PDA

View Full Version : Regenerating Health Should Be Optional



Pages : [1] 2 3

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 03:52
Now, my final feelings about regenerating health are going to depend an awful lot on me getting new information. For instance, in-game explanations (pre-installed augmentations, for instance), will go a long ways towards making me more tolerant of it. The rate at which I heal will also have a big impact on how I feel about it.

Nonetheless, I can already see the regenerating health taking on a similar role to the "Vita-chambers" of Bioshock fame. I can see it becoming something that ruins any feeling of immersion, any need for strategy, any feeling of apprehension moving forward in a new dark, dangerous place, etc. I can see it becoming something that reduces the games overall quality. I hope the developers can see past their idea and see things from that perspective as well, like 2K eventually did. I just really hope that you guys consider making it an optional thing, much like tutorial pop-ups, something to help newer or more casual players, but not something thats rammed down your throat. At least make a "realistic"-type difficulty without it. Give us something.

K^2
5th Oct 2008, 04:25
Are we sure now that health regeneration is not a result of an optional augmentation? I think Rene hinted at some inconsistencies in the info we are getting. Not to mention that I first saw something about this feature from the same source that claimed 3rd person views.

Ihsan
5th Oct 2008, 06:02
If they are putting ez mode regenerating health in, this would be a great idea being able to turn it off. The way i see it, if they are trying to apeal to a wider audience why not have options for everyone, some people may want regen health, but not iron accuracy crosshairs etc.

Romeo
5th Oct 2008, 06:58
There's a LARGE difference between Vita-Chambers and recharging health. With Vita-Chambers, you literally never die and have to go back, you just come back on demand no matter how poor your performance was. Recharging health wont do you any favors if you're going to run straight at a dozen enemies like a fool, and to boot, it necessitates target selection, which in itself, is a strategy. And like K^2, I think I will wait for Rene's clarification before I abide by the rampant speculation presented to me.

IH-Denton
5th Oct 2008, 07:17
regenerating health should be one of 20 augs and no more! Like it was in DX1.

Romeo
5th Oct 2008, 07:24
Hm... I can definately see where you're coming from, and on a certain level, I do agree... I suppose I'll reserve my final judgement until I see how Eidos handles it. It doesn't have to be a game-breaker if handled correctly.

Larington
5th Oct 2008, 08:49
I suspect one of the main reasons for putting some kind of auto heal system into the game is as an attempt to make up for the god awful control method that is a console game control pad.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 09:01
There's a LARGE difference between Vita-Chambers and recharging health. With Vita-Chambers, you literally never die and have to go back, you just come back on demand no matter how poor your performance was. Recharging health wont do you any favors if you're going to run straight at a dozen enemies like a fool, and to boot, it necessitates target selection, which in itself, is a strategy. And like K^2, I think I will wait for Rene's clarification before I abide by the rampant speculation presented to me.

That's not a very large difference. "Can't die vs Can't die unless you really go out of your way to die", basically. It completely removes any tension from any encounter, and takes conflicts from being a matter of skills and planning and equipment, to being a matter of time. "Want to kill those 20 guys? Pop out of cover and open fire until you're in the red, then back into cover, then repeat 10 seconds later".



And I know why they're doing it. There's a game design principle that says "it's not fun to die/lose". But I'll tell you something - it's not very fun to win when there was no chance of losing, either. And that's exactly what it is. The technical possibility of death is meaningless if I have to sit there and basically allow myself to die.




It's just something that I can already see being a huge mistake, and a huge controversy, and I just really hope they do something about it. It's one of those things that would be really, really easy to implement and would have good ramifications across the board. And on the plus side, it wouldn't even really affect the people that, for whatever, reason, like the idea of virtual immortality in their games.

Larington
5th Oct 2008, 09:32
I'm wondering if there should be a difficulty settings menu which is far deeper than the usual easy, medium, hard, realistic that is used in DX1. These buttons are still there but in addition to this you can customise the difficulty of individual aspects in the game, so you can set auto-heal to boosted. standard, limited, unavailable for that, set a difficulty modifier for any hacking/lockpicking/intrusion game mechanics and so on, so the player can modify the experience to suit his/her desires.

I'm pretty certain that even if that isn't the case, the auto heal will be stronger on console systems by default than it will be on PCs to account for the differences in the control systems between the two versions of the game.

Time will tell I guess.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 13:10
Recharging health won't be optional. They either have to put healthpacks around the game, or not. I would have preferred they handled it the way it was in Deus Ex 1, or at least in Halo 1, rather than the Halo 2 way of doing it.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 14:03
Carlo, if there does indeed exist a regenerating health system, which, I might add, has not even been verified yet, a simple solution to the difficulty loss will be to just play on a higher difficulty. I'll be playing on the highest one myself, anyway.

AaronJ
5th Oct 2008, 14:08
The only way I see us getting out of this self-healing mess is to MOD THAT BOI UP.

Igoe
5th Oct 2008, 17:10
I won't be playing this game on a console, I will be playing it on a PC.

That being said, The PS2 version of the DX interface was an absolute nightmare. You just can't allow the console users to have a cumbersome interface to muck about in, it DETRACTS from the overall gameplay.

Nowadays consoles seem to be raking more profits than the PC equivalents. I'm NOT saying PC gaming is dying- its not. I'm saying right now its more profitable for the developers to make sure the console versions of games sell well. When games sell well, the developers get more power to create different games and then can afford to take more risks, resulting in better games, etc.

A modified version of a regenerative healing structure would be advantageous for the console gang because its one less interface they have to muck about to do something a PC user finds trivial. I'm not saying the style will be Halo based, or SHOULD be. That's Halo. DX3 will have its own system, and whatever it is has to work for the console people. There are plenty of ways to go about this and I'm more than certain EM has pursued a good deal of them.

Basically what I'm saying is, don't be surprised if they use a system tailored for consoles. That doesn't necessarily mean it will suck or detract from gameplay on the PC versions.

StingingVelvet
5th Oct 2008, 17:16
That's not a very large difference. "Can't die vs Can't die unless you really go out of your way to die", basically. It completely removes any tension from any encounter, and takes conflicts from being a matter of skills and planning and equipment, to being a matter of time. "Want to kill those 20 guys? Pop out of cover and open fire until you're in the red, then back into cover, then repeat 10 seconds later".

So I take it you never played Call of Duty 4 then? Or any other game with "auto-heal" for that matter? As someone who has completed CoD4 on its highest difficulty setting, let me tell you that "auto-heal" does not, in any way, mean a game is not challenging. There is, as the mod said, a HUGE difference between Bioshock's lame Vita Chambers, which meant no penalty at all for death, and "auto-heal," which if anything makes a shooter more tactical. In F.E.A.R. I can just run through a room and take a bunch of damage, hitting the Z key if I need some life, and going about my business. In CoD4 that gets you killed, fast, and then it's back to a checkpoint for you.

This "auto-heal" thing gets a bad name, mostly from die-hard PC gamers who can't accept change and are so scared of console games taking over completely that they view these console ideas as the devil's brew. At the end of the day medpacks are annoying to manage, no more realistic, stick you after a checkpoint with no health and 20 enemies that force you to restart a level, and clutter up the game world with glowing or otherwise obvious pick-ups. GOOD RIDDANCE.

mouse
5th Oct 2008, 17:24
A regenerating health leaves no place for the use of candy bars, sodas, beer and all these items. Those gave you a small amount of health and I often roamed the bars and nightclubs to gather enough stuff to heal me.

On the other hand, an auto-regeneration is more realistic - at least when it is an optional augmentation.

Overtime
5th Oct 2008, 18:10
So I take it you never played Call of Duty 4 then? Or any other game with "auto-heal" for that matter? As someone who has completed CoD4 on its highest difficulty setting, let me tell you that "auto-heal" does not, in any way, mean a game is not challenging. There is, as the mod said, a HUGE difference between Bioshock's lame Vita Chambers, which meant no penalty at all for death, and "auto-heal," which if anything makes a shooter more tactical. In F.E.A.R. I can just run through a room and take a bunch of damage, hitting the Z key if I need some life, and going about my business. In CoD4 that gets you killed, fast, and then it's back to a checkpoint for you.

This "auto-heal" thing gets a bad name, mostly from die-hard PC gamers who can't accept change and are so scared of console games taking over completely that they view these console ideas as the devil's brew. At the end of the day medpacks are annoying to manage, no more realistic, stick you after a checkpoint with no health and 20 enemies that force you to restart a level, and clutter up the game world with glowing or otherwise obvious pick-ups. GOOD RIDDANCE.

Auto heal was absolutely the right decision on CoD4. No doubt about that.


The fact is nobody here knows how the devs are going to implement it and what the relation of the heal system will be with the game. So i will reserve judgement until more is published.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 18:57
Carlo, if there does indeed exist a regenerating health system, which, I might add, has not even been verified yet, a simple solution to the difficulty loss will be to just play on a higher difficulty. I'll be playing on the highest one myself, anyway.

Yes "enemies do more damage" will be a great solution to "I don't want to auto-heal". That was very well thought out. That fixes the immersion problem, everything.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 19:13
So I take it you never played Call of Duty 4 then? Or any other game with "auto-heal" for that matter? As someone who has completed CoD4 on its highest difficulty setting, let me tell you that "auto-heal" does not, in any way, mean a game is not challenging. There is, as the mod said, a HUGE difference between Bioshock's lame Vita Chambers, which meant no penalty at all for death, and "auto-heal," which if anything makes a shooter more tactical. In F.E.A.R. I can just run through a room and take a bunch of damage, hitting the Z key if I need some life, and going about my business. In CoD4 that gets you killed, fast, and then it's back to a checkpoint for you.

This "auto-heal" thing gets a bad name, mostly from die-hard PC gamers who can't accept change and are so scared of console games taking over completely that they view these console ideas as the devil's brew. At the end of the day medpacks are annoying to manage, no more realistic, stick you after a checkpoint with no health and 20 enemies that force you to restart a level, and clutter up the game world with glowing or otherwise obvious pick-ups. GOOD RIDDANCE.
Playing Call of Duty 4 on veteran is just a race to checkpoints. You don't even enjoy the game.

Deus Ex on realistic is slow and methodical, and much more involved.

Kaebis
5th Oct 2008, 19:19
So I take it you never played Call of Duty 4 then? Or any other game with "auto-heal" for that matter? As someone who has completed CoD4 on its highest difficulty setting, let me tell you that "auto-heal" does not, in any way, mean a game is not challenging. There is, as the mod said, a HUGE difference between Bioshock's lame Vita Chambers, which meant no penalty at all for death, and "auto-heal," which if anything makes a shooter more tactical. In F.E.A.R. I can just run through a room and take a bunch of damage, hitting the Z key if I need some life, and going about my business. In CoD4 that gets you killed, fast, and then it's back to a checkpoint for you.

This "auto-heal" thing gets a bad name, mostly from die-hard PC gamers who can't accept change and are so scared of console games taking over completely that they view these console ideas as the devil's brew. At the end of the day medpacks are annoying to manage, no more realistic, stick you after a checkpoint with no health and 20 enemies that force you to restart a level, and clutter up the game world with glowing or otherwise obvious pick-ups. GOOD RIDDANCE.

Well said!

:)

free2game
5th Oct 2008, 19:24
A lot of different kinds of recharging health can work, but a Call Of Duty or Gears Of War style one doesn't in the context of the game. Something like what Stalker had where items augmented health regeneration, but it was never enough that you could just take some damage and wait a few seconds then jump back. For this type of game that just doesn't work. For Gears of War, Halo, and Call of Duty it's meant to keep the action flowing at a steady pace, this isn't that kind of game. It's one that should be about planning, and this just makes it too forgiving. Games baby players too much these days needlessly. I mean damn, even as dumbed down as Bioshock was, it didn't have a Call Of Duty style health system.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:27
Yes "enemies do more damage" will be a great solution to "I don't want to auto-heal". That was very well thought out. That fixes the immersion problem, everything.

I see you aren't willing to have a serious discussion, then. It appears all you feel like doing is *****ing. Have it your way.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 19:28
So I take it you never played Call of Duty 4 then? Or any other game with "auto-heal" for that matter?
Yeah, I have. I take it you don't know the difference between "this is a good thing for game A" and "this is a good thing for game B". Or the difference between "FPS" and "RPG". Just some empirical observation.



As someone who has completed CoD4 on its highest difficulty setting, let me tell you that "auto-heal" does not, in any way, mean a game is not challenging. There is, as the mod said, a HUGE difference between Bioshock's lame Vita Chambers, which meant no penalty at all for death, and "auto-heal," which if anything makes a shooter more tactical. In F.E.A.R. I can just run through a room and take a bunch of damage, hitting the Z key if I need some life, and going about my business. In CoD4 that gets you killed, fast, and then it's back to a checkpoint for you.
No. I don't really care if it's difficult for you, but it's not really difficult for the vast majority of human beings to pop out, shoot, heal, pop out, shoot, and repeat until done. It turns the game into a grind, with no consideration given to whether or not to fight. That's the whole point of the feature. Game designers think it's no fun to die or fail, so they implemented this feature to give you the ability to go Rambo all the time without any real fear of dying. It makes the game "more fun", supposedly, though in reality all it does is remove tension and any feeling of having accomplished something.

Auto-heal kills tension, it kills fear of entering certain areas, it kills the need for asking yourself "do I really need to fight these guys?", it removes what could have been a useful augmentation, and just generally dumbs the game down. Which, after Invisible War, is the last place any sane person should be taking the franchise.



This "auto-heal" thing gets a bad name, mostly from die-hard PC gamers who can't accept change and are so scared of console games taking over completely that they view these console ideas as the devil's brew. At the end of the day medpacks are annoying to manage, no more realistic, stick you after a checkpoint with no health and 20 enemies that force you to restart a level, and clutter up the game world with glowing or otherwise obvious pick-ups. GOOD RIDDANCE.
Yeah, I remember all those glowing pick ups from the first two games. Whoops.



I see you aren't willing to have a serious discussion, then. It appears all you feel like doing is *****ing. Have it your way.

Not going along with asinine suggestions ≠ not willing to have a serious discussion. Your suggestion, among other things, failed to address a single reason why I dislike the idea of auto-healing. Your suggestion basically amounts to "spend 5 seconds shooting before you have to pop back into cover, instead of 10". Thats not much of a solution. It's more of a waste of time.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 19:29
I see you aren't willing to have a serious discussion, then. It appears all you feel like doing is *****ing. Have it your way.

To be fair, your reply to his post really wasn't addressing his point.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:32
To be fair, your reply to his post really wasn't addressing his point.

And how so? Someone complains about a feature that they know nothing about, so I provide a solution to his unreasonable assumption. People like him never stop to think if the higher difficulties will limit or perhaps even remove any auto healing feature implemented, or that it will be included in the fashion that he even believes.

It's full of assumptions, and, mainly, *****ing. I would address the point if there existed one, however.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 19:37
And how so? Someone complains about a feature that they know nothing about, so I provide a solution to his unreasonable assumption. People like him never stop to think if the higher difficulties will limit or perhaps even remove any auto healing feature implemented, or that it will be included in the fashion that he even believes.

It's full of assumptions, and, mainly, *****ing. I would address the point if there existed one, however.

*sigh*

Sit down, let me drop some education on you.

1) Yes, I do know how it'll work. "Auto-healing" is pretty self explanatory. It's not like they gave it a cryptic name or anything and failed to explain it. There's only one way for something called "auto-healing" to work. The only people who don't know how it works by now are the dopes burying their heads in the sand because they don't want to see another Invisible War coming.

2) Yeah, I never stopped to think if a higher difficulty level would alter/remove the feature. Which is why I suggested such a thing. In the first post. The one you apparently didn't read before coming in here to rant and ***** about something you apparently know nothing about. Lets see if you can't read this post before you reply to it this time. Lets make sure this doesn't happen again.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 19:40
And how so? Someone complains about a feature that they know nothing about, so I provide a solution to his unreasonable assumption. People like him never stop to think if the higher difficulties will limit or perhaps even remove any auto healing feature implemented, or that it will be included in the fashion that he even believes.

It's full of assumptions, and, mainly, *****ing. I would address the point if there existed one, however.

When discussing feature sets, like automatic health regeneration, it's a complete cop-out to just suggest playing on a higher difficulty. Think about the inverse scenario: "We forgot to put ammo boxes in our game after level 2, so just play on easy so enemies take less ammo to die."

The developers are responsible for providing a Deus Ex experience. If they don't, there's no way you can call what people are doing "*****ing". Start a new IP if you want to start changing up the mechanics, don't just tack some modern-day fads onto a classic name.

free2game
5th Oct 2008, 19:42
So I take it you never played Call of Duty 4 then? Or any other game with "auto-heal" for that matter? As someone who has completed CoD4 on its highest difficulty setting, let me tell you that "auto-heal" does not, in any way, mean a game is not challenging. There is, as the mod said, a HUGE difference between Bioshock's lame Vita Chambers, which meant no penalty at all for death, and "auto-heal," which if anything makes a shooter more tactical. In F.E.A.R. I can just run through a room and take a bunch of damage, hitting the Z key if I need some life, and going about my business. In CoD4 that gets you killed, fast, and then it's back to a checkpoint for you.

