking turrets and doors or something) or you get in and out quickly. :)

System Shock 2 had respawning enemies, and I think this worked extremely well with the concept of degrading weapons. I remember when I had to traverse an area which happened to be near one of the enemy respawn points, and my shotgun was functional but empty, and my pistol was probably going to fail during the next 1-3 shots. I had no health, everything else was broken and I had only Standard Bullets in my inventory. Within 25 seconds, an arrachnid which had spawned a few rooms back was going to catch up to me (and I was unable to kill it because I was out of AP rounds). My only chance of survival was to kill the shotgun-wielding hybrid that spawned a room ahead of me, drop my empty but functional shotgun to make room in my inventory, pick up his broken shotgun, unload it, drop it, pick up my functional shotgun, load it, and start moving again before the arrachnid could catch up to me. What made this so suspenseful was that there were four possible outcomes that were essentially out of my control: (a) my pistol failed before I could kill the shotgun-wielding hybrid, (b) my pistol failed before I could kill the second shotgun-wielding hybrid who reached me before I could finish loading my shotgun because I was so close to the spawn point, (c) the arrachnid caught up to me and finished me off, or (d) my pistol lasted long enough for me to kill both hybrids and make it to the next room with a functional, loaded weapon (but still no way to combat the creepy arrachnid that was still tracking me from the room behind me!). It sounds frustrating, but to me it was one of the most exciting gaming moments I had experienced in a long time!

Anyway, I've gotten a bit off-topic here. The point I was trying to make is that an interesting dynamic with respawning enemies and continually declining resources, is that the player is forced to budget their resources for exploration as well as combat. If you want to re-enter an area you have already passed, you risk leaving that area with fewer resources than you started with. If you don't find what you are looking for, then you have sacrificed the condition of your equipment for nothing. I think this dynamic could work well in the world of Deus Ex, where so far the player has been unconditionally rewarded for exploration. This isn't to say that this pressure should always be present, but used judiciously I think it could improve pacing of the game.

Jerion
20th Dec 2008, 18:03
Respawning enemies is never a good idea, IMO. In my experience it's just a cop out to either force the player to waste ammunition or force the player to keep moving along.

K^2
20th Dec 2008, 21:56
Seconded. I'd like to have at least a possibility to clear the level and walk around carelessly like I own the place.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
20th Dec 2008, 23:31
Character spawning is definitely THE most irritating thing for me in a game. I absolutely hate it. :mad:

spm1138
21st Dec 2008, 04:42
I dunno. What if the bad guys could radio for back-up or call 911 or something?

What if a shift change for the guards was something you had to worry about?

There are ways of doing it without just having an endless stream of magically appearing mooks.

GmanPro
21st Dec 2008, 05:04
It worked well in System Shock 2. But DX isn't about monsters crawling all over a space ship.

As good as SS2 was, I think that the concept of respawning enemies can only really feel good in certain types games and a DX game isn't one of them.

rhalibus
22nd Dec 2008, 03:58
I don't mind a bunch of NPCs leaving their post and entering the player's area when the player sets off an alarm, but I agree that re-spawning enemies is bad 'cause it breaks immersion for me rather quickly.

Big Orange
29th Dec 2008, 05:09
How would 'spawning' be unrealistic if you're shooting up the inside of the White House, for example? In real life everbody in a uniform from miles around would keep rushing in to stop you.

K^2
29th Dec 2008, 08:00
If enemies spawn at perimeter and find their way in, no, it is not unrealistic. Unfortunately, most of the time they just spawn at fairly random places, and that is unrealistic.

But the gameplay argument is stronger, anyways. DX is a game that gives you multiple approaches to solving problems. One of them is clearing the area before proceeding. Taking that away reduces options, and therefore, it is bad for a DX game.

I would not mind it too much if there is an area or two where enemies respawn, keeping caveat from first paragraph in mind. I'd like to know where the enemies will be coming from, and have an option to leave them a few surprises. But for the most part, I'd prefer if things stay dead.

GmanPro
29th Dec 2008, 08:20
^^ Definitely. Respawning enemies is a cool element is some games, but Deus Ex isn't that type of game.

Left 4 Dead has randomly spawning zombie hoards in various locations basically wherever the players can't see. And that works very well for that type of game. But not DX. In fact I can't really think of anyone or anything I would like to respawn in a DX game. Maybe the wandering citizens in the city streets (should the player feel like messing around and just capping everyone lol :D ).

spm1138
29th Dec 2008, 08:40
I don't really see how Deus Ex isn't that type of game.

Reinforcements / the po po turning up is classic heist movie stuff.

It really fits in with both the cat burglar playstyle and more action oriented stuff.

Rather than enemies just "respawning" - appearing out of thing air which is just an old implementation of the idea what about if you getting seen doing scary stuff could result in people dialing 911 or hitting the silent alarm etc. etc.

It could be a gameplay mechanic too, like if somebody tried to dial 911 and you saw them maybe you could knock em out before they managed to tell the operator the whole story so they'd dispatch one guy to check out a possible problem rather than the HRT to deal with a full scale shoot-out (yeah, I just pinched that from Die Hard).

Note that you still have the option of clearing the area, you just have to be subtle about it.

There'd then be an escalation through the local police / security officers checking out the situation to people coming running level wide / more regular guys arriving in a car to the SWAT team turning up in a van 10-20 minutes later, setting up a perimeter and trying to open negotiations / methodically clearing the building.

At no point in this story is anyone "spawning".

The delay in the heavies turning up gives you time to complete your objectives and exfil and makes for some race against time scenarios which again are classic heist movie stuff.

This would also make taking the hard and loud route feel a bit less trivial than it does if there's only three guys you're going to have to shoot.

Plus scripting it would allow for general area-wide AI responses more convincing than people running around screaming for three minutes and then blithely going back to doing whatever.

Maybe you'd have to find that NPC to help you with your enquiries in a Panic Room somewhere in the level.

GmanPro
29th Dec 2008, 09:15
Having enemies turn up when you trip an alarm or whatever is a good idea but it doesn't constitute enemies respawning imo. I just don't want this to feel like SS2 or the NWN1 OC you know?

If you set off an alarm and a whole wave of enemies, magically spawned from some unseen location, start swarming you... than it doesn't fit in a DX game. Instead, tripping an alarm should just make the police or guards or whoever is in the immediate area, already spawned into the game, come looking for you. And if you knock them out or kill them, then the alarm will summon no one else :thumb:. Having the police or a swat team come driving up to the front gates of whatever complex you are infiltrating (if you are careless and get noticed) would fit MUCH MUCH better as a scripted event. Just like the level in Thief 2 where you infiltrate the new mechanist tower/fortress of Angelwatch. If you haven't discovered the hidden switch that deactivates the alarm, then when you try to grab your main objective, the whole place goes on high alert and new enemies are summoned to search for you. Great moment in video gaming...

NK007
29th Dec 2008, 13:03
I don't really see how Deus Ex isn't that type of game.

Reinforcements / the po po turning up is classic heist movie stuff.

It really fits in with both the cat burglar playstyle and more action oriented stuff.

Rather than enemies just "respawning" - appearing out of thing air which is just an old implementation of the idea what about if you getting seen doing scary stuff could result in people dialing 911 or hitting the silent alarm etc. etc.

It could be a gameplay mechanic too, like if somebody tried to dial 911 and you saw them maybe you could knock em out before they managed to tell the operator the whole story so they'd dispatch one guy to check out a possible problem rather than the HRT to deal with a full scale shoot-out (yeah, I just pinched that from Die Hard).

Note that you still have the option of clearing the area, you just have to be subtle about it.

There'd then be an escalation through the local police / security officers checking out the situation to people coming running level wide / more regular guys arriving in a car to the SWAT team turning up in a van 10-20 minutes later, setting up a perimeter and trying to open negotiations / methodically clearing the building.

At no point in this story is anyone "spawning".

The delay in the heavies turning up gives you time to complete your objectives and exfil and makes for some race against time scenarios which again are classic heist movie stuff.

This would also make taking the hard and loud route feel a bit less trivial than it does if there's only three guys you're going to have to shoot.

Plus scripting it would allow for general area-wide AI responses more convincing than people running around screaming for three minutes and then blithely going back to doing whatever.

Maybe you'd have to find that NPC to help you with your enquiries in a Panic Room somewhere in the level.

Sounds like GTA, a lot.

Big Orange
29th Dec 2008, 18:43
A good scripted sceneario could be when you're infiltrating a secret Illuminati stronghold in some rocky Swiss ravine (maybe a complex of offices and labs in some remote, heavily rennovated castle). If you raise complete hell, not only the MJ12 troops posted there would be out to get you, eventually after 30 to 40 minutes a wider general alarm (that cannot be cancelled) would be announced with all the tunnels and bridges leading to the Illuminati castle either getting barricaded by local military/police vehicles or even blown up by demolitions. Army Reconnaissance Detachment troops would arrive in flying military transport, suported by airborne security robots packing firepower, so your chance of a relatively clean escape from the castle grounds after completing your objectives is much reduced.