This "auto-heal" thing gets a bad name, mostly from die-hard PC gamers who can't accept change and are so scared of console games taking over completely that they view these console ideas as the devil's brew. At the end of the day medpacks are annoying to manage, no more realistic, stick you after a checkpoint with no health and 20 enemies that force you to restart a level, and clutter up the game world with glowing or otherwise obvious pick-ups. GOOD RIDDANCE.Well I think you've got something mixed up about this comparison. Call Of Duty 4 is a linear scripted game where the designers intend the player to move from checkpoint to checkpoint. It's design choices were extremely different from Deus Ex, and even FEAR really. FEAR moved along basically at you own pace for the most part between shootouts, Call Of Duty always wants the player to be moving forward, so much so that enemies respawn before checkpoints, compared to the kill the enemies between each checkpoint design system. The recharging health works there because there's going to be a great difference in the number of enemies each player will kill, while in FEAR, it's a set number, so health packs can be easily paced in between those. Now in Deus Ex it's a whole different story, it's not linear or controlled to the same level and it's designed to encourage planning and player choice. A recharging health system just makes mistakes easily corrected and just babies the player, cutting down for satisfaction for planning working and making the game less enjoyable, along with just as I said, not working in the context of the game in that style.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:42
*sigh*

Sit down, let me drop some education on you.

1) Yes, I do know how it'll work. "Auto-healing" is pretty self explanatory. It's not like they gave it a cryptic name or anything and failed to explain it. There's only one way for something called "auto-healing" to work. The only people who don't know how it works by now are the dopes burying their heads in the sand because they don't want to see another Invisible War coming.

2) Yeah, I never stopped to think if a higher difficulty level would alter/remove the feature. Which is why I suggested such a thing. In the first post. The one you apparently didn't read before coming in here to rant and ***** about something you apparently know nothing about. Lets see if you can't read this post before you reply to it this time. Lets make sure this doesn't happen again.

I don't need education from someone obviously not qualified to give me any. ;)

1) No, you don't. It is not entirely self-explanatory. I would love for you to show everyone in this thread the undeniable proof that the healing system in this game is going to be just like what has been seen in games like Call of Duty and Halo. I'll be waiting for your half-wit comeback to this, though I'm sure the proof will be nowhere to be seen.

2) If you made the suggestion yourself, why are you still complaining? Seems we have a hypocrite among us.

Let me give you some advice: Before going on a rant about something, make sure you have something to back the bull**** up, because it's a waste of everyone's precious time otherwise.

Added note: The above applies to WhatsHisFace as well.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 19:47
1) It's called "auto-healing". That's proof, for anyone who isn't adept at burying their heads in the sand and pretending the perfectly obvious isn't sitting there, staring at them. The people who are denying this are quickly becoming the new "it's a sequel!" crowd. Ignoring obvious, clear evidence in favor of absolutely nothing, wishful thinking. Let me know how that turns out in 2009.

2) Congratulations on making zero sense. I'm a hypocrite, because I...suggested something that you thought I hadn't thought of? Because you screeched and complained about my post, without having read it? Are you, perhaps, unaware of what "hypocrite" means? Is English not your first language? I'm trying to understand how something this nonsensical gets posted.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:49
It's called "auto-healing". That's proof,

Wrong.


2) Congratulations on making zero sense.

Typical response from someone who has no decent counter-argument.

No points this round.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 19:51
Let me give you some advice: Before going on a rant about something, make sure you have something to back the bull**** up, because it's a waste of everyone's precious time otherwise.

Added note: The above applies to WhatsHisFace as well.
I would say an Eidos-sanctioned magazine article is "something to back the bull**** up." Magazines don't just "create" info when previewing a game.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 19:52
Give him a few weeks to climb back down off the mountain of stupid he's built for himself. He's in "save face" mode right now, arguing won't do any good. He'd argue about the color of the sky at the moment.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:53
I would say an Eidos-sanctioned magazine article is "something to back the bull**** up." Magazines don't just "create" info when previewing a game.

Then please, almighty WhatsHisFace, provide me with the highly credible and absolute proof, word-for-word, that you found in said magazine.

You've got 5 minutes.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 19:55
Yes WHF, provide proof, on a forum that doesn't allow you to post scans. Tick tock.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 19:56
Then please, almighty WhatsHisFace, provide me with the highly credible and absolute proof, word-for-word, that you found in said magazine.

You've got 5 minutes.
I've got a better idea. Why don't you take those five minutes and explain to me why a widely-published magazine, given an exclusive preview of a highly anticipated game, would not have "credibility". :lol:

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:56
Yes WHF, provide proof, on a forum that doesn't allow you to post scans. Tick tock.

Lol. I find that highly amusing. You actually backed up my point. Wow.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:57
I've got a better idea. Why don't you take those five minutes and explain to me why a widely-publised magazine, given an exclusive preview of a highly anticipated game, would not have "credibility". :lol:

The same reason that the media in general hasn't had total credibility since, well, always. But hey, if you want to stretch out the words that a magazine article tells you, feel free to. Just keep the bull**** to yourself, mkay?

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 19:57
Your point was that your request was asinine? Are you sure? :confused:

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 19:58
Your point was that your request was asinine? Are you sure? :confused:

Your persistence on playing stupid is getting rather old. Can't be helped, I guess. You have nothing better to post. ;)

free2game
5th Oct 2008, 19:59
The same reason that the media in general hasn't had total credibility since, well, always. But hey, if you want to stretch out the words that a magazine article tells you, feel free to. Just keep the bull**** to yourself, mkay?
They obviously wouldn't publicize lies. Not in some kind of exclusive preview. It's not some small blog or anything making up something or poorly translating something.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:01
They obviously wouldn't publicize lies. Not in some kind of exclusive preview. It's not some small blog or anything making up something or poorly translating something.

So I'm supposed to believe what a magazine tells me? I'm supposed to see a "widely known, highly credible" reviewer's score of Halo 3 of a 9.6 and go "HEY, I'm going to love this game and if I don't, I'm a ******* idiot with bad taste!"?

I don't think so. Also, I'll apply extra stress to the fact that the magazine barely made anything "clear". Jeez, people can be so stubborn and simple sometimes.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 20:02
Your persistence on playing stupid is getting rather old. Can't be helped, I guess. You have nothing better to post. ;)

You asked him to provide proof of the content of a magazine, only possible by posting scans of said magazine, on a forum that does not allow the posting of scans.


Actually, you know what? Forget it. You aren't going to understand. I don't even know why I'm bothering to explain this to you. Congrats on establishing yourself as the forums first lol-cow. I'm sure we all look forward to milking you in the future.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:05
You asked him to provide proof of the content of a magazine, only possible by posting scans of said magazine, on a forum that does not allow the posting of scans.


Actually, you know what? Forget it. You aren't going to understand. I don't even know why I'm bothering to explain this to you. Congrats on establishing yourself as the forums first lol-cow. I'm sure we all look forward to milking you in the future.

Proof that has not been provided in the time limit I established. Therefore, any "points" sourcing the magazine are null and void.

I'm glad that you're finally ending this tiring tantrum of yours. Congrats on being the first person on here to officially make it onto my "Cannot back up any arguments" list. I'm sure WhatsHisFace will soon follow.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 20:05
So I'm supposed to believe what a magazine tells me? I'm supposed to see a "widely known, highly credible" reviewer's score of Halo 3 of a 9.6 and go "HEY, I'm going to love this game and if I don't, I'm a ******* idiot with bad taste!"?

I don't think so. Also, I'll apply extra stress to the fact that the magazine barely made anything "clear". Jeez, people can be so stubborn and simple sometimes.

If Eidos invited magazine editors to see a demonstration of Deus Ex 3, and those magazine employees sat down and wrote an article about what they were presented at Eidos... yes, you should believe them.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:07
If Eidos invited magazine editors to see a demonstration of Deus Ex 3, and those magazine employees sat down and wrote an article about what they were presented at Eidos... yes, you should believe them.

Then I can see where your arrogance and lack of valid information come from.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 20:09
Then I can see where your arrogance and lack of valid information come from.
Yes. An authoritative source with hands-on impressions of the game in the presence of the game's studio/publisher media room. If you can't believe this story, you can't believe any other story you read in any magazine or newspaper.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:10
Yes. An authoritative source with hands-on impressions of the game in the presence of the game's studio/publisher media room. If you can't believe this story, you can't believe any other story you read in any magazine or newspaper.

Unlike people such as you, I require some valid evidence, not text on a sheet of paper. I'll judge the game fully when I play it, not based on what I'm told via the media. You'll never do this, however, as you seem to love to complain.

Kaebis
5th Oct 2008, 20:11
Yes. An authoritative source with hands-on impressions of the game in the presence of the game's studio/publisher media room. If you can't believe this story, you can't believe any other story you read in any magazine or newspaper.

Just don't bother man, they're obviously not going to listen. Even though you are rasing very valid points...

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 20:14
I also recommend the "don't bother" course of action. It's impossible to argue with someone that just recreates their own little reality every time you bring up something that kills their position/argument. Just milk some lulz out of him and smile knowingly.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:16
Yes, vent your anger, Carlo. It's the only road to recovery. Honestly, if you have nothing worth posting, don't post at all. You waste more time doing that, but you must have gallons of it if you're willing to spend so much time whining. I'm just going to have to pretend I can't hear it, I guess, otherwise I'll waste all of mine.

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 20:17
He's given me enough "lulz" for the day I suppose. I look forward to any future "roffles" I may be provided.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:19
He's given me enough "lulz" for the day I suppose. I look forward to any future "roffles" I may be provided.

I guess my work with you is done as well, seeing as you have stooped to little Carlo's level. I look forward to playing (and enjoying) this game that you so blindly bash so early in development. ;)

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 20:19
His position of "na na na na, I can't hear you!" gave me a nice little roffle just now. :D

Red
5th Oct 2008, 20:33
I usually like quite feisty arguements, but this one isn't accomplishing anything. I suggest we wait for a month or so, when Rene will be allowed to answer our unanswered questions...

Or perhaps, Rene, it would be nice if you could at least clear up a little about this issue right now. I don't expect a detailed answer, but I liked the way you pointed out in another thread "(about the maps' sizes) Think DX1, not Invisible War". So... the actual question would be... How is this regeneration going to work? Think CoD4 or something completely different? It'd be nice to know atleast something about that, just so we wouldn't jump down each others throats over this.

AaronJ
5th Oct 2008, 20:35
Self-healing will be the universal ammo of DX3.

They've already started making big mistakes.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:36
I usually like quite feisty arguements, but this one isn't accomplishing anything. I suggest we wait for a month or so, when Rene will be allowed to answer our unanswered questions...

Or perhaps, Rene, it would be nice if you could at least clear up a little about this issue right now. I don't expect a detailed answer, but I liked the way you pointed out in another thread "(about the maps' sizes) Think DX1, not Invisible War". So... the actual question would be... How is this regeneration going to work? Think CoD4 or something completely different? It'd be nice to know atleast something about that, just so we wouldn't jump down each others throats over this.

Eh, people will be crybabies no matter what form of regeneration it is. Complainers can't live without something to complain about. :rolleyes:

Although I would also like to have an explanation of it, but seeing as Rene has already spilled enough of his guts, I may have to wait until after the stuff is tossed into the media. -Sigh-

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 20:41
You'll probably have to wait a little longer actually, since you don't trust the official media. :lol:

foxh0und
5th Oct 2008, 20:42
Self-healing will be the universal ammo of DX3.

They've already started making big mistakes.
I think its too early to judge if auto healing is good or bad the more important question is are Devs gona change it for us if they get a lot of negative comments if not then this discussion is pointles.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 20:54
To Carlo: The more of that you post unprovoked, the more I'll be reporting the troll activity. I thought it would be fair to warn you, at the least.

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 21:01
Haha, grow a pair, lol-cow. I'm just reminding you of how "unreliable" official media, like the stuff given to a magazine, is in your world. We can't have you going off and believing things just because they come from direct observation of the game, can we? Besides, you don't want to imply that you'd believe the official media, after deriding others for doing the very same thing, would you? Why, that would make you a hypocrite! Surely you don't want that.

SubTonic20
5th Oct 2008, 21:11
It appears you've fallen victim to your own claim of me "Not reading what you type". If you did, you would know to what extent that I distrust the media. Now, as long as you continue to troll and act like that, I will gladly report it all. I believe this has gone on long enough, however. I will direct my attention to people worth having it. :)

CarloGervasi
5th Oct 2008, 21:19
It appears you've fallen victim to your own claim of me "Not reading what you type". If you did, you would know to what extent that I distrust the media. Now, as long as you continue to troll and act like that, I will gladly report it all. I believe this has gone on long enough, however. I will direct my attention to people worth having it. :)


The same reason that the media in general hasn't had total credibility since, well, always. But hey, if you want to stretch out the words that a magazine article tells you, feel free to. Just keep the bull**** to yourself, mkay?

The funny thing is, people don't even really need to argue with you anymore. They just need to let you speak, and you'll end up arguing with yourself. When confronted with this, you'll try to dig yourself out of your hole...only to argue with yourself again in the process of doing so. It's a closed loop of funny.

Romeo
5th Oct 2008, 21:31
You'll probably have to wait a little longer actually, since you don't trust the official media. :lol:
This is the official media. You're going to hear things first-hand here, instead of second-hand elsewhere. Besides, as I said in another thread, the possibility to do auto-regeneration right exists, it all depends on how Eidos handles it.

Haha, grow a pair, lol-cow. I'm just reminding you of how "unreliable" official media, like the stuff given to a magazine, is in your world. We can't have you going off and believing things just because they come from direct observation of the game, can we? Besides, you don't want to imply that you'd believe the official media, after deriding others for doing the very same thing, would you? Why, that would make you a hypocrite! Surely you don't want that.
IGN, one of the biggest official media outlets, makes mistakes quite commonly, and this will be everybody's first and last warning, if you all can't play nice, you'll enjoy a nice two-week vacation.

AaronJ
5th Oct 2008, 23:26
I think its too early to judge if auto healing is good or bad

That is stupid. Go play Call of Duty 4. Enjoy hiding to lick your wounds while waiting for the red to get off your screen.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
5th Oct 2008, 23:34
* Views thread*


Oh dear... :(


* Leaves thread * http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/SmileyWave3.gif

HouseOfPain
5th Oct 2008, 23:55
I think we need to complain with what we have right now, Sub Tonic.

If we think something as stupid as Auto-Healing is in the game, we need to voice our opinion NOW so there is a chance to change it.

Would you seriously rather protest Auto-Healing after the games done?

Romeo
5th Oct 2008, 23:56
That is stupid. Go play Call of Duty 4. Enjoy hiding to lick your wounds while waiting for the red to get off your screen.
Or play Mass Effect, where the natural healing is very slow, and wont truly save you in battle, only medkits will. The regeneration is more useful for healing you between shoot-outs.

* Views thread*


Oh dear... :(


* Leaves thread * http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/SmileyWave3.gif
Yeah, I don't blame you. lol

WhatsHisFace
5th Oct 2008, 23:59
I think we need to complain with what we have right now, Sub Tonic.

If we think something as stupid as Auto-Healing is in the game, we need to voice our opinion NOW so there is a chance to change it.

Would you seriously rather protest Auto-Healing after the games done?

If there's a chance to improve anything, I hope it's the gimped stealth system. It's so hard to find a good stealth game these days.

Romeo
6th Oct 2008, 00:01
I think the stealth system looks fine, what do you find wrong with it?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
6th Oct 2008, 00:02
I think we need to complain with what we have right now, Sub Tonic.

If we think something as stupid as Auto-Healing is in the game, we need to voice our opinion NOW so there is a chance to change it.

Would you seriously rather protest Auto-Healing after the games done?

Is this question addressed to me? :scratch:
:D

WhatsHisFace
6th Oct 2008, 00:08
I think the stealth system looks fine, what do you find wrong with it?
Stealth was a big part of Deus Ex. It used the popular shadow-based stealth system from Thief. The same style of play was later made insanely popular with SplinterCell, a stealth breakthrough.

Now, what they've done is taken that out and put in a Metal Gear Solid style, line-of-sight based stealth system. It needlessly dumbs things down and takes away that core part of the experience.

Romeo
6th Oct 2008, 00:13
Ah, actually, the light and dark levels from the original Deus Ex had no bearing on how enemies could see you or not, it was purely cover based. Invisible War introduced light and dark elements. And I'm kinda on the fence with this one... When a game does things right, you're correct, light and dark stealth can be magnifiscent to watch. However, I've also see a few frustratingly bad examples of light and dark. Still, personally, I think I can go nuts with the system presented to me. I did in Deus Ex.

free2game
6th Oct 2008, 02:24
So I'm supposed to believe what a magazine tells me? I'm supposed to see a "widely known, highly credible" reviewer's score of Halo 3 of a 9.6 and go "HEY, I'm going to love this game and if I don't, I'm a ******* idiot with bad taste!"?

I don't think so. Also, I'll apply extra stress to the fact that the magazine barely made anything "clear". Jeez, people can be so stubborn and simple sometimes.

No obviously, the logical thing to do would be to take into context the review, the way it was reviewed, the standards of the platform, and it's own genre/niche. In the standards of a console FPS experience it's extremely good and well featured and yes those scores were probably inflated because of the way it's reviewed, but the point still stands it's a high point for that genre, but if you don't like console FPS games you probably wont like it as much as the reviewer, reviewing it in that context.