ZylonBane
29th Dec 2008, 18:57
This comic is too relevant not to post...

http://www.hlcomic.com/comics/concerned176.jpg

LatwPIAT
29th Dec 2008, 23:14
I just played a bit of Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, and it has an interesting take on alerts and enemies.

If you set off one alarm, the guards would emerge from the guard-houses and start actively looking for the player. Also, they would start firing at distractions rather than investigating them.

If you set off two alarms, the guards would start barricading themselves and wait for the player to move into their well-lit line of fire.

If you set off three alarms, the guards would don ballistic armor, helmets and heavy armor.

Now, if this was somehow implemented in Deus Ex 3, there would be a choice involved. You could play stealthily, and just avoid enemies, get by on pistols, melee and stealth, or you could play "John Rambo-style" and use heavier weapons such as grenades and assault rifles to move down more heavily armed enemies. This would also mean that a Stealth-player caught in a momentary firefight would face a lot weaker enemies, more down to his ability to take down with a pistol or stun prod, while a "John Rambo-style" player would face initially weaker enemies ("Element of suprise") that would quickly evolve into heavily armed shock troops, more up to his level of combat and challenge.

Mindmute
29th Dec 2008, 23:40
A good scripted sceneario could be when you're infiltrating a secret Illuminati stronghold in some rocky Swiss ravine (maybe a complex of offices and labs in some remote, heavily rennovated castle). If you raise complete hell, not only the MJ12 troops posted there would be out to get you, eventually after 30 to 40 minutes a wider general alarm (that cannot be cancelled) would be announced with all the tunnels and bridges leading to the Illuminati castle either getting barricaded by local military/police vehicles or even blown up by demolitions. Army Reconnaissance Detachment troops would arrive in flying military transport, suported by airborne security robots packing firepower, so your chance of a relatively clean escape from the castle grounds after completing your objectives is much reduced.

Blowing up bridges, army reenforcements flying in on transports and airborne robots (honestly since DX3 happens in 2027 if there are ANY airborne robots I'll just turn the PC off at once) just seem a bit overkill.
We're talking about the Golden Age here. The Illuminati don't really make their presence known so directly, nor would I expect them to have any direct control of units in the Swiss Army..

The idea of scripted timed events is nice, but this is just too Hollywood-like.

NK007
30th Dec 2008, 00:08
I really, really, really want a neighborhood watch for some reason. I see them around all the time, and for some reason they piss me off. Also I think it will add an element of comedy, and I really want to beat one with a baton and see him begging for his life.

FreedomForever
30th Dec 2008, 02:41
I would love if everybody was different from how they look to height and weight(in most games everybody is the same height).Allthough I would love this,I wouldn't be disapointed if they didn't,Im sure theirs going to be more variety than deus ex.

I guess deus ex didn't have much variety but that didn't effect me and I never really thought about it until this thread lol but who cares it's an old game,most games were like that.

singularity
30th Dec 2008, 04:28
honestly since DX3 happens in 2027 if there are ANY airborne robots I'll just turn the PC off at once

I know this is a little bit off topic here, but it sounds like you aren't expecting there to be flying robots in 2027. I don't think you are aware of the fact that we have flying automated machines functioning right now, as I'm typing this. Seriously, if you don't expect there to be automated devices in 20 years, you better take a long, hard look at the insane rate of technological development we are currently living in the middle of.

I used to partake in online debates, and after each post we had to cite our sources, and we had a saying, that if you have to use Wikipedia to prove your point, then you are wrong. That being said, there can be no denying that Wikipedia is a powerful tool that is easy to use and capable of outlining information quickly and effeciently, and as such, I figgured this link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_is_Near) would prove useful to anyone who might be doubting the technology available to us within the next several decades (and subsequently, the enemies and tools you might be using/ seeing in DX3).


Most consider Kurzweil a leading expert on the topic, and I would encourage you, if you are interested in the subject, to find some of his speeches and adresses available online.

Jerion
30th Dec 2008, 05:12
That should totally be an Eidos forum rule:

"All online debates must be backed up with cited sources."

:D

Big Orange
30th Dec 2008, 05:27
Blowing up bridges, army reenforcements flying in on transports and airborne robots (honestly since DX3 happens in 2027 if there are ANY airborne robots I'll just turn the PC off at once) just seem a bit overkill.

Not for a cybernetic warrior killing half the global leadership at a meeting and slicing through dozens of their armed guards like a buzzaw. In real life half a country's law enforcement and military would collapse on top of a terrifying attacker like that.



We're talking about the Golden Age here. The Illuminati don't really make their presence known so directly, nor would I expect them to have any direct control of units in the Swiss Army..