WhatsHisFace
6th Oct 2008, 02:51
Ah, actually, the light and dark levels from the original Deus Ex had no bearing on how enemies could see you or not, it was purely cover based. Invisible War introduced light and dark elements. And I'm kinda on the fence with this one... When a game does things right, you're correct, light and dark stealth can be magnifiscent to watch. However, I've also see a few frustratingly bad examples of light and dark. Still, personally, I think I can go nuts with the system presented to me. I did in Deus Ex.
Have you even played through Deus Ex? Wait, no. Have you at least played the TRAINING level of Deus Ex? If you at least went ten minutes into the training level, you'd know you are completely wrong. There's no way you can possibly think that lighting conditions didn't effect stealth if you've played the original.

CarloGervasi
6th Oct 2008, 02:55
I think he's got it reversed. Hiding in a shadow never does much good in Invisible War.

K^2
6th Oct 2008, 04:41
Ah, actually, the light and dark levels from the original Deus Ex had no bearing on how enemies could see you or not, it was purely cover based. Invisible War introduced light and dark elements. And I'm kinda on the fence with this one... When a game does things right, you're correct, light and dark stealth can be magnifiscent to watch. However, I've also see a few frustratingly bad examples of light and dark. Still, personally, I think I can go nuts with the system presented to me. I did in Deus Ex.
Sorry, but you are completely off on that one. DX did not have dynamic lighting. It was all light-map-based. But the light map was used to determine your cover. Id est, hiding in shadows worked better than in the light.

minus0ne
6th Oct 2008, 05:18
Sorry, but you are completely off on that one. DX did not have dynamic lighting. It was all light-map-based. But the light map was used to determine your cover. Id est, hiding in shadows worked better than in the light.
I think the confusion stems from the fact that the 'flashlight' aug can't be seen by enemies in DX1 (you could be in the shadows close to an NPC and shine the light right at his face without him taking notice, iirc).

But yeah, DX1 did, just as the Thief games of the same time, have a light-based stealth system, and it worked pretty well IMHO. To be honest I'm not sure what IW had, to me it always felt random (for all we know the AI continually rolled dices to determine detection :p I seriously would not be surprised if that turned out to be the case, but it's probably just poor and rushed coding).

It's one thing to have lots of well-lit locations where it's hard to find a shadow, but quite another to take out the light-based stealth system altogether. In reality it's possible to hide in darkness, even if it's on certain occasions (for instance, someone walking from a well-lit area into a dark room will need some time to adjust his eyes to the darkness, time you can use to further escape from his vision).

DX1, Splinter Cell (or Thief) may not have been perfectly realistic, but that aspect of the gameplay was solid. What's the bigger rush: you ducking behind a desk and remaining unseen by an NPC (simple line-of-sight mechanic, predictable), or you ducking or pressing against a darkened wall and being passed by said NPC, narrowly escaping detection (a light-and-shadows mechanic is more analogue, which means more possibilities for heartbeat-thumping moments IMHO).

Fen
6th Oct 2008, 08:44
Your health status directly influences the way you are going to approach a situation. It increases immersion and enjoyabilty. It also forces the player to explore different options that they may have originally overlooked.

The auto-regen systems work well for action games where the goal is to shoot the enemy. But not in an RPG world like deus ex where there are multiple ways to go about things.

DXeXodus
6th Oct 2008, 09:38
It all depends whether it is COD4 style health regeneration or STALKER style health regeneration. The latter being a slow regeneration over time and the inclusion of health packs.

I am slightly worried that COD4 style regeneration will only promote run and gun game-play and weaken the RPG aspect of the game. But I am ready to be proved wrong. I fully trust Eidos here.

Azrepheal
6th Oct 2008, 21:37
Back on topic (regen instead of lighting :rasp: ) I was thinking about one of the arguements against it. Now I am primarily against autohealing UNLESS its done via an augmentation or very little over a very long period of time (stopping the bloodflow, blood in wounds beginning to congeal kind-of-slow)

But some people were discussing how regen as a non0aug would be ridiculous in a prequel, why doesnt JC have it, etc. My answer to this query would be that JC was nano-augmented so that his cellular structure improved. DX3 can have nanoaugmentation and still be a prequel - irl, nano-technology will start at a base layer, creating singular particles, atoms etc. This will then move up to very simple atomic structures and mainstream use would only really see it in creating materials for building (wood, metals etc) - creating biological entitys, cells and soforth would be a lot more complicated.

My theory would be that autoregen (if it isnt an aug) would simply be nanobots rebuilding the mechanic augmentations of Adam - creating metals, individual parts that only work via direct force. JC's nanotechnology regeneration would have to create cells that would be compatible with JCs body - living structures that react physically, electronically and affect the other cells around them, and having more than just a physical 'cog in the machine' presence.

Just to reiterate, Im fundimentally against the autoheal, but if they stick it in then I dont see it being a major time-upsetter.

K^2
6th Oct 2008, 21:42
I think the confusion stems from the fact that the It's one thing to have lots of well-lit locations where it's hard to find a shadow, but quite another to take out the light-based stealth system altogether. In reality it's possible to hide in darkness, even if it's on certain occasions (for instance, someone walking from a well-lit area into a dark room will need some time to adjust his eyes to the darkness, time you can use to further escape from his vision).
I know this works very well in real life, because I happen to see in darkness better than just about anyone I ever met. So I've been able to hide from people in what appeared to me to be plain site.

But we don't really know the details yet. For all we know, all the augs will light protagonist like a christmas tree. In that case, hiding in shadows would be rather ridiculous.

WhatsHisFace
6th Oct 2008, 23:22
I think he's got it reversed. Hiding in a shadow never does much good in Invisible War.

Stealth in IW was completely broken. It didn't even work in the "tutorial" part of the game where the guard says "Stick to the shadows" shortly after the attack on Tarsus. :(

teknikal-vision
7th Oct 2008, 02:37
I'm very dissapointed at this so called 'regenerating health'.

From what I know the prospect of not having to rely on medpacks and the occasional medbot doesn't sit too well with me...

In Deus Ex I loved the tension of being low on health, down on my bioeletrics and medpack/biocell-less and the anxiety of not knowing how long it will be until I came across another medbot, medpack or biocell. And when you pulled off some great feat with barely any health... well that made you feel absolutely awesome! :D

Rationing your items and using them wisely was an essential part of Deus Ex's strategy system.

Oh and how enjoyable is to to rummage around for items like medpacks and biocells? VERY MUCH SO! I loved that reward for exploring every nook and cranny of a map. ^_^

DXeXodus
7th Oct 2008, 04:28
I forgot about the medbots :( goodbye old friend.

But oh well, heres to new things!

*Raises his drink*

Spiffmeister
7th Oct 2008, 04:39
In DX1 and 2 regeneration has been an augmentation. The regenerating health system is good in games such as Call of Duty, but only because its playstyle suits it. One of the skills in DX1 was better healing with medkits. This seems to suit DX better, rather then being able to hide and regenerate, rather then micromanaging your inventory, or sacraficing one of your augmentation slots.

Igoe
7th Oct 2008, 05:34
Well, I can see both sides of the argument. I'd been waiting till I heard OFFICIAL confirmation before I said anything, but Rene has said straight out that there is Auto-heal.

On the one hand, it does streamline the gameplay, and makes it so that AFTER the gunfire has ceased, you don't have to spend X amount of time fumbling around using medkits or standing still waiting for regen to kick in.

On the other hand thats the POINT. Players need a punishment for engaging in heavy fire. If the difference between sneaking and engaging in combat is a minute of healing myself, then I may think twice about busting in and capping guards. I'll be more likely to find a different, less dangerous route.

Auto-healing makes it so as long as u don't take TOO MUCH fire in the span of a second or two, you're fine. Once the fire has stopped, you're golden. Auto-heal ALSO means you can't be poisoned or be caught on fire.

Theres no penalty for engaging in combat, or being reckless, and I think thats the point of it.

EVERYBODY chose the Regen aug. EVERYBODY. EVERY PLAYER HAD IT, and I think that's their greatest argument for it. The problem is it took time and you acquired it a quarter of the way through the game.

I understand auto-regen, and I understand the developers choice to use and and ultimately it is their decision. I am AGAINST the idea, but I very much see the reasoning behind it.

I guess all I'll say is, I can almost guarantee you'll have more success appealing to the original DX crowd than the newer crowd. You're trying to reinvent an old franchise that almost died because it deviated from the norm.

Word of mouth can be a very powerful tool. The very people that played the first DX now could have a very large impact on how the game is perceived by the players who HAVEN'T played the first two installments.

I am VERY happy DX3 is shaping up to be great, and that the people behind it are so passionate, but I believe that you need to tread lightly in this particular area.

K^2
7th Oct 2008, 06:05
Auto-heal ALSO means you can't be poisoned or be caught on fire.
I don't know where you get that idea. Ever played an RPG before?

Here is how it works in virtually every RPG out there that has auto-heal. You auto-heal. Excruciatingly slow. You can make it heal faster, usually, by having some special equipment or what have you. In this case, I'd guess an aug might exist to do that.

There are still ways to restore health fast, because there are situations where you have to deal with two waves of attacks one after another, and auto-heal can't save you there. Boss fights are another situations requiring quick healing. In case of DX3, I'm positive we'll still see med kits for just such things.

Effects like poison or fire typically do damage much faster than you can auto-heal it. Sometimes, you can get your auto-heal to the point where a single poison attack doesn't hurt you, but in games where this is an option, poison attacks usually stack. You can then use either a med kit or an antidote to cancel effects of the poison. In case of DX3, I'd guess a med kit would do it, just like in previous games.

Auto-healing, if it is very gradual, changes little of core game mechanics. What it does change, quite a bit, is some tactics involved with managing your inventory and use of health kits. If you are low on health, you might be tempted to use a health kit before exploring further, because you might run into trouble. In this case, you might be tempted to find a quiet spot and heal a bit. That's pretty much all.

DXeXodus
7th Oct 2008, 06:19
I sincerely hope that the auto-healing is handled in the above-mentioned way and not COD4 style.

K^2
7th Oct 2008, 06:57
I sincerely hope that the auto-healing is handled in the above-mentioned way and not COD4 style.
Well, that is one thing that should be relatively reasonably modable. This can be done by either determining the exact amount of auto-heal and trying to find it in the binaries. (Sure, it will take a lot of tries, but one might get lucky.) Or by writing a reverse trainer. Something that watches the health variable, and keeps subtracting some amount of health per cycle. Then tweak it to cancel, or nearly cancel, the auto-heal, and there you have it.

Laokin
7th Oct 2008, 07:01
Why do med bots have to be out? Your gonna pick up a bio mechanical arm, and cut your real one off all by yourself? Medbots install your bio mods in DX1, another unnecessary change in IW.... but it actually makes more sense than ever in DX3 -- being mechanical and all.

K^2
7th Oct 2008, 07:04
There might be separate augmentation installation bots that install the augs. Just because there aren't med bots anymore (which sort of makes sense for a prequel) doesn't mean you'll be doing installs in the field with an army knife.

Laokin
7th Oct 2008, 07:04
Well, that is one thing that should be relatively reasonably modable. This can be done by either determining the exact amount of auto-heal and trying to find it in the binaries. (Sure, it will take a lot of tries, but one might get lucky.) Or by writing a reverse trainer. Something that watches the health variable, and keeps subtracting some amount of health per cycle. Then tweak it to cancel, or nearly cancel, the auto-heal, and there you have it.

Almost, if there are no med packs because it's like CoD 4, you'd have to be able to add in a functional med pack..... or the game would probably be impossible unless you were just really effin leet. Would this be impossible without the SDK or would code injection do the trick?

(Don't know much about programming, I'm in my early courses.)

Laokin
7th Oct 2008, 07:05
There might be separate augmentation installation bots that install the augs. Just because there aren't med bots anymore (which sort of makes sense for a prequel) doesn't mean you'll be doing installs in the field with an army knife.

Who would like to see the field army knife? That would be amazing lol

(Sarcastic......)

K^2
7th Oct 2008, 07:12
Almost, if there are no med packs because it's like CoD 4, you'd have to be able to add in a functional med pack..... or the game would probably be impossible unless you were just really effin leet. Would this be impossible without the SDK or would code injection do the trick?

(Don't know much about programming, I'm in my early courses.)
You don't need to inject code for that. That's the beauty of it. You can get the OS to grant an external program permission to access memory used by the game. That external program would simply locate where health is stored, and keep modifying the values for it.

It's really a little more complex than that, because finding the location isn't exactly trivial, but it is a lot easier than code injection. In fact, if auto-heal does prove to be bad, I almost guarantee that such a program will pop up.

CarloGervasi
7th Oct 2008, 07:18
You guys are over thinking it. I guarantee you all you'll need to do is edit a text value in "user.ini" or whatever they decide to call it from X, X being whatever the default healing value is, to 0. Voila. But, as others have said, if really poor design decisions have creeped in and we don't' have locational damage/health, no other means of healing, etc, that won't really solve the problem, and nothing will without a TES Construction Set styled SDK.

Ihsan
7th Oct 2008, 07:23
Why has no-body mentioned about the cool damage system from DX1. If we get regenerating health, I dout it will remain. I mean what would be the point of worrying about being shot in the leg and walking slower, when 10 sec later you will be sprinting a marathon with full hp :/

Though I certainly wouldnt mind the STALKER system, were you regain health at a very minor rate, and it is often off set by bleeding, radiation etc.

K^2
7th Oct 2008, 07:23
You guys are over thinking it. I guarantee you all you'll need to do is edit a text value in "user.ini" or whatever they decide to call it from X, X being whatever the default healing value is, to 0. Voila. But, as others have said, if really poor design decisions have creeped in and we don't' have locational damage/health, no other means of healing, etc, that won't really solve the problem, and nothing will without a TES Construction Set styled SDK.
Well, yeah, I suppose expecting it to be hard coded might be a bit extreme. But considering that it is an in-house engine, the config file itself can easily be binary. It would still be a lot easier to find and edit than in the execs, I suppose.

I'm sure they'll keep the med kits. It'd be really bad decision not to.

[HP]
7th Oct 2008, 09:04
So, CoD like health regenaration?! ffs, I know you people at eidos had lot's of reunions about this, and came to the conclusion that, "oh well, CoD has it, Halo has it, and casual gamers like it because it facilitates the gameplay", well that's the thing, it facilitates the game and that sucks imho!
The industry has not grown towards that aspect, the industry has changed and although I obviously understand you guys want to grab the attention of other gamers apart from the hardcore fans, I don't that fact.


I know some people actually liked the exact scenario I just described but this is a decision the team made.

Yeah I liked it! In DX1 there were lot's of medpacks, and It's pretty awesome to search the world for them, and somewhere on the game you get a "health regeneration" augmentation that regenerates your health in exchange of cell energy!And as you progress on the game, you can upgrade this aug so it wont waste too much energy, This my friends is a god damn RPG element, resources managing, not sit in a corner and suck on your thumb until you're at full health!
But oh well, the team has already made that decision and we'll have to live with it.

Other than that, I guess Eidos is doing a good work, judging by the community manager's words. I guess I can live with all the other aspects mentioned, including the 3rd person thingy, which is obviously made thinking about console gamers, but whatever... I especially like how he keeps on repeating "Don't worry, we have it just like DX1 and not like IW!"

Romeo
7th Oct 2008, 20:11
Ok, I finally thought of the game I had been trying to suggest as a game that had recharging health, yet still deterred people from getting shot: Perfect Dark Zero.

The premise was this: You had a health bar. If you were punched, or fell a little too far, your health would eventually recover all the health lost, however, were you stabbed, or shot, you could only recover a very small portion lost. This inspired you to avoid attracting attention to yourself, as you couldn't regenerate all your health (and that game had no health-packs) from getting shot at. With Deus Ex, you could regenerate a little bit of health from getting shot at, but to really restore it all, you would need health-packs and/or food.

Examples below

Falling or getting punched:
[====---] a few seconds [=======]
Getting shot:
[====---] a few seconds [=====--] healthpack [=======]

Papy
7th Oct 2008, 21:34
There's no way you can possibly think that lighting conditions didn't effect stealth if you've played the original.
A lot of people played Deus Ex as a straight shooter.

As for auto-heal, it will break the game for anyone who love more than simple shooters, exactly like Vita-Chambers break the game for anyone who love games like SS2. I still have a bit of hope the devs will include an option to revert to a resource based heal system for every Deus Ex fan, but the fact they also throw away shadow based stealth and use 3rd person view makes me think they do not care much for Deus Ex... except for the marketing power of its name.

Romeo
7th Oct 2008, 21:45
...Except they're nothing alike. One simply allows you to retreat in most instances, the other makes it so you're not even punished for dying.

WhatsHisFace
7th Oct 2008, 21:57
A lot of people played Deus Ex as a straight shooter.

As for auto-heal, it will break the game for anyone who love more than simple shooters, exactly like Vita-Chambers break the game for anyone who love games like SS2. I still have a bit of hope the devs will include an option to revert to a resource based heal system for every Deus Ex fan, but the fact they also throw away shadow based stealth and use 3rd person view makes me think they do not care much for Deus Ex... except for the marketing power of its name.
A lot of people play Halo just for multiplayer. Does that mean they should make an MP only game like Shadowrun? Hell no.

Romeo
7th Oct 2008, 22:04
I think his point was that one should not focus on a single aspect of the game, in a multi-faceted game.

Papy
7th Oct 2008, 22:05
...Except they're nothing alike. One simply allows you to retreat in most instances, the other makes it so you're not even punished for dying.
They look different but the result is the same : you don't have to care about resources to continue the game. If you don't think before shooting with BioShock your penalty is to be respawn a few meters behind. If you don't think before shooting with auto-healing your penalty is to just wait a bit longer. For both : you don't have to think and you can just shoot.

Edit : BTW, the only way I could appreciate BioShock was with Vita-Chambers disabled and without using save. With Vita-Chambers, BioShock is a very bad game.

Romeo
7th Oct 2008, 22:55
True, but there's absolutely no way to lose with Vita-Chambers (if you die, you're not penalized in any way, and enemies you've hurt stay hurt, any ones you killed stay killed). If you die with auto-charging health on (which is still entirely possible), you're set back to your last save/checkpoint. There is a difference between the two, and a large on in my opinion. If Deus Ex does some kind of "you never stay dead" system, I will personally burn down the building.

canine
8th Oct 2008, 03:21
I agree. Make it optional.

DXeXodus
8th Oct 2008, 03:54
True, but there's absolutely no way to lose with Vita-Chambers (if you die, you're not penalized in any way, and enemies you've hurt stay hurt, any ones you killed stay killed). If you die with auto-charging health on (which is still entirely possible), you're set back to your last save/checkpoint. There is a difference between the two, and a large on in my opinion. If Deus Ex does some kind of "you never stay dead" system, I will personally burn down the building.

With regards to that. i have ten important words:

Let us save our game when we want to please.

K^2
8th Oct 2008, 04:28
I don't see why they would possibly use a checkpoint system rather than save-anywhere system. Save points don't belong in FPS.

DXeXodus
8th Oct 2008, 05:04
I agree with you 100%. But you try telling that to the people who have made "almost every game" lately. Consolitis type A.

K^2
8th Oct 2008, 06:37
Point taken.

I once had a dream that all the consoles evaporated away. Then I woke up, and found that my PS3 was stolen. But I look on the brighter side: GTAIV is coming to PC anyways.

HouseOfPain
8th Oct 2008, 07:35
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/30-Turok

^---- thoughts on Health bars and basically any FPS coming out today. Take a hint, Eidos.

Ihsan
9th Oct 2008, 13:14
Good old yahtzee, he sums things up nicely.

~Psychotic~
9th Oct 2008, 13:56
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/30-Turok

^---- thoughts on Health bars and basically any FPS coming out today. Take a hint, Eidos.

Ah, the sweet sweet sound of Yahtzee's voice. I love Zero Punctuation lol. But you have to realise that Zero Punctuation is the rantings of but one man. He by no means speaks for the entire gaming community.

You also have to note that he criticizes almost EVERYTHING in the game he's "reviewing." He's supposed to, that's what makes him funny, he's a cynic and to be honest, I wouldn't take his points too seriously.

ZylonBane
9th Oct 2008, 14:34
Ah, the sweet sweet sound of Yahtzee's voice. I love Zero Punctuation lol. But you have to realise that Zero Punctuation is the rantings of but one man. He by no means speaks for the entire gaming community.
He speaks for me. Near-instant automatic health regen isn't an advance, it's a sop to casual gamers who just want to sit on their couch, look at the pretty colors, and go pew pew pew!

Gradual health regen though (as in Bloodlines), I have no problem with. And if you could choose to spend XP or augs to increase that regen rate over the course of the game, that would be perfect. That's the whole point of an RPG vs just an adventure game-- to make yourself more powerful over time.

K^2
9th Oct 2008, 15:48
Zylon, good summary. Though, I think there is a class of DX fans, the ones that do not come from either pure FPS nor pure RPG backgrounds, that would still have a problem with even a gradual regeneration.

Jerion
9th Oct 2008, 18:54
Crucify me for saying this...But People seem to have been burned by poorly done auto-health regeneration. The fact is, it does not have to copy what has been done before.

Health regen could be extremely subtle, and heal you slower than a water fountain healed you in DX. It may be a built-in aug, much like the flashlight aug form the first game. It may not function when you have other Augs activated. Personally, I think it's a good idea and while it wouldn't keep you from running around looking for anything that could heal you, it would provide a backup method of healing yourself.

This is not a bad thing. It's just another unknown variable until the Devs finish balancing everything.

GmanPro
9th Oct 2008, 21:37
pha is right. The next step IS having guns with unlimited ammo. Whats next? Games where you sit and watch your character run around and do all the work for you? Why don't you just read a book or watch a movie if you don't feel like playing a game. If the possibility of failing is too much for people, then don't play video games!!!!:mad2:

Red
9th Oct 2008, 21:40
Crucify me for saying this...But People seem to have been burned by poorly done auto-health regeneration. The fact is, it does not have to copy what has been done before.

Health regen could be extremely subtle, and heal you slower than a water fountain healed you in DX. It may be a built-in aug, much like the flashlight aug form the first game. It may not function when you have other Augs activated. Personally, I think it's a good idea and while it wouldn't keep you from running around looking for anything that could heal you, it would provide a backup method of healing yourself.

This is not a bad thing. It's just another unknown variable until the Devs finish balancing everything.

"and damage will be dealt with by a very Call of Duty-style auto-heal."

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=198546

Now interpret this whatever way you want... :rolleyes:

imported_van_HellSing
9th Oct 2008, 21:52
They probably don't know more than us, they just heard "auto-heal" and thought CoD4. René already had to clarify some points that were misinterpreted by article writers.

CarloGervasi
9th Oct 2008, 21:54
The fact that people are scrambling to excuse the auto-heal system, or figure out some ways for it to work without auto healing anything, is a pretty good sign that auto-heal probably isn't the right direction for this game.

ZylonBane
9th Oct 2008, 22:00
If they've already decided that they want to make Project Snowblind 2, then CoD-style autoheal probably is the right decision.

Sigh.

Red
9th Oct 2008, 22:35
They probably don't know more than us, they just heard "auto-heal" and thought CoD4. René already had to clarify some points that were misinterpreted by article writers.

They summarized the PC Zone article, who got their info first hand from EM.

And Rene already confirmed the auto-heal. Something about "game scene growing up" and "don't want players to search for medkits" crap.

~Psychotic~
9th Oct 2008, 22:58
He speaks for me. Near-instant automatic health regen isn't an advance, it's a sop to casual gamers who just want to sit on their couch, look at the pretty colors, and go pew pew pew!

Gradual health regen though (as in Bloodlines), I have no problem with. And if you could choose to spend XP or augs to increase that regen rate over the course of the game, that would be perfect. That's the whole point of an RPG vs just an adventure game-- to make yourself more powerful over time.

While I agree, I also hate auto-healing and wish it was an OPTION (at the start of the game, NOT in the options menu). Spending augmentation canisters like in the first game to get regen was fine, I preferred it (I prefer it over skill points/XP) because the catch was you also need bio-electric energy to use the augmentation as well.

And my point still stands, while Yahtzee may talk for you, he does not talk for the entire gaming community. I may agree with some of his opinions but in no way does he ever talk for me. I can talk for myself thanks, I don't need someone to put words in my mouth.

ZylonBane
9th Oct 2008, 23:21
I may agree with some of his opinions but in no way does he ever talk for me. I can talk for myself thanks, I don't need someone to put words in my mouth.
Lighten up, Francis.

MrP
10th Oct 2008, 00:07
I'm blindly hoping auto-heal is based on an optional aug (with health packs/candy bars/etc. still abundant for those who choose not to install it).
I'd also like the rate of healing to be dependent on difficulty level chosen (and/or tweakable via an .ini file for those still not satisfied by the default options). :thumbsup:

Given the above, I'd personally be happy and would imagine it could quell any possible outcry form the purists or whoever, too. http://www.wizdforums.co.uk/images/smilies/shrug.gif
Sound plausible?

Mindmute
10th Oct 2008, 00:12
I wouldn't mind it at all if it had a VERY slow rate. Something along the lines of "Hey it's been a while and my ankle doesn't feel as sore as when I tripped".
If we're able to "regrow" bodyparts by simply sitting on a corner for 5minutes I'll cry. Really, I will cry and post the proof here.

~Psychotic~
10th Oct 2008, 00:39
Lighten up, Francis.

Hey, just saying.

jordan_a
10th Oct 2008, 21:11
New! Health (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=80744)

CarloGervasi
11th Oct 2008, 01:06
New! Health (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=80744)

Did you mean to just link back to this thread? :confused:

K^2
11th Oct 2008, 03:06
Did you mean to just link back to this thread? :confused:
He always does that. Just means he added this thread to the list of "important" threads. The thread containing the list is one of the stickies.

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 08:57
FEAR 2 developers cut regenerating health system....


Good news! In-house gameplay testing has made Monolith see sense, resulting in the removal of Halo health regeneration!

Usually when you see mystifying behavior in a playtest, it’s a buggy AI defying your best efforts to make him act the way you expect. This time it was a player. He had stumbled into an intense firefight against five or six ATC regulars and was spraying them with submachinegun fire in slowmo, flinging grenades one after another into the chaos of smoke, sparks, debris, and flying body parts. Then he abruptly turned and ran back the way he had come, completely disengaging from combat.
The reason soon became clear. As we watched, the red screen tint signaling imminent death faded away and the player charged back around the corner to continue the fight. He had run off in search of a dark corner where he could regenerate in peace.

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/42...-System-Nerfed

Just putting it out there :)
cough

CarloGervasi
14th Oct 2008, 10:06
Now I just have to hope the guys Deus Ex has been entrusted to are as smart as the FEAR guys. It'll be just my luck though that a game I care about gets saddled with health regeneration trendwhoring while one I don't manages to escape it.

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 10:14
I understand how you feel man. We just need to wait and see what happens. There are many ways to have a regenerating health system. Ways which I believe will suit a DX game. I'm not over the moon about it, but I will learn to accept it and who knows, maybe it will even grow on me :)

CarloGervasi
14th Oct 2008, 10:17
There are. Honestly, the biggest thing to me is in-game explanations. If Adam has a "regeneration" augmentation installed when the game starts, with a nice little scientific explanation to go along with it (like how JC did for his IFF, info link, light, etc), I'll probably be totally happy with it. It still won't be good game design, but creating a cohesive, believable fantasy is what really matters to me most in a Deus Ex game. If they can just do that, then yeah, regenerating health will be something I can begrudgingly live with.

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 10:21
So far, I am very happy with everything that we know with the slight exception of the regenerating health idea. But, as you say, if it is explained correctly in game is well justified I'm sure I will learn to like it, if not just live with it.

iamrob7
14th Oct 2008, 10:26
Well I thought I'd post here seeing as I was cruelly stopped from replying in the other thread I made.

Part of the reason I don't like the autoheal idea is because it infers a direction that the developers are going in, in the same way that the "cover system" suggests a certain direction.

Now it may be that my fears are incorrect and the autoheal system is done in such a way that it works and the fact that it is being included in no way means that the developers are taking a simplified arcade/console approach to things. However I am suspicious and I think after Deux Ex 2 we should all be very suspicious and raise concerns.

I like the idea that has been suggested that there is some sort of slow autoheal but it can be accelerated using food/drink/medical kits etc.


And DXexodus I think it was a little harsh you locking my thread, admittedly I probably should have posted my comments in another thread, but I don't really see why I shouldn't 'have a rant' immediately when I join this forum. This forum after all is about voicing opinions and i wasn't offensive to anyone or anything I don't think. Besides you don't have to read my rant unless you wanted too. Sorry to respond here but you locked the thread.

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 10:36
And DXexodus I think it was a little harsh you locking my thread, admittedly I probably should have posted my comments in another thread, but I don't really see why I shouldn't 'have a rant' immediately when I join this forum. This forum after all is about voicing opinions and i wasn't offensive to anyone or anything I don't think. Besides you don't have to read my rant unless you wanted too. Sorry to respond here but you locked the thread.

We have been through this countless times. You are more than welcome to voice your opinions in a mature manner, but too many times people get far too carried away without reason. Saying that the game must be for "retarded" people, asking for it to not be "gay" etc is not mature. I locked your thread because it did not contribute to anything.

I am sorry if you are offended, but spend enough time here and you will realize that if everyone who had a complaint or a rant came on and made a new thread, then we would have hundreds of useless rant threads.

The developers are more than aware of our gripes by now.

iamrob7
14th Oct 2008, 10:55
Well you have been through this countless times but for me it's fresh. I appreciate I probably should have seperated my points and put them in the different topics so I apologise for that.

However I didn't think I got carried away without reason at all, using the words retarded or gay in a descriptive fashion as in bad is valid is it not? My point about adding things like autoheal so the game is accessible for 'consoles or people who are retarded' is a valid one I think. Because this seemingly was what in part happened with DX2. Nothing immature about it just making my point. If I came in swearing etc and not making any points then fine but I did make points.

To you presumably because you are on this board permanently, those points are old news, I'm sure they have been made many times by many different people in many different ways. I just wanted to speak my mind also.

Fair enough you can lock the thread and tell me to post elsewhere but criticising me for 'having a rant the first time i post' and using language which is allegedly immature when I am just making my point concisely I think is a little harsh. However I know that modding can be a exhausting and repetative job so you have my sympathy and I will shut up about it in future.

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 11:02
I too apologize if it seemed harsh. Often, as a mod, I can seem to be the annoying teacher telling everyone to be quiet, but I am just doing my job.

Feel free to criticize the game, but for future reference, please place those comments in the applicable areas and try not to be so abrasive in the way you bring those points across. Being abrasive only puts people off and you will, more often than not, just be ignored.

:thumbsup:

hippy fascist
14th Oct 2008, 11:14
Well you have been through this countless times but for me it's fresh. I appreciate I probably should have seperated my points and put them in the different topics so I apologise for that.

However I didn't think I got carried away without reason at all, using the words retarded or gay in a descriptive fashion as in bad is valid is it not? My point about adding things like autoheal so the game is accessible for 'consoles or people who are retarded' is a valid one I think. Because this seemingly was what in part happened with DX2. Nothing immature about it just making my point. If I came in swearing etc and not making any points then fine but I did make points.

To you presumably because you are on this board permanently, those points are old news, I'm sure they have been made many times by many different people in many different ways. I just wanted to speak my mind also.

Fair enough you can lock the thread and tell me to post elsewhere but criticising me for 'having a rant the first time i post' and using language which is allegedly immature when I am just making my point concisely I think is a little harsh. However I know that modding can be a exhausting and repetative job so you have my sympathy and I will shut up about it in future.


Actually using the word gay as a euphamism for bad is out of line. Would you use the word kyke to describe a disappointing protagonist?

I'll go through your post and show you where you went wrong if you like (I'll be going to extremes here and attempting to emulate the thought processes of mods so note: this is not my view)

Ok the Time has finally come for me to say a few things...

Reading the recent news regarding Deus Ex 3 has spurred me on to make this move. Join this forum etc

This is all fine


I played Deus Ex when it came out and there has never been a better computer game. Deus Ex 2 wasn't bad but obviously got a lot of things wrong.

hugely subjective statement, it got a lot of things wrong based on what YOU wanted from the game. For some people I'm sure Deus Ex 2 is their prefered game out of the two, because different people want different things. Don't state opinion as fact.



I'm quite sure someone has a thread on this forum where people offer their opinions but I can't find it, so I just want to say a few things and please the developers listen...although i suspect they won't.

Passive aggressive antagonism. You're basically baiting the developers here.



1 - This game has to be long...long long long...charge me double i don't care...i will pay you huge sums of money for this game, but make it deep and long. Don't give me a Deus Ex 2 kind of over in five minutes situation please.

Hyperbole, but this is fine



2 - Basically Deus Ex 1 had everything right apart from the shooting mechanics...copy that mofo. I have a really good idea for the shooting mechanics also....remember the game SWAT 4...the shooting mechanics in that is perfect for this game...PERFECT...the crosshair, the feel of it...everything...copy that mofo.

Not a very well put point as you don't elaborate as to WHY it is perfect, but that's a lack of debating skill rather than an attempt at causing offence



3 - I just read you are going to include Auto-Heal???????? Noooooooo please noooooo, don't give me that Call of duty BS. Call of Duty is not a great game it is a good game and if anyone says its great well that's just because of the multiplayer aspect.

Massively subjective statement, many would say the same in reverse. This is your opinion yet you state it as fact. Don't do it.



Telling me you are giving Deus Ex 3 Auto Heal is like stabbing me in the face with a 12inch knife.

Ridiculous hyperbole.



DONT DO IT....PLEASE...IT IS A MISTAKE...I don't know if you are under pressure to make it like that for consoles or for people who are retarded or whatever...but don't do it...it is so arcadey and so very very lame...

I liked the recharging health in Halo, it changed how you played the game from a tactical point of view. Please avoid calling me retarded in future. Based on your grasp of grammar and overuse of slang I believe my intellect far outweighs yours. But then again, that's my belief, not a fact...;)



4 - Covering...When I heard you were using a covering system that really worried me...REALLY WORRIED...PLEASE please please don't make it like a cover and fire game or anything remotely like that. If this game ends up as some sort of static shifting cover game in any context I will cry...CRY...it was fine in Deus Ex 1...Just copy Deus Ex 1 but improve the AI and shooting mechanics and bingo you have a masterpiece.