The Illuminati are a very subtle and hidden organization, but they directly employed MJ12 as heavies and at their height they would likely have contacts in other important military, intelligence, and law enforcement agency if they supposedly ruled the world.



The idea of scripted timed events is nice, but this is just too Hollywood-like.

Maybe, but in most cases I wouldn't mind scripted 'spawning' dressed up as army and police vehicles arriving at the place you're causing trouble in, but in a less OTT fashion.

spm1138
30th Dec 2008, 08:06
Sounds like GTA, a lot.

It's more inspired by the likes of HEAT and Heist tbh. Maybe a bit of Sneakers too.

Mindmute
30th Dec 2008, 14:06
I know this is a little bit off topic here, but it sounds like you aren't expecting there to be flying robots in 2027. I don't think you are aware of the fact that we have flying automated machines functioning right now, as I'm typing this. Seriously, if you don't expect there to be automated devices in 20 years, you better take a long, hard look at the insane rate of technological development we are currently living in the middle of.
I'm sorry, I phrased it wrong, I am well aware that there are airborne automated machines nowadays, I was actually reading an article on the Sky Seer a couple of days ago.
What I meant to say by that is "airborne security robots brandishing miniguns, or any other type of heavy weapon, a la DX:IW".



Not for a cybernetic warrior killing half the global leadership at a meeting and slicing through dozens of their armed guards like a buzzaw. In real life half a country's law enforcement and military would collapse on top of a terrifying attacker like that.

Still, blowing up bridges and calling the military? Do you realise just how drastic that is? Just how impactful on a location blowing up a bridge is? There is no way that could be decently covered up.
The only way I could see that working would be if they said Adam did it.




The Illuminati are a very subtle and hidden organization, but they directly employed MJ12 as heavies and at their height they would likely have contacts in other important military, intelligence, and law enforcement agency if they supposedly ruled the world.


Don't equate MJ12 with heavy fighting units. It even says on the DX Bible that MJ12 before the split was the Intelligence and Communications branch of the Illuminati. Page was the one who started gathering a private army.

Remeber Everett and Dowd calling Page's new para-military "crude inventions"?
Canonically, and this is supported even by the Illuminati ending, they "insinuate and advise" they don't really take direct action. Calling a military unit to help secure a threat to THEM, in THEIR secret chateu would be a little hard to do indirectly.
Military chains of command are a lot more transparent than you'd think, the orders aren't (usually) taken so blindly and it's possible to trace them all the way back to the source.

I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I'm just saying it would take serious story-telling gymnastics to pull it off.




Maybe, but in most cases I wouldn't mind scripted 'spawning' dressed up as army and police vehicles arriving at the place you're causing trouble in, but in a less OTT fashion.

Looks like it's your personal preference vs mine.
I always liked that even though their effects worked on a grand scale, your actions in DX happened on a small one. It gave you a sense that even if you won, no one would know the truth. Added to the atmosphere, I think.



I'm guessing our whole discussion just boils down to personal preference. I'd rather keep the action more on par with DX's than "Know what would be cool? Let's blow up bridges and start bringing in military transports! That will apease the mainstream Hollywood action movie fan." (Might just be fear that they somehow bring Vin Diesel into the game though ;))

Nathan2000
30th Dec 2008, 15:59
Looks like it's your personal preference vs mine.
I always liked that even though their effects worked on a grand scale, your actions in DX happened on a small one. It gave you a sense that even if you won, no one would know the truth. Added to the atmosphere, I think.

There were exceptions, though. Blowing up the Universal Constructor or sinking a superfreighter (Smuggler: "You think you can scuttle a superfreighter with a LAM?" :D) were pretty big events, in my opinion. Even bigger event was learning that MJ12 blew up the whole VersaLife building and they blame you.

Mindmute
30th Dec 2008, 17:28
There were exceptions, though. Blowing up the Universal Constructor or sinking a superfreighter (Smuggler: "You think you can scuttle a superfreighter with a LAM?" :D) were pretty big events, in my opinion.

The UC was still more or less a secret (I know word had gotten out, but it was probably only in the circles of people who knew a bit about that sort of technology to begin with), so was the superfreighter, considering not even the dockworkers and sub-pen guards knew what was going on inside.
They were still small-scale events in the way that they happened in one limited location (Even the nuke that ended up hitting Area51).

The only thing I would consider a grand-scale action was the spreading of the Gray Death and even that was easy to cover-up.