Kinda whiney, but this paragraph is acceptable.



5 - Just don't make it gay I beg you, if in doubt COPY DEUS EX (first game)...just copy whatever they did there. You have the opportunity to create the greatest game in the history of all things....seriously this game could be it...the best ever for all eternity.,., Ok slight exagerration but really it is a serious business.

"Just don't make it gay"

If I have to explain to you what's wrong with that statement. It has no basis, it's offensive and makes you sound like a 10 year old spouting naughty words...



6 - If you fail and turn this game into some short ass, auto healing, covering, console piece of poo poo I will sue your asses for the money to fund the inevitable crack habit i will develop after the dissapointment.

I'm sure all you developers are nice people, but really when i hear about things like Auto Heal I start to worry where this game is going...make it something sacred...something special...don't turn it into a load of poo

Again, pointless ridiculous hyperbole

I think you made all of three points, but none of them are backed up other than to say, "I WANT THESE THINGS CAUSE I LIKE EM!"

Doesn't require a thread to do that, and all three points have seperate threads allready

That's why it got locked, deal with it.

ZylonBane
14th Oct 2008, 11:22
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/42...-System-Nerfed
PROTIP: When you see a hyperlink with "..." in the middle, don't expect copy'n'pasting it to work.

iamrob7
14th Oct 2008, 12:07
"Actually using the word gay as a euphamism for bad is out of line. Would you use the word kyke to describe a disappointing protagonist?"

No I wouldn't use Kyke but then that is a ridiculous analogy to make comparing "gay" to "kyke". "Gay" has become a modern slang to describe something you don't like and doesn't upset any of the gay people i know so I don't know why it should upset you. Kyke is a derogatory racial term that in no way can be construed as causing no offense. A ridiculous extreme analogy.


"hugely subjective statement, it got a lot of things wrong based on what YOU wanted from the game. For some people I'm sure Deus Ex 2 is their prefered game out of the two, because different people want different things. Don't state opinion as fact."

Well I can only offer "my" opinion...what else do you expect...I am talking about ME and my opinion. I enjoyed Deus Ex 2 but like the vast majority of people felt in comparison to DX1 it got a lot of things wrong. I don't insult or insinuate that anyone who feels different is wrong, I simply state my opinion like any other normal human being. What on earth is your problem with that?


"Passive aggressive antagonism. You're basically baiting the developers here."

No I wasn't baiting anyone, I was just expressing my belief that my voice here was one in a thousand so I knew no one was really going to give me any special attention. This was meant as an admittance of my insignificance in the process as when you rant people can often misunderstand that you believe your view has special importance.

"Hyperbole, but this is fine"

Exagerrating something to make a point is indeed fine on a fan forum, thanks for your approval.


"Not a very well put point as you don't elaborate as to WHY it is perfect, but that's a lack of debating skill rather than an attempt at causing offence"

No it is not a lack of anything, I just didn't want to write a 300 page essay on why I think Deus Ex is perfect, people on here presumably have played the game so they already know. What a petty comment for you to make.


"Massively subjective statement, many would say the same in reverse. This is your opinion yet you state it as fact. Don't do it. "

Ahaha this is an opinion I am voicing, my fears for what autoheal infers...anyone can express a different opinion I am not stopping them, if I say to you Call of Duty 4 was a rubbish game, then that is up to me. Of course it will be stated as a fact, because it is a fact this is my opinion. Sheesh

"Ridiculous hyperbole."

I am expressing my feelings toward something using an extreme example, this is a fan forum I'm not writing a formal letter to a business partner. This forum is about the fans passion for this game, so I am expressing this. Maybe you should try not to take life so seriously on a fans forum for a computer game? no?

"I liked the recharging health in Halo, it changed how you played the game from a tactical point of view. Please avoid calling me retarded in future. Based on your grasp of grammar and overuse of slang I believe my intellect far outweighs yours. But then again, that's my belief, not a fact...;) "

Ahaha, well you come across like someone who is petty, takes life a bit too seriously and probably thinks he is smart but has no real life experience. I would never declare my intellect as being "greater" than someones, to me thats a vulgar, pathetic act that can only come from someone who really doesn't have a lot going for them. But then that of course is an opinon ;)

The retarded comment was suggesting my fears regarding the possible "dumbing down" of this game as has happened previously. Seeing as Autoheal function is more commonly found in more Arcade like shooters such as COD and Halo this is a reasonable inferrence. Unfortunately even with your alleged "intellect" you seem to have struggled to understand this. :O


"Kinda whiney, but this paragraph is acceptable."

Whiney lol? and this post of yours with your numerous "hyperbole" comments etc isn't whiney and unbelievably petty?? ahaha seems like it to me :D

""Just don't make it gay"

If I have to explain to you what's wrong with that statement. It has no basis, it's offensive and makes you sound like a 10 year old spouting naughty words..."

Ahahaha, I am guessing you don't have much of a social life, but then that is just a guess. This is an expression of passion, an outpouring of emotion regarding this game, myself pleading with the developers in my own special way. Perhaps you are a fairly rigid uncomfortable person but I am afraid I am not, my self importance is not and never will be governed by those who govern theirs by petty delusion. This is not a formal email I am sending to a work colleague. If it upsets you then just ignore it :D, there is a great quote from Nietzsche "Every word is prejudice". Clearly this goes over your head...

"Again, pointless ridiculous hyperbole"

Again a pointless comment, exagerration can be concise...when passion is involved...:O you come across as being really rather petty don't you think?

"I think you made all of three points, but none of them are backed up other than to say, "I WANT THESE THINGS CAUSE I LIKE EM!""

Ahahaha, well this is a fan forum is it not?? Am I not supposed to express what I like and what I dislike??? I explained that I didn't like the idea of Deus Ex being a "cover and fire" game, there is no other point to make, some people might like that type of game, I am expressing my opinion that I do not. I am telling the developers what I would or would not enjoy in the upcoming game. Wasn't that the point of this forum in the first place? Or for instance when I am expressing my displeasure at the autoheal function I infer my fear that they introduce features that dumb down the game and make it more generic. This is because I prefer the game to be more deep and involved which I state. So that is the opinion end of story. Again you don't really read or empathise you have just chosen to attempt to pick apart something in a rather pathetic and petty way :D

"Doesn't require a thread to do that, and all three points have seperate threads allready"

Yes I already apologised to the moderator for doing that, I should have split it up into the different topics, i appreciate the moderators exhaustion and can sympathise with him, but for you it is just petty and rather pathetic for you to post a message like this. You come across like a rather sad self important individual :D

"That's why it got locked, deal with it"

Try to keep up on current events, dealing with it wasn't really a problem, but responding to criticism is a fairly logical step for most people :D

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 12:29
PROTIP: When you see a hyperlink with "..." in the middle, don't expect copy'n'pasting it to work.

It works fine to me. Don't know why it doesn't work for you. Carlo could read it fine.

@ hippy fascist and iamrob7: Just leave it now please. This is not necessary. The thread was closed and that is final. Move on please.

iamrob7
14th Oct 2008, 13:05
Sure I am sorry, I wasn't going to say anymore but I felt kind of incited to respond by HippyFs post, apologies to anyone on this thread.

ZylonBane
14th Oct 2008, 13:57
It works fine to me. Don't know why it doesn't work for you. Carlo could read it fine.
No, it doesn't work for you. Try actually clicking on it. That URL doesn't exist, so it takes you to the Voodoo Extreme home page. What you pasted is the visually abbreviated version of the URL that the forum software auto-generates to save screen space.

This is the actual URL:
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/42257/F-E-A-R-2-Regenerative-Health-System-Nerfed

And this is what the forum displays it as when I turn it into a link:
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/42257/F-E-A-R-2-Regenerative-Health-System-Nerfed

Copying the displayed URL in this case yields a broken link. You have to right-click the link and copy the link target.

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 16:19
OK, well, all I wanted to show was that piece of the article anyway.

Abram730
24th Oct 2008, 08:02
having a quick auto-Regen on easy would satisfy the causal gamer. I just think it should be really slow on normal and off on hard/realist difficulties. If you want to cater to morons, make easy level normal and a very hard lol.. morons want to play on easy but not to seem "gay"(no offence intended) by choosing it.
normal = easy
hard = normal
very hard = hard
realistic = realistic(I can die from a head shot? yes).

A model for heath Regen.

1)passive Regen linked to difficulty - power consumption like flashlight.

2)activated higher power consuming Regen. much more power used.

3)med kits - the same as active Regen except you can't deploy in combat as they use your hands. Also have a set charge and saves power.

I think if Regen is included it should take energy as in a starting Aug with passive/active modes.

That brings up the question of food.
Perhaps food ads to your bio-electric.. As in "candy bars grow fingers back"?WTF that's :nut:

Perhaps bio-electric packs were standardised for dx1 as they used an optimized fuel consolidating power to energy suppliers. Perhaps that wasn't so with the mechs.

Why would food give you bio electric?
The science, looking at the direction of technology before nano goo.

Although nanobots are a ways off there is the rapidly expanding field of "systems biology".. "Biology is making an historic transition from being a descriptive science to being an engineering science," says Regis Kelly, director of the Institute for Quantitative Biomedical Research (QB3). "This transition is putting us on the edge of one of the most exciting times in the history of biological science, which is why systems biology is such a hot field right now."

Bio-electric microbial fuel cells, so you would eat to charge up. Now 80% efficient at power generation.
non-bio-tech
http://www.brightcove.tv/title.jsp?title=959031809&channel=187703184
Implantable, miniaturized microbial fuel cell
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7160637.html

One can assume a genetically modified Implantable microbial fuel cell would be available by 2027. Perhaps even a modified gut considering all the Augs.

well genetic manipulation of the human genome meets lots of resistance, yet what many don't know is that by count humans are 90% microbe.
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2008/02/25/of_microbes_and_men/
By modifying microbes humans can in turn be modified;) There are complex host microbe cellular communications. A language if you will and microbes speak human and modify our gene expression to speak to them.
http://www.thinkgene.com/symbiotic-microbes-induce-profound-genetic-changes-in-their-hosts/

One direction is to understand and to harness this to improve human function.

http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/04_01/Harnessing_microbes.shtml

In a tiny squid, bacterial toxin governs organ development.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/uow-iat110904.php

So microbes can be involved in forming organs in animals. Such processes could be programed in to regulate additional human abilities. accelerated healing, growing new limbs. For the squid it's skin becomes a cloaking device.

The Next Step in Bio-evolution: Engineering the Microbial World
http://www.ai.mit.edu/lab/dangerous-ideas/Fall2002/austin-bioev.pdf

(The problem with nanotechnology, as Chris Voigt points out, is that the motors and gears that researchers currently etch from silicon don't really work very well yet. He suggests that we may already have those micromachines under our noses -- and in our noses.

"Bacteria have already evolved machinery that works quite well," Voigt says. Once you understand how the pieces of that machinery fit together and work, you can mix and match pieces to create bacterial robots that can perform complex tasks.)

early step(Salmonella Bacteria Turned Into Cancer Fighting Robots)
http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/?p=851

Just keep in mind that the continuity of the game is for a nanomaniacal age and people are often very Mysophobic(fear of germs).
Does this video freak you out lol?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rz4CddJDU30
look at the reaction to Bio-tech.. not like I trust corps to do it correct as profit comes before safety, although people also have a purely emotional reaction to genetic modification of anything.

Abram730
24th Oct 2008, 08:10
I forgot to mention the name "probiotic" as in helpful good bacteria. All I'm saying is that microbes could include the players entire genetic code and facilitate fast healing. That they would act like stem cells with the rapid growth of microbes. A bigger genome then normal human cells as they would have way better "wetware".

What do you think? To bio for cyberpunk or does it go with the anything goes per dx1 mechanical augmentation days?

Cugros
24th Oct 2008, 09:02
That sounds good, Abram730. I especially like the passive slow regen, that uses power: This could lead to the fact, that when you don't use augs wisely, you run out of energy -> no more regen -> you have to find food, if you don't have any.

And it is not too bio if you ask me, in a few decades we could have easily invented the way to use bacteria for our own good, and healing our wounds. They do a lot of good to us already: they live all around our body, and try to protect their habitat (us) from other bacteria. You also had a bunch of good links, I was really impressed by some of that stuff.

I have always loved collecting food accros the levels in DX. But you are right: chocolate doenst grow fingers back. And even nowadays anything organic can be turned in to energy, so it is plausible. So food really should replenish Energy, not health.

Another good thing is, that an unoptional power-consuming regeneration system could actually make the game harder. An augmented agent really should avoid running out of energy. The worst case scenario is the same, whether you have passive power-eating regenation or not: You are surrounded by enemies, with very low health and no means of healing yourself.

Also, the health augs were always in the same slot with other, arguably better augs, so I found it irritating, that if I wanted to use those other augs, I could not use any regeration. Yes I know that is a part of DXs idea: You have to make choises. But some players dont need an active healing system. Maybe just those stealthy players who try to avoid open gunfights, and heavy damage. The regen aug in DX used massive amounts of energy, but I had no need for that fast regen: I could've spent time camping in the airducts and exploring them, slowly regenrating health. I had no rush to get into a new gunfight.

Oh, and for those, who strongly oppose regeneration: if you play on computer, it will be optional: just go to .ini, and somwhere there will be a number like: regenrate=2. Just change the 2 to 0, and there will be no more regeneration. On consoles this isnt as easy....

So, I personally welcome auto-regen in the form of a power-consuming, technically plausible, passive and slow way of regenerating health. Alternate ways of healing are a must.

Voltaire
24th Oct 2008, 18:35
One idea I haven't seen posted is health regen to certain points. Remember the street fighter type beat-em-ups that had yellow health bars, and if you took a coupla belly hits, the yellow gauge would go down, but a red one directly beneath would only go down half as much, so that the yellow health would fill it back up again. That's complicated to say.

Wait. OK. If I get shot, for 50 damage, let's say there's a regen system that allows me to regenerate 25 of those points, slowly. There could be Augs for faster health regen, or higher potential regen (i.e. reclaim 40hp from 50hp of damage).

Anyone uderstand?

Voltaire
24th Oct 2008, 18:40
Yeah. It's been suggested before.

Oh. Good. :)

Linked with the zonal, area specific health system, I think I'd be happy with such a set-up.

foxberg
24th Oct 2008, 18:53
Excuse my ignorance, but why we are still talking about what we would like to see in the Health System when it is "written in stone" that DX3 will have an Auto-Heal System?

ZylonBane
24th Oct 2008, 19:12
I choose to believe that the dev team-- the guys in the trenches, the ones actually coding this game-- know very well that the original DX health system with the location-based damage is the correct way to go.

I also believe that their pointy-haired idiot bosses, in collusion with the marketing morons, have decreed that auto-regenerating health is what the kids want today, so just do it, this is no longer open to argument, get out of my office.

If the dev team has even half a clue, they'll code in a hidden "oldschool" mode that will do things properly.

foxberg
24th Oct 2008, 19:15
...they have a chance to either change it or remove it all together.

No. This is what René said:

First off, yes some things are changing:

-Auto health regen (although we haven't been told exactly how this will work...)
So, as you can see it's not a matter of whether we will have an AHS or not, but how it will work.


Also, keep in mind that this thread, at least now, is primarily about "how can an auto-health-regeneration system work, without being too ****ty", which doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the system is written in stone anyways.
I guess I can agree with that.

foxberg
24th Oct 2008, 19:37
Well, I hope it is still not too late for Devs to make changes to the system should they feel that those changes would be necessary.

gamer0004
25th Oct 2008, 08:16
It will be the same system as in Call of Duty 4, for more info read my summary in the information topic.

Abram730
25th Oct 2008, 10:07
That sounds good, Abram730. I especially like the passive slow regen, that uses power: This could lead to the fact, that when you don't use augs wisely, you run out of energy -> no more regen -> you have to find food, if you don't have any.

And it is not too bio if you ask me, in a few decades we could have easily invented the way to use bacteria for our own good, and healing our wounds. They do a lot of good to us already: they live all around our body, and try to protect their habitat (us) from other bacteria. You also had a bunch of good links, I was really impressed by some of that stuff.

I have always loved collecting food accros the levels in DX. But you are right: chocolate doenst grow fingers back. And even nowadays anything organic can be turned in to energy, so it is plausible. So food really should replenish Energy, not health.

Another good thing is, that an unoptional power-consuming regeneration system could actually make the game harder. An augmented agent really should avoid running out of energy. The worst case scenario is the same, whether you have passive power-eating regenation or not: You are surrounded by enemies, with very low health and no means of healing yourself.

Also, the health augs were always in the same slot with other, arguably better augs, so I found it irritating, that if I wanted to use those other augs, I could not use any regeration. Yes I know that is a part of DXs idea: You have to make choises. But some players dont need an active healing system. Maybe just those stealthy players who try to avoid open gunfights, and heavy damage. The regen aug in DX used massive amounts of energy, but I had no need for that fast regen: I could've spent time camping in the airducts and exploring them, slowly regenrating health. I had no rush to get into a new gunfight.

Oh, and for those, who strongly oppose regeneration: if you play on computer, it will be optional: just go to .ini, and somwhere there will be a number like: regenrate=2. Just change the 2 to 0, and there will be no more regeneration. On consoles this isnt as easy....

So, I personally welcome auto-regen in the form of a power-consuming, technically plausible, passive and slow way of regenerating health. Alternate ways of healing are a must.

You also don't have to worry about people having to search high and low for med kits... food is abundant.

refrigerators, bars, restaurants, on counters, break rooms, vending machines(pay or smash it).. at a point, adding med kits everywhere seem out of place. Med kits would be good as they take less space in your inventory and would save you bio-energy after a big battle... The food angle helps because it's easy to make it abundant and it takes a lot of inventory space so it's not an easy button. They can be placed in key places to assume full health for balance without it looking out of place. It would not instantly charge you up but provide flashlight strength power to supply Regen and start filling your bio-power after your health is full. They could stack or could add to a counter. I like the counter idea as it means food can't charge up in a fight and thus gives a reason for bio-cells. A bio-cell would be a pure instant charge and more strategic. 1 bio-cell = 5 foods or something along that line.

fun example.. a player in low on life and out of power and there is beer and a whole bottle of liquor... tough choice does he double back to look for supplies as perhaps he won't be as good with his aim, wobble a bit,... or it won't affect his melee so he drinks up and goes bar room brawlic.

It also prevents augs from being an anytime easy button as in using up all your power would have a disadvantage.

ZylonBane
25th Oct 2008, 23:48
...for more info read my summary in the information topic.
No.

Captain Barfmonger
26th Oct 2008, 00:16
I believe this was a needed direction for this series to go to. Hopefully they follow the system in CoD4, or even Bioshock (more FUN!)

:D

Jerion
26th Oct 2008, 00:53
Commence bashing in 3...2...1...

Laokin
27th Oct 2008, 05:33
"hugely subjective statement, it got a lot of things wrong based on what YOU wanted from the game. For some people I'm sure Deus Ex 2 is their prefered game out of the two, because different people want different things. Don't state opinion as fact."

Well I can only offer "my" opinion...what else do you expect...I am talking about ME and my opinion. I enjoyed Deus Ex 2 but like the vast majority of people felt in comparison to DX1 it got a lot of things wrong. I don't insult or insinuate that anyone who feels different is wrong, I simply state my opinion like any other normal human being. What on earth is your problem with that?

I have to point out something here... it is, actually a FACT that DX 1 was a better game. It sold way more, and even went game of the year. DX 2 bombed... and went nowhere but to hell with terrible reviews. It's not an opinion that DX2 got things wrong... that's a fact. If it hadn't... it would of sold more. The fact of the matter is, you must extrapolate your view point to one of business. If DX2 was better than DX1, than DX2 would have moved more copies and also be the popular vote. Infact, nearly 90% of people that I have experience with, will say it was terrible. It is the minority that likes it. The fact is.... it got a lot wrong, it sold less... which means from a REAL point of view it was a worse game. Other point of views are in fact opinion, but when dealing with a product related to an industry, the majority vote IS fact. The only opinion is what DX2 actually got wrong.... which I would like to add, is practically a non opinion... as 99.99% of people will tell you off the bat "Small levels, Uni Ammo, Lack of stats, Less Biomods, Gimped health system, long load times, terrible performance marks, being shipped broken, terrible support, being developed for consoles than being ported to pc when the Original was PC ported to consoles ect... ect...."

These are all facts, the opinion is how you perceive it... but from a business viewpoint Eidos needs to look at the sales....(in proportion to the economics of the era released) to determine which game was absolutely better, in this case.... DX1.... FACT.

This in no way means that people don't enjoy two more than one. It is a FACT that swimming with sharks will increase the chances you will be deceased early.... yet some people still prefer to do it, doesn't make this any less of a fact.

You can criticize him all you want, a majority of the people here feel the exact same way as him. I do although agree, that it is no way acceptable to attempt to speak to people of authority with a lack of respect. i.e. It's okay to tell your friends that something is gay, if it's okay with your friends, it's quite another to try to speak to a professional designer and refer to something as "gay" when you don't even know the guy. Just because YOUR gay friends think it's cool, doesn't mean ALL gays think it's cool... but this is just semantics as we ALL know he wasn't talking about GAYS.... you people don't like to pay attention to context, you pay too much attention to literary definitions, when context, is what actually defines meaning in almost all cases. The context of a sentence, is the setup to the meaning. Example..... "Flippin' raybands are cool!" doesn't mean sunglasses are cold, we know this from the CONTEXT it was used in. This is something everyone in America should have been taught in elementary school, I know I was taught context back in first grade, why is it most adults... simply overlook it.

This is like saying, Barrack Obama is black... If you just SAID that on TV... you would be called a racist. Or using the N word.... If a white guy says damn thats my n word.... he's obviously NOT a racist, but some how -- it's still unacceptable. Get this, white people never intended on the n word becoming a slang word for friend... but it is and the majority of black people will still think your a racist even if you use it in the very same context they do. Double standards and taking things contextually incorrect, are unintelligible and ultimately are road blocks for what should be inevitable civil peace.

*sigh* Wish some people would think before they spoke... that goes for the guy saying the game is for retards AND the guy trying to point out the error of his ways.

Tstorm
27th Oct 2008, 23:31
Heal = no. With heal you can go around shooting and not caring bout your health. All of a sudden you cant die and you go around blasting people. No fun in that. I like it when I have to plan out my way, get the right weapons, and use strategy to take my enemies down. Heal kills that idea.

GmanPro
28th Oct 2008, 22:44
I see what some people are saying about it, and I agree that auto-heal doesn't really fit in an RPG but I'll reserve my judgment for after I play it. If they do it well enough then I don't really see it as a game-ruiner for me. A lot of games now are doing a sort of pseudo-regen type of deal, where you heal back some of your lost hit points and then need to use items or whatever to get back to full health. If this is the case, as I'm sure it is, then I don't have a problem with it.

DXeXodus
29th Oct 2008, 04:04
I really wish this was the case but the developers have already stated that they don't want players searching for med kits. This notion really points the finger at not having a segmented health bar, but rather one health pool.

spm1138
29th Oct 2008, 11:40
There's lots of ways they could go.

Full (CoD4), partial (Ridd i ck) or high tide (GITS) regenerating health bar.

If they do have it segmented they don't have to have pick-ups. They could go for med-stations like in DX1 and Rid****.

They could tie your health in to an aug to be upgraded to extended or make it require a resource ingame.

I can almost see the argument for no medikits too, in that it dictates the pace of the level a bit.

Bluey71
29th Oct 2008, 16:15
There's lots of ways they could go.

Full (CoD4), partial (Ridd i ck) or high tide (GITS) regenerating health bar.

If they do have it segmented they don't have to have pick-ups. They could go for med-stations like in DX1 and Rid****.

They could tie your health in to an aug to be upgraded to extended or make it require a resource ingame.

I can almost see the argument for no medikits too, in that it dictates the pace of the level a bit.

I like the health station idea - mobile ones, like bots...

GmanPro
29th Oct 2008, 16:44
I think that I could bear to deal with it so long as my health bar doesn't regenerate until AFTER the fighting is over. At least give us that much!!!

ZylonBane
29th Oct 2008, 17:37
I think that I could bear to deal with it so long as my health bar doesn't regenerate until AFTER the fighting is over.
How the smeg is the game supposed to determine when fighting is over? This isn't one of those JRPGs where there's a whole separate battle mode.

GmanPro
29th Oct 2008, 17:44
They did it in DX1 n00b. When the fighting was over, the combat music would stop.

ZylonBane
29th Oct 2008, 18:10
Oh, how precious, the kid who registered less than a year ago is calling me a "n00b".

Look, Sparky, dynamic music is not a gamesystem that affects whether I live or die. Detection errors in that system are slightly annoying at worst, not potentially fatal. Furthermore, how does it make any sense at all that my health regeneration rate should be influenced by whether or not someone is shooting at me?

GmanPro
29th Oct 2008, 18:18
Come on dude, its been done in many other games too. Ninja Gaiden 2 had an interesting way of doing it. I don't know the exact numbers but it was something like for every 10 hit points of damage you take 2 of them would be "permanent" and so after the fighting was over, you'd heal back your life except for the permanent damage. Which you would then use items to heal back to full. This is just an example of course and I hope that EM does something new and interesting with their regen system. Not just a COD4/Halo style take cover behind some crates and wait for your health to recharge. That style of regen only really fits into a purely action type of game. Not Deus Ex. :thumbsup:

And sorry for calling you a n00b, you know I didn't mean it ;)

spm1138
29th Oct 2008, 18:39
I doubt they will make it an option. It'd make balancing the levels very tricky.

SageSavage
29th Oct 2008, 19:03
Yeah, that's unlikely but I consider this element to be the one towards most people have strong resentments and maybe they should take that into account. I guess at this time there is still some room left for certain changes to mechanics.

Jerion
29th Oct 2008, 19:06
Yeah, that's unlikely but I consider this element to be the one towards most people have strong resentments and maybe they should take that into account. I guess at this time there is still some room left for certain changes to mechanics.

AKA Balancing. They will be using Auto-health regen in some incarnation, but the specifics of how fast and how much it regens under what conditions will be determined by the rest of the game.

SageSavage
29th Oct 2008, 19:23
I was actually more hoping for some sort of miracle involving the project lead saying "Hey, let's drop that idea and stick to the original damage&heal system - there are so many people complaining about the very idea to do something else." ;)

Normally I am not one of those hardcore-purists but a vast majority of people seems to agree with me on that the old system was very, very good already.

fiskerton
29th Oct 2008, 19:32
Just wanted to recount a memory I had of playing the original Deus Ex. I can't remember the level, save that it was late on in the game, but my JC Denton had critical wounds to both legs, reducing him to a pathetically slow crawl. Low on ammo and surrounded by enemy droids, I eventually succeeded in getting to a medical station and healing the injuries so JC could start walking and fighting properly again.

Now that situation proved tough to get out of. I was crawling around for ages trying to find a way out and probably died a few times in the process. Some people might view that as not being much fun. I'd say it was the kind of challenge that no other game has ever presented me with.

Deus Ex's greatest strength in my view was the variety of options, outcomes and gameplay it presented you with. So, while simplification can often be a good thing, there is a danger that introducing things like auto-health-regeneration and removing body part damage (which, admittedly, hasn't been confirmed) will change the game from one where almost anything can happen to one where far fewer things can happen. The virtue that elevated Deus Ex above every other game (if you agree with the polls that put it as the best of all time) is diminished and it becomes just another game instead.

ZylonBane
29th Oct 2008, 20:10
I doubt they will make it an option. It'd make balancing the levels very tricky.
The challenge of balancing is overrated in games that allow vast player freedom. Look at all the fan-made balancing mods created for Oblivion. People seem happy with most of those.

Red
29th Oct 2008, 20:57
Hai.

Guess what. Fallout 3 has localized damage and you replenish it via a wide variety of food, medkits and different medical brews.

Guess what kind of a game it is. <post-apocalyptic fps rpg, developed for consoles first and then ported to PC winkwinknudgenudge>.

But hey. We don't want to search for medkits now c'mon...

GmanPro
29th Oct 2008, 23:28
If they follow through on their promise to make transitions between indoor and outdoor areas seamless then technically there won't be any levels. Just one big environment. Which maybe makes balancing a little more confusing...? :confused:

Still though, I do agree that it should be optional. Maybe we should start a poll or some sort of petition lol.

ikenstein
8th Nov 2008, 22:56
just got timeshift whcih has autoheal. it suks bad.

seems like the devs dont like the deus ex health system. or the skillpoints system. or the locations modeled on real world locations. or the augs system. which begs the question, why make a deus ex sequal at all?

RedOak
8th Nov 2008, 23:35
just got timeshift whcih has autoheal. it suks bad.

seems like the devs dont like the deus ex health system. or the skillpoints system. or the locations modeled on real world locations. or the augs system. which begs the question, why make a deus ex sequal at all?

Ugh, what does timeshift has to do with DX3?

K^2
9th Nov 2008, 00:50
I was actually more hoping for some sort of miracle involving the project lead saying "Hey, let's drop that idea and stick to the original damage&heal system - there are so many people complaining about the very idea to do something else." ;)
According to Hume, a miracle is something that makes one doubt any source of information claiming that miracle has occurred rather than accept that it did.

If Rene himself tells me now that EM dropped auto-regen, I'll call him a liar. So yes, I guess it would be a miracle.

2030
9th Nov 2008, 01:10
I see that the majority of you see the possible danger in actually implementing a permanent health regeneration trait into Deus Ex 3. You all have your reasons, and even the ones who advocate it hold good arguments; however, I'd like to point out just some illogical contradictions that I've noticed, in particular the healing trait in Deus Ex 3--because some of you seem to be all tangled up in how the health system should work, and you've forgotten about the logic, and about the effect an auto-regen would make on the Deus Ex timeline.

I'll try and make this short and if anyone here would point out some facts to be corrected then by all means.

In Deus Ex 3 the storyline is to be immersed way before the conversion from biomechanical to nanotechnological augmentation. Now as I recall in the original Deus Ex, there was a gradual healing nano augmentation available in the game, but that's just it, it's nanotechnology--how will the developers make sense of this contradiction between the two games? Nanotechnology apparently did not become practical until JC's time. I feel that if the developers want to stay true to Deus Ex they should comply with the logical timeline of the technological advancements in the Deus Ex world.

Whatever the developers decide to do I hope they stick to the almost tangible but still futuristic logic of Deus Ex, and not stray too far away from its precedence

I apologize if someone pointed this out before me;)

ZylonBane
9th Nov 2008, 01:59
Now as I recall in the original Deus Ex, there was a gradual healing nano augmentation available in the game, but that's just it, it's nanotechnology--how will the developers make sense of this contradiction between the two games?
It doesn't matter. The primary complaint is that just giving the player rapidly auto-regenerating health from the very beginning changes it into a much more casual game. DX is supposed to be the thinking-man's FPS. If Eidos wanted to make yet another brainless shooter, they should have called it something else.

GmanPro
9th Nov 2008, 03:58
Well, auto heal might work for a game like Thief, just because combat is really not a major part of the game and you shouldn't even be getting into situations where you need healing. :thumbsup:

Still tho, I hope they don't mess with my thief :D

Pete278
9th Nov 2008, 04:04
It doesn't matter. The primary complaint is that just giving the player rapidly auto-regenerating health from the very beginning changes it into a much more casual game. DX is supposed to be the thinking-man's FPS. If Eidos wanted to make yet another brainless shooter, they should have called it something else.

STALKER has regenerating health, but very, very slowly. It only really goes back up if you eat, and, at no point, have they said it'd be rapidly regenerating.

GmanPro
9th Nov 2008, 07:11
True, but its the way they said it that has me worried.

They should have said auto-regeneration and not auto-heal. If they are planning on implementing a system similar to STALKER then they shouldn't have said that it would be like CoD4.

Also, if their system is going to regenerate health at a rate as slow as STALKER, then they shouldn't have even mentioned it, because when I played that game, I didn't even notice that my health was regenerating... it seriously didn't make any sort of difference to the gameplay.

Jerion
9th Nov 2008, 07:43
True, but its the way they said it that has me worried.

They should have said auto-regeneration and not auto-heal. If they are planning on implementing a system similar to STALKER then they shouldn't have said that it would be like CoD4.


The magazine said it would be like CoD 4 and Rene said that the magazine got some things wrong. Rene, our EM rep, has not said it will be like CoD 4.



Also, if their system is going to regenerate health at a rate as slow as STALKER, then they shouldn't have even mentioned it, because when I played that game, I didn't even notice that my health was regenerating... it seriously didn't make any sort of difference to the gameplay.

Exactly...so why are you worried again?

K^2
9th Nov 2008, 09:47
Exactly...so why are you worried again?
He's explaining why in the very sentence you are quoting. He said if it would be as slow as STALKER, then it wouldn't be worth mentioning, then it wouldn't interfere with things. It is mentioned. Therefore, it is not as slow as STALKER, assuming the inference holds. Therefore, there is no longer an implication that it will not be noticeable. Of course, the inference is inductive in the first place, but the argument for it is reasonable. So he does have a point.

Bluey71
9th Nov 2008, 10:42
Well I would have thought Eidos would want to put this thing to bed, sooner rather than later.

I've been taking a look at reactions on other boards, and I've got to say so far, most people seem to expecting DX3 to be another IW in the making.

I'm not surprised auto health regen has an eight page thread. I am a little surprised the third person elements planned for the game doesnt have a similar length thread though, especially the automatic switch to third person every time you use an aug??

spm1138
9th Nov 2008, 11:41
I'm not surprised auto health regen has an eight page thread. I am a little surprised the third person elements planned for the game doesnt have a similar length thread though, especially the automatic switch to third person every time you use an aug??

My reading of that was that it's not "every time you use (any) aug", it's every time you use specific augs that let you perform visually cool actions like pulling people through walls etc which are hard to depict in 1pv.

Red
9th Nov 2008, 12:59
STALKER has regenerating health, but very, very slowly. It only really goes back up if you eat, and, at no point, have they said it'd be rapidly regenerating.

René's words: "We don't want players go searching through levels for medkits." (interestingly enough the same wouldn't apply to ammo and weapon mods, hm?)