Blowing up a bridge or declaring martial law to bring in the military just to contain one person?
I'd still say that's very very big.
Or it just could be that something in the scenario he proposed just doesn't agree with me.. I'll stop argueing about it now, don't worry ;)


Did they blow up the whole building though? I was under the impression they tried to make it look like Denton was a terrorist as an excuse to justify the explosion on their labs and the shutting down of the versalife building.. Or did I miss something in the game that implies the whole building was destroyed?
Really hopeful there's something new for me to discover on DX so I can go for another playthrough.
(Not really a big spoiler, just a question containing possible spoilers)


Bit more On-Topic:

I would love if everybody was different from how they look to height and weight.

To me, this would utterly improve the immersion. I think it's details like this that can make it go from an ok title to an amazing one.

Unstoppable
30th Dec 2008, 22:22
I would like to see variety found in Diablo 2. Give me a reason to play in harder difficulties and to beat the game 2-4 more times. Throw in elite enemies and bosses etc. I want to see Deus Ex 3 have tons of replay value please!

rhalibus
31st Dec 2008, 22:58
I don't mind bosses as long as you don't have to immediately kill them to continue the game (killing them unlocks the only door, etc.)...Deus Ex did it right: you could flee from Walton Simons at the underwater lab, to fight him later at Area 51; hopefully after a few more augmentations and skills. Just something as simple as that really made you feel that you were in control, not the developers...

NK007
1st Jan 2009, 04:16
I want to be able to finish the game without fighting anyone, just like Planescape Torment. I guess it's my lazy nature or sumfin'....

mackingu
1st Jan 2009, 17:21
Deus Ex did it right: you could flee from Walton Simons at the underwater lab, to fight him later at Area 51...

wait, you could do that? i had no idea :scratch:

time to start another game :)

LatwPIAT
1st Jan 2009, 19:56
I want to be able to finish the game without fighting anyone, just like Planescape Torment. I guess it's my lazy nature or sumfin'....

Usually non-combat runs are harder than playing through the game with the occationall firefight.

Blade_hunter
1st Jan 2009, 21:51
The difficulty depends on the level design, the stealth capabilities of our avatar and the game possibilities such as distractions for example.

Level design for multiple paths and some locations to be hiden near passages enemy patrols, hackable locked doors, etc

the stealth capabilities like moves such as walking, prone positions, leaning, crouching, suits, powers, etc

game possibilities like using a crate to be inside, throw items to make noise and attract the attention in a wanted location, friendly NPCs, animals.
Use the turrets or security bots against your enemies, even animals, set traps

there is a lot of means we can use to reach our objectives most of them are already in DX, some others are a bit new.

We can make kills without any fight like we can avoid any contact since it's possible

rockyrr
1st Jan 2009, 22:11
more enemys the better ;):rasp:

Jerion
1st Jan 2009, 23:03
As long as it's finite amount and no spawning, I'm all for it. :)

Unstoppable
2nd Jan 2009, 00:27
Usually non-combat runs are harder than playing through the game with the occationall firefight.

You could do a lot of things that weren't apparent. Like saving your brother Paul by not leaving him when he tells you to. Also saving Jock. I lost them both the first play through because I didn't know Deus Ex gave you so much freedom :).

GmanPro
2nd Jan 2009, 07:59
I would like to see variety found in Diablo 2. Give me a reason to play in harder difficulties and to beat the game 2-4 more times. Throw in elite enemies and bosses etc. I want to see Deus Ex 3 have tons of replay value please!

Lol except that in Diablo 2 the enemies were all the same with just different tints and names.

Big Orange
5th Jan 2009, 00:29
Still, blowing up bridges and calling the military? Do you realise just how drastic that is? Just how impactful on a location blowing up a bridge is? There is no way that could be decently covered up.
The only way I could see that working would be if they said Adam did it.

The Illuminati castle would be in a remote location and the the Illuminati are seemingly powerful enough to have much of the world's military and police under their thumb, while manipulate the media reports into saying the bridge demolitions were a military training exercise gone wrong, and while the original Illuminati are likely much more cautious and secretive than Bob Page's strategically aggressive regime, like any other political group the Illuminati's former leadership in DX1 sound so full of crap.

While Everette snobbishly snorts 'crude inventions' when he mentions Bob Page's thuggish MJ12 Commandos, he's an obvious hypocrite when he's in theory using you as a violent enforcer to kill Bob Page and his followers. While MJ12 in the 20th century was initially a passive intelligence gathering and technology building wing of the Illuminati they obviously grew to be the Praetorian Guard of the Illuminati which was why Bob Page used them to supplant his less assertive colleagues and their bloated covert bureaucracy (boxes stacked upon boxes).