Now you interpret this in any way you want.

ikenstein
9th Nov 2008, 15:05
Ugh, what does timeshift has to do with DX3?

autoheal. timeshift has it. i played it for about 10 minits before i uninstalled it in disgust. what a waste of 15 bucks.

2030
9th Nov 2008, 15:20
It doesn't matter. The primary complaint is that just giving the player rapidly auto-regenerating health from the very beginning changes it into a much more casual game. DX is supposed to be the thinking-man's FPS. If Eidos wanted to make yet another brainless shooter, they should have called it something else.

Well from what I see then, if introducing things into Deus Ex 3 for the sake of "improving gameplay" and with no consideration to the series' universe then I predict we've--the loyal fanbase--already lost half the battle.

Blade_hunter
9th Nov 2008, 17:44
I can't read every post but If I understand the health regen will be activated only when we are on cover position if I'm right ...

I don't like this thing because many console games have it and many modern FPS games use some heath regen even if it's slow it's not the best option ...

With this system we can die if we enter in big combats, but I prefer that than the vita chambers of bioshock ....

I think the dev's wanted to simplify the heath management, and avoid to create the med bots and the medkits for the game.

For me the health regen must be an ability or biomod

my suggestion for the health
health regen ability (unlocked by an endurance or medicine skill)
auto regen slowly up to
10% - 15% - 20%

biomod
it depends if we keep the DX 1 heath system on most rules or not
5, 15, 25, 40 HP / sec (like the first) We have 500 HP if I remember and 200 for the two major parts

if we have for example:
head 20 hp, torso 50 hp arms 30 hp legs 35 hp (with my proposal we have 70 hp for the major parts and 200 hp for the entire body)

2, 5, 10, 20 HP / sec

My option is to use different sorts of medkits too, some food, but I don't think it happen

I proposed an alternate version close to the DX system, but the only difference is the weapons doesn't need to have a damage bonus for each part of course if we have a medkit it can give 20 hp and we can upgrade the global HP of our avatar.

I don't think everyone like my suggestion but I can suggest ...

ZylonBane
9th Nov 2008, 17:54
I can't read every post but If I understand the health regen will be activated only when we are on cover position if I'm right
No.

Blade_hunter
9th Nov 2008, 18:21
Ok it's like many console FPS when we aren't damaged the heath slowly recover ?

GmanPro
9th Nov 2008, 18:22
Hopefully slowly. Very very very slowly...

Actually they should just take it out completely :thumbsup:

ZylonBane
9th Nov 2008, 19:09
I'd be fine with very slow regen. As I've commented before, it would prevent players from getting completely stuck in situations where they have insufficient health to get through a tough area and no way to heal up. But it should be slow enough to discourage players from getting into that situation in the first place.

VtM: Bloodlines got a lot of this stuff right. The Eidos guys should be looking to that game just as much as the original Deus Ex.

Jerion
9th Nov 2008, 21:19
I'd be fine with very slow regen. As I've commented before, it would prevent players from getting completely stuck in situations where they have insufficient health to get through a tough area and no way to heal up. But it should be slow enough to discourage players from getting into that situation in the first place.

VtM: Bloodlines got a lot of this stuff right. The Eidos guys should be looking to that game just as much as the original Deus Ex.

Exactly!

Blade_hunter
10th Nov 2008, 00:55
one question about regeneration

does anyone wants

the ability to be fully regenerated by this auto heal or partially 15 - 25 % of the full heath ? (I propose those values but it can be others they are only examples)

an other thing is about the "medkits"(in the case of a cyborg a repair kit no ?) and the bots or stations or a medic (technician for a cyborg / robot) if they come back, is it preferable an instant heal or an other system by a slow cure by the hp the kit gives to heal the player ?

for me and perhaps some balance it's better a kit that heal slowly the player

Sorry this time I have more difficulties to use a correct english if someone wants to help and correct my phrases; thanks ....

DXeXodus
10th Nov 2008, 04:00
I can't read every post but If I understand the health regen will be activated only when we are on cover position if I'm right ...

I don't remember reading that anywhere... :scratch:
Can you find that quote Blade?

gamer0004
10th Nov 2008, 14:58
He mixed up the third person feature and the health regen...

ikenstein
10th Nov 2008, 20:32
I'd be fine with very slow regen. As I've commented before, it would prevent players from getting completely stuck in situations where they have insufficient health to get through a tough area and no way to heal up. But it should be slow enough to discourage players from getting into that situation in the first place.

VtM: Bloodlines got a lot of this stuff right. The Eidos guys should be looking to that game just as much as the original Deus Ex.


bloodlines rocked. ive played it out tho :(

stalker and clear sky did health regen and they were good as well. maybe you got a point.

Blade_hunter
10th Nov 2008, 21:38
http://www.nofrag.com/2008/oct/04/29742/

this link it's in french I don't played to CoD4 but the site mention they use the same system of CoD4

spm1138
11th Nov 2008, 03:51
CoD4 has no cover system.

Also as far as I am aware the game isn't being shown off in working form?

DXeXodus
11th Nov 2008, 03:57
I believe he is talking about the auto health regeneration.

Lazarus Ledd
11th Nov 2008, 08:42
Give me Regenerating Health. Fixed!

gamer0004
11th Nov 2008, 12:26
CoD health regen was explicitly mentioned in a Dutch magazine, in EDGE, and apparently on that French website... Don't try to convince yourselves that there are ways in which it can be implemented well (even though it's true), because it won't happen and you'll just be dissapointed.

You know what I think is worst?
Example: a new expansion will be released for LOTRO, called the Mines of Moria. The game will feature the new class "rune-keeper".
I quote one of the devs: "the addition of the Rune-Keeper in Moria, a straightforward magic using class, is a pretty big step in that respect. It's not something that a pure Tolkien lore person would accept, it just couldn't exist in Middle-Earth. On the other hand, this is an RPG, it must exist."
I mean, they are not completely staying true to LotR, but at least they acknowledge it.
Whereas Dugas says: "Invisible War was very sci-fi – maybe too much." while what they're doing is way worse! And they keep saying things like that, saying that they're not making certain mistaked but then some lines after that quote it is clear that they're just doing that! Do they think we're stupid?

Blade_hunter
11th Nov 2008, 15:33
The quote :

"La santé sera gérée comme dans CoD4 : vous vous planquez et elle remonte toute seule."

Google translation:

Health will be managed as in CoD4: you and stash it back alone.
I don't know what is it (CoD 4 heath system) I tried to make some research about that, but perhaps i need to search more.

foxberg
11th Nov 2008, 16:48
The quote :

"La santé sera gérée comme dans CoD4 : vous vous planquez et elle remonte toute seule."

Google translation:

Health will be managed as in CoD4: you and stash it back alone.
I don't know what is it (CoD 4 heath system) I tried to make some research about that, but perhaps i need to search more.

I think it means you hide (or go to a safe place) and it goes up by itself.

René: Translation, please?

Blade_hunter
11th Nov 2008, 18:44
Ok it's like many modern console FPS when we aren't damaged the heath will be regenerated at the maximum ...

Pha you have reason about what you say but we try to suggest a compromise or our fears about that, but unfortunately you have right, it's not optional or even partial.

I think the next DX after reading some articles will be more concentrated to the action, instead of it's predecessors ...

I hope they find the mid way between action and infiltration I hope they keep the infiltration valuable but the action isn't bad but I say that because if the infiltration is useless ... :/

Laokin
11th Nov 2008, 19:44
GAHHH If it's true.... I officially boycott DX3. Yeah that's real practical, real Console like. You want to appease the casual gamer... when there is nothing about DX that is built for the casual gamer. It's a world of lore and conspiracy theory. 15 minutes of play time is not going to get you into the conspiracy theory. I.E. It's not a game for the "Casual" market.

This **** is absurd. The dev's abandoning real gamers and feeding us turd after turd, for the minority? I hear them saying "your minority is our majority of sales." Not true, there is no auto health regen in fallout 3. That game block bustered in sales even after the whole month early leak for the 360 version (1 million + downloads before the game launched.) This is PROOF that people just want a good game. Although, I remember clearly talking with Rene about it. He didn't comment much, but I said it would probably be different than COD and he sent me a PM telling me more or less I was right about most of my rant. He wouldn't tell me in what aspect, he said wait for the magazines. They came and went, and still nothing. I swear, if it's F'n get shot, duck hide... 100% this game has NO CHANCE at being good. What's the point in going the stealth route if there is no downside to going guns blazing? CoD style health recovery is a balance breaking affair in the world of Deus Ex. You just CAN NOT have a duck and hide system in a game that's supposed to facilitate stealth. There becomes no motivation to going the stealth route... which means your wasting your time. Just go guns blazing get to the end and close the book.

::Shakes Head in Disappointment::

On another note... this is how it should be done.



Here goes,

I was trying to go to bed last night when it hit me. The best thing DX3 can do is move to an auto heal system. Just not one of the norm. What they need to do is model the energy/health from the game Supreme Commander's resource system. For all that don't know... this is an RTS with UNLIMITED resources. You get mass/energy per second. This is how DX life/energy should be.

You auto regen life at a certain tick per second. (That tick must be balanced to the damage enemies do in order to know how fast it needs to be.) You purposely make it slow. This leaves the ability to have candy bars and energy cells. When you eat candy bars and the like you get a "buff" that increases the rate of you recovery plus 2 ticks a second (example purposes... once again this is a balance issue.) You can make it stack up to 10 times. This could also allow you to have painkillers aswell. I.E. you take a pain killer it fluffs your life up 60 points and then has a minus feed on it. For every 2 you lose you gain one. The half life would be 30. I.E. if you had 1 life and pop a painkiller you would now have 61 life. By the time the effect of the pain killer (or what ever item you would like to fit this niche) is over, you'd be left with 31 life plus the original feed rate of your life. I.E. 31++++. Each "+" represents 1 recovery tick a second. You could then allow the regen augmentation to fit back in. Regen can up your feed rate + 10 ontop of the default while making your energy - 20. So if your energy was + 10, minues 20 would leave you at -10 drain on your energy. Sort of like Guild Wars, or Supreme Commanders resource system.

This would allow you to have a localized damage model once again. You could bring in new items to address disabled parts of the body. You can also make it so a Disabled part of the body is a reduction in feed to the auto health model. I.E. disabled limbs could make you bleed to death essentially. Say 1 broken limb is -5 feed. A broken arm and a broken leg is -10 feed subtracted by your positive 5 would leave you at - 5 a second. You can also leave health kits in the game... This encourages the feel of finding medkits without the redundancy. Med kits can patch a disabled limb back to "working" status no more... no less, and then the auto recovery can heal the rest. Alternatively you can use painkillers/candybars to combat the bleed effect or just be fortunate to have chosen the regen aug and fix yourself right up. You would need much less med kits/biocells to keep you going as they would only serve as a temporary boost or a splint in a terrible situation. This system has no "easy mode" implications, as the only matter that can effect the difficulty of the game is how much power is packed into the "punch" of the enemy. I.E. the enemy head shots you, you get a blurry vision pixel shader effect (not horrendous just subtle so you know you've been shot in the head) and your down to 25 life. Hiding wouldn't be adequate unless you ran completely away and lost the a.i. which once again... relies on level design. The only solution is to employ a painkiller to stay in the fight. When the fights over, you can hobble to the next one... or hit the regen aug, or eat some candy bars and your prepared for the next one.

On another note... what if you ALWAYS had painkillers.... like, you have an auto-morphine system. Anytime you are belted below a "critical life" warning, the morphine is administered. You could put a cool down on the morphine, or make it so it's a pickup that it automatically used until you have none left. Once again... only being effective really temporarily, with the side effect of staying alive because it would always give you half the original amount of life (the painkiller gives you) back. Anyways my main point is... auto-regen can work.... and better yet, it can make sense.

Once again, nobody has stated how the Auto Regen system works. I find that with the proper tweaking/dev love my system can work out beautifully and still feel like Deus Ex.

P.S.
The only thing that can change this is if we all unite with the common opinion that COD style health regen is a deal breaker. If we all show how closed minded we are on that subject, this would facilitate a developer response. I doubt Rene is just gonna go on a banning spree. And if they do.... they will see the error of their ways when it comes to sales. It's time to stop letting them believe half the community is all right with it. That gives the leverage. I think some one should open a new Health REGEN topic where we all co-sign that it's a ****. Also, we should be as negative as possible while still being rational about why it serves no purpose. Maybe this will facilitate a proper response.

I DEMAND a more original/more practical solution. I refuse to pay money for a game that is going to have a similar game play experience to that say of... Rambo. DX was a game for intellectual people... ya know, one of the few that's not set back in the day of knights and horses. Yuck, I hate that stupid cliche. Eidos is really missing the target audience for a game of this genre. Once again, corporate greed sets in. They are only using the name DX because it was all the rage when it came out... then was mutilated. Now they have the perfect way to lure product purchase by presenting to you a possibility that the game may be good. This is exploiting a franchise.... and I'm not to stupid to see it.

Eidos will not get my money if they intend to "punish" me with a half baked design decision. It's a much bigger issue then they believe. I don't care if this pushes the release back a month or two, but I refuse to allow them to tell me that I'm going to suffer because they are out of time. The only way that can be justified is by saying "We made a poor design decision... and we are not postponing the release to fix it." This WILL NOT get my money if it plays out this way. I don't care how awesome the story is, or how cool the augs are, or how bad ass it is to strangle some one through a wall. If I have no reason to see that half of the game... it's a waste to even develop that choice.

Choice is presented in a "Logical" fashion. Allow me to reiterate, there is no logical choice to sneaking up on somebody when there is no penalty for getting shot. This leaves the most logical solution to be the run and gun type of game play. I do not... and I repeat... DO NOT, play DX like an action movie. Making your game so it plays out logically as an action game is a terrible design decision... I don't need to see anything about the game to know this is a mistake. There is no way you can tell me it makes more sense to go stealth. Maybe the occasional room, in which you will be zerged by alerting some guards. But this doesn't facilitate Stealth... it facilitates PART TIME stealth. I.E. Breaks the whole purpose of the game, if they tell you "how" and "when" stealth is needed. F Eidos Montreal.

Red
11th Nov 2008, 20:01
Heh, Laokin... Optimism is a great virtue... :)

Laokin
11th Nov 2008, 20:39
Heh, Laokin... Optimism is a great virtue... :)

And so is standing up for ones belief system. I been telling people to remain patient as we haven't been told officially how it works. I was told by Rene that PC Zone was wrong... yet every magazine is saying the same thing.

I remain optimistic.... but not if it's going to be set in stone that they chose the worst possible system they could have. Without people standing up for what they believe we would still have racist laws in this country. African-American people would still be standing at the back of the bus. You must look at both sides of the coin and determine which side has a potentially better logical solution.

Being told that it's COD4's health system, then being told wait for the other magazines pc zone got it wrong... then seeing the other magazines say the same thing. Then sitting here with my thumb up my A, isn't really going to help at all. Remaining optimistic isn't going to change the bad design decision. That side of the coin is futile. Just wait.. and wait... and wait some more, to ultimately find out that the system is lame sounds counter-productive to me.

Showing the dev's that the community will be OUTRAGED.... and possibly black-list their game might actually facilitate a response. It's not likely but it's still a better choice than waiting around to just see the final product... then wasting money on it which perpetuates bad game play design decisions for the future. I refuse to reward them for making a dud of a game. They are all about money... so by taking the money away... what do they have left??

In simple terms.... it's just not right to change a franchise into something lame to try to make a profit. If they approached the game passionately like they say they do, they would make the best possible game they can and then their effort will be rewarded by the profit. The industry uses marketing and manipulation and flat out lies to generate interest in their games. Then you buy it... and realize the dev's lied... but you directly funded Video Game Terrorism. (example: Farcry 2, wtf...?? No stealth... terrible A.I. no destroyable game world, static tree branches flying out from a tree. Machette's not cutting bushes but killing people in 1-2 hits. All broken promises, too bad I already bought the damn game for PC and can't resell it.) They are going to see the large return for minimal expense paid... and do it again. And we are supposed to just let that happen. There would be no games worth buying and then the market will die... and we will live in a world without video games.

I for one enjoy my video games..... I find them much more satisfying then movies.... so I want to protect the market thus facilitating good entertainment. What's so wrong with that?

Mark my words... One day I'll have a company more successful than Valve. I'll then purchase the rights to Starseige:Tribes if they are still owned by then, and then make the best game ever made. Game after game staying true to the formula of success while staying true to the source material.

WTF is wrong with hollywood/Developerwood with the changing of source material... Some how they think it equates to more sales... when the popular consensus if they destroy the continuity of their game.

spm1138
11th Nov 2008, 21:01
"Belief system"?

It's a videogame. They're not secretly infecting people with an engineered nano-virus and then withholding the antidote for personal game or anything ;)

Do you think when magazines say "CoD4" it's because it's 100% the same or because it's an easy point of comparison for their readers?

If they said "Rid****: Escape from Butcher Bay" or "Ghost In The Shell: Standalone Complex" people'd wonder what they were on about perhaps?

Laokin
11th Nov 2008, 21:31
"Belief system"?

It's a videogame. They're not secretly infecting people with an engineered nano-virus and then withholding the antidote for personal game or anything ;)

Do you think when magazines say "CoD4" it's because it's 100% the same or because it's an easy point of comparison for their readers?

If they said "Rid****: Escape from Butcher Bay" or "Ghost In The Shell: Standalone Complex" people'd wonder what they were on about perhaps?


You can have a belief about anything... it doesn't mean the severity of the issue equates to believing in God or anything like that. And yes... I believe they are doing unethical business... taking advantage of the consumer... and I for one believe it should be Illegal. Consumers get taking advantage of everyday... and there is no real laws to protect the consumer... just the corporation.

CoD 4 isn't the only game even recently to do such a model... nor is it the most popular either. Multiple accounts reading the same exact thing written by completely different people is irrefutable evidence. Especially since I was told that the following magazine coverage would in fact detail the health system. All they keep doing is saying it's CoD4. If it wasn't, wouldn't Eidos jump in and say they are factually incorrect? I forgot it's normal to let game previews mislead the consumer to an incorrect game play mechanic only to have the developers completely ignore such "False" accusations. The fact that they still haven't confirmed nor denied it is practically confirmation in itself. If some one is on trial for murder... and he is accused of murder, then asked if he did it, and he didn't answer.... doesn't this imply he's guilty?

Same rule applied here... Not to mention the articles that were meant to vindicate the system all said the same thing. Call of Duty 4.

How about being honest and just saying exactly how it works.... oh wait, I think that's what they did. CoD 4. Notice that everyone who says it's like COD4 doesn't amend it at all. They don't say it's like CoD 4 BUT... or like COD 4 WITH... or even a Mix of COD 4 and original ideas. They all peg it to be exactly the same and we have no official word from the dev team that it's not true.

Hello... wake up... this is the real world. Optimism isn't going to make this go away. We have irrefutable evidence of how the system is going to be based on UNBIASED INDEPENDENT PREVIEWS that all say the same thing. Remember these people seen it with their own eyes and they all come to the same conclusion. If it wasn't exactly like CoD4 you would see differences in the previews. Note the fact that they are all Identical.

:mad2:

"It's a videogame. They're not secretly infecting people with an engineered nano-virus and then withholding the antidote for personal game or anything"

They are secretly misleading the fans by telling them things like the magazine got it wrong only to not tell us how or why... and ultimately it's for personal gain for the corporation of Eidos. So In essence... that's exactly what they are doing. Manipulating the facts based about a controversial design decision to confuse you in order to purchase the end product which will ultimately be something they LIED to you about.

LIE for Money
Secretly Infecting = Secretly Misleading people (the infected are the people who buy the story that the magazine got it wrong)
For PERSONAL GAIN not game... and yes, it's to garner SALES... to take your MONEY.

Blade_hunter
11th Nov 2008, 21:46
For me I prefer to wait before to say if the game were good or bad even with the auto heal.

For me the best compromise is a "partial version" in some situations it can be useful and avoid to players that make the mistake of using all medkits, have only 2 HP after a rude combat and be forced to load a save far away to their actual progress.

Perhaps no auto heal will be better like a classic health system, I read in an other thread about DX and about the health I read they won't use the separate location damage of DX 1 (one the best things of DX is throw away)

I don't know but I think they want to suppress the utility bots of the game (med bots and mech bots) I have wrong ?

ZylonBane
11th Nov 2008, 22:25
Guys, don't hurt yourselves stressing about it. The Eidos Montreal team has sealed themselves in an impenetrable self-congratulatory groupthink reality distortion bubble. They have surrendered themselves to the warm comfort of absolute dogmatic certainty. Nothing anyone has to say can persuade them that any of their decisions are wrong.

The bubble can only be breached on the day the game is released, when they will become confused and disoriented by the public backlash against their perfect, flawless, marketing-backed design decisions. They will feel betrayed by the fans for not accepting their vision of what Deus Ex should be.

All this has happened before, and it will happen again.

K^2
11th Nov 2008, 22:58
I believe they are doing unethical business... taking advantage of the consumer... and I for one believe it should be Illegal. Consumers get taking advantage of everyday... and there is no real laws to protect the consumer... just the corporation.
Consumer is the one at fault here. If the consumers stopped supporting businesses that do not support their interests, we wouldn't have this problem. Clearly, Eidos expects to make enough sales of the game. They expect people who liked DX to buy this game, which is why they gave it a Deus Ex title. If you think you are being taken advantage of, there is only one thing you can do as a responsible consumer. Don't buy the game. That's all there is to it. You can also try telling other people to take a similar action if they are also disappointed with the direction EM is taking. But your complaints about unfair businesses are going to fall on a deaf ear, and for a good reason, so you might as well drop it.

spm1138
11th Nov 2008, 23:08
How's about you wait until the game is out before you get sandy bajingos and organise a boycott?

Or at least until you've got some concrete details?

You haven't even seen a gameplay video for pete's sake.

Jerion
11th Nov 2008, 23:15
How's about you wait until the game is out before you get sandy bajingos and organise a boycott?

Or at least until you've got some concrete details?

You haven't even seen a gameplay video for pete's sake.

There are some people on this forum that should really listen to this advice. :thumbsup:

K^2
11th Nov 2008, 23:54
How's about you wait until the game is out before you get sandy bajingos and organise a boycott?

Or at least until you've got some concrete details?

You haven't even seen a gameplay video for pete's sake.
Nobody's talking about boycott. I'm just trying to explain to complainers that they'll either buy the game or they won't. Nothing else really matters.

spm1138
11th Nov 2008, 23:59
Ah OK pal. Fair enough. I agree with that really.

Laokin
12th Nov 2008, 00:12
Consumer is the one at fault here. If the consumers stopped supporting businesses that do not support their interests, we wouldn't have this problem. Clearly, Eidos expects to make enough sales of the game. They expect people who liked DX to buy this game, which is why they gave it a Deus Ex title. If you think you are being taken advantage of, there is only one thing you can do as a responsible consumer. Don't buy the game. That's all there is to it. You can also try telling other people to take a similar action if they are also disappointed with the direction EM is taking. But your complaints about unfair businesses are going to fall on a deaf ear, and for a good reason, so you might as well drop it.

Really.... this was almost pointless for you to type up. Your obviously now at this point looking for my posts just to attack. Clearly I said it was the consumers fault. Clearly I said, if this IS going to be in the final product.... I wouldn't purchase it. Clearly I'm trying to ask anybody who does feel bothered by it to say something. Clearly input matters. To what degree we won't know if we don't try. Like I said there are many things in history... and even the history of the game industry. Quake 4 only has trick jumps because people like me tore up their forums. People said it wouldn't matter back then... but then they focused on the trick jumps and even added new ones in altogether. NO patch.... RETAIL.

Also... if two people have a confrontation... the person who started it is the only person who should be punished? That's like saying "Yeah I hit him... but he F'd my wife" and then just punishing the man who got punched in the face.

We may have been the cause for the shape of the industry now, however, this doesn't give them them the "right" to take advantage of the situation. If the company wasn't greedy and really cared about it's fans... they would make changes that make sense. Like I said, this is all based on the hypothetical event that the game ships with CoD4 healing as this negates the whole point of stealth.

Don't answer a post of mine anymore unless it's clearly warranted. If you had read anything I posted before you would know you just repeated me and then added... "But your complaints about unfair businesses are going to fall on a deaf ear, and for a good reason, so you might as well drop it."

So really, who are you to say it's a deaf ear? Do you work for Eidos Montreal? Or, gosh, are you just stating your opinion as a fact?

I'm gonna go with the latter on this one.

P.S.
"They expect people who liked DX to buy this game, which is why they gave it a Deus Ex title."

This is precisely my point. They are trying to do whatever it takes to get you as confused as possible so you purchase the game. There is no reason to deny a fact if it, is indeed, a fact. Also, there is no reason to turn a "deaf ear" to false accusations being made about your game in the very first public previews... previews that I might add, are designed to gain your interest in the title.

They know the real DX fan isn't really going to enjoy this game. The fact is, they don't care... and they used that false hope we have for a good sequel against us. They are trying to make the casual crowd enjoy a sophisticated game.... which is impossible. Thus the reasoning for the ridiculous "arcade" like action experience they are pushing. They don't even care about you.... or me, or any one on this forum. Why send Rene here? Simple. To convince you to buy the game, even though you know better. Lie and mislead about the features of your game. This to me is a "shady" ethic. I'm sorry you think it's "cool" to be walked on. You think things at EA wouldn't be worse if people didn't outrage. Granted, they are still on the DRM b/s but at least they realize every game out of that studio for like 3 years was complete trash. Why? Because we complain, NOT that they lose money. Spore sold so well even though people hated that game. The same thing would of happened if Tiberium was ever released. The same thing did happen with the Need for Speed series. The only one that sold worse was ProStreet and that still sold extremely well. EA is like the king of shady business ethic. Wanna know how it started? Just like this. So you'd rather me continue to be the cause of this consumer crisis? Oh... wait, you want me to not buy the game and sit quietly -- even though I want this game as much as you. The next thing you can say is "well then deal with it" and once again.... I would simply just be adding to the same ethic that allowed it to get this bad to begin with. If the consumer is ever to change the trend.... he would have to do much more than keep his money in his pocket. Just think about it.

P.S.S.
This is the best quote on these boards. And fits my opinion perfectly.



Originally Posted by Bluey71

Change is one thing, but breaking the game to such a point, where it becomes something too different from the original,just to open Deus Ex to new players is a contradiction. Afterall, the reason most of us are here is because of what the first game was.

Blade_hunter
12th Nov 2008, 01:12
I think in regards of the original game some differences are acceptable and some others, not.

some guys wants DX 1(same gameplay and tacs) with an other story and a new engine (gfx and physx)
some others wants a sort of expanded DX in therms of gameplay
some others wants an alterated version of DX (some little modifications and modernizations)
some others wants a compromise between DX 1 & 2 (those guys will perhaps not be disappointed I think)
some others doesn't care about the gameplay since the story can reach the level of DX 1 or 2 depends what the guys liked and preferred.
some others wants the upcoming game will be more focused to one gameplay part of DX, many wants often more RPG and more infiltration rarely more FPS


after reading some informations, posts, etc ...
I'm certain to see some suggestions from this forum into the game, prequel, cover system, mech augmentations, etc ... there is some of them
all suggestions weren't approved by all, that's a bit impossible after all; some ideas can be approved or disapproved by a majority, I think everyone is aware of that.

An other thing is we haven't see the game itself, even if it's different of DX some can like - love the upcoming game, some can dislike - hate the new game, some won't buy it because they trust the game press.

The new developing team I think they played DX and see what they think is good or wrong.
I think make what the fans wants isn't the objective of the devs, I think they want to enlarge the DX community ...
listen a bit the fans and propose an alternate gameplay with the same core concept reduced or expended.

DX 1 and DX 2 have the same base and many common possibilities, but they have many different elements.
One is more for the mid - core gamers, the other is more for the console - casual gamers.

The thing is: Wait and see

like the many I have some hopes and some fears about the new game I think many have hopes and fears with this game, some seems to be dissapointed by the news about the game, I'm not certain if they hear the fans or even take a look here, perhaps some ideas are a pure coincidence with ours, I don't know ...

Laokin
12th Nov 2008, 01:20
I think in regards of the original game some differences are acceptable and some others, not.

some guys wants DX 1(same gameplay and tacs) with an other story and a new engine (gfx and physx)
some others wants a sort of expanded DX in therms of gameplay
some others wants an alterated version of DX (some little modifications and modernizations)
some others wants a compromise between DX 1 & 2 (those guys will perhaps not be disappointed I think)
some others doesn't care about the gameplay since the story can reach the level of DX 1 or 2 depends what the guys liked and preferred.
some others wants the upcoming game will be more focused to one gameplay part of DX, many wants often more RPG and more infiltration rarely more FPS


after reading some informations, posts, etc ...
I'm certain to see some suggestions from this forum into the game, prequel, cover system, mech augmentations, etc ... there is some of them
all suggestions weren't approved by all, that's a bit impossible after all; some ideas can be approved or disapproved by a majority, I think everyone is aware of that.

An other thing is we haven't see the game itself, even if it's different of DX some can like - love the upcoming game, some can dislike - hate the new game, some won't buy it because they trust the game press.

The new developing team I think they played DX and see what they think is good or wrong.
I think make what the fans wants isn't the objective of the devs, I think they want to enlarge the DX community ...
listen a bit the fans and propose an alternate gameplay with the same core concept reduced or expended.

DX 1 and DX 2 have the same base and many common possibilities, but they have many different elements.
One is more for the mid - core gamers, the other is more for the console - casual gamers.

The thing is: Wait and see

like the many I have some hopes and some fears about the new game I think many have hopes and fears with this game, some seems to be dissapointed by the news about the game, I'm not certain if they hear the fans or even take a look here, perhaps some ideas are a pure coincidence with ours, I don't know ...


Well... your post is nice.


Lol, the only problem I see here is what EM is telling us.

If they want to do what you said, they should come out and be open about it. Explain why they made the changes they did. It's just terrible to make the fan rely on guesswork. This will work in both ways, canceling sales... and generating some. Had they came right out and said what it is they are trying to do... the public could then judge for themselves. I think this matters just as much in the beginning as it does in the wind down. First Impressions are nearly impossible to shake off. I played halo 1... thus no buy from me for Halo 2 or 3. No matter how "awesome" people said it was, it just felt the same to me. Granted, they did it right though.... Halo just isn't my cup of tea. At least they stayed true to the source material. They even added in deploy able items. Living proof that you can successfully change the gameplay of an IP without losing core fans. Something Eidos is missing from their magic formula.

K^2
12th Nov 2008, 01:29
Eidos owns the rights to Deus Ex trade mark. It is their choice how to use it. They can try to build on brand loyalty by releasing a title that is true to its name. They can exploit the brand loyalty by either releasing a cheap title to make some money, or they can release a good but different title under the name to try to build a new brand off of it.

It looks to me as if Eidos is going for something in between. DX3 is definitely not a cheap game just to score some quick bucks. That's good news already. But the game isn't going to be true to original, either. It will be a game with many similarities in design, which is sure to re-capture part of the fan base. They also want to make enough things different to make the game interesting to completely new people. These changes are sure to alienate some of the fans, but that's what Eidos chose to do with their title, and they have a full right to do so.

Finally, if you bought a complete piece of crap game just because of its name, you deserve to have that sort of thing done to you. Sequels are not always true to original. In fact, they tend not to be. If you don't want to be taken advantage of, do your research before buying.

Laokin
12th Nov 2008, 01:42
Eidos owns the rights to Deus Ex trade mark. It is their choice how to use it. They can try to build on brand loyalty by releasing a title that is true to its name. They can exploit the brand loyalty by either releasing a cheap title to make some money, or they can release a good but different title under the name to try to build a new brand off of it.

It looks to me as if Eidos is going for something in between. DX3 is definitely not a cheap game just to score some quick bucks. That's good news already. But the game isn't going to be true to original, either. It will be a game with many similarities in design, which is sure to re-capture part of the fan base. They also want to make enough things different to make the game interesting to completely new people. These changes are sure to alienate some of the fans, but that's what Eidos chose to do with their title, and they have a full right to do so.

Finally, if you bought a complete piece of crap game just because of its name, you deserve to have that sort of thing done to you. Sequels are not always true to original. In fact, they tend not to be. If you don't want to be taken advantage of, do your research before buying.


All I'm saying is... it shouldn't be legal to falsely represent the content of the product your going to sell. If this is what they are in fact doing... then why not just say so? What's with the misleading comments leading us on... making us think it's going to be better than it is?

What ever happened to fairly marketing your material so the people interested didn't have to rely on third party reviews. I have also bought games after reading reviews and researching a title... and thought it to be completely rubbish. This is a double-standard. I'm supposed to do research and then get short changed some how it's still my fault?

No... it's the fault of the people they pay to do reviews and put a spin to make it seem more appealing. The problem is, you don't know weather or not they personally REALLY played a title. You don't know weather or not the people giving personal reviews likes games of the same Genre as you. The bottom line is the best research you can do is trying the game yourself. I think the law of false advertisement is a little too lenient. Ubisoft should be sued to hell and back for FC2. Every thing they advertised was missing. It's not my fault the developers were spouting misleading propaganda in order to gain sales.

Just because it's not on the box doesn't mean it wasn't advertised to be in the final product. Developer interviews are actually advertisements ya know. They are making the game... their claims should be held against them.

The fact is... it goes both ways..... but in no way can you prevent 100% or even logically see with out a shadow of a doubt if you are going to be taken advantage of by the industry.

This "stupid" line of defense is a null issue. It still doesn't give them the right to MISLEAD what they are actually creating.

I didn't say they didn't have the right to do what they want with the IP. I said they don't have the right to put out false information about what they are actually doing. If the health system is really like COD4.... then say so. It's your right.... but it's not your right to tell me it's more than COD4 if it is really 1:1 with COD4. This is a lie..... this has nothing to do with what they have the ability to create... as it has to do with manipulating your market.

This is the shady ethic of it. The ethic that should be illegal. It is false advertising by definition... but not prosecutable by law. This is a growing trend in the gaming industry... and I am standing up for my belief that this is wrong. If you can't see how it's wrong.... maybe you shouldn't say anything at all. If it's really on deaf ear's... then your post is frivolous as you have nothing to gain from it. No point to make... why don't you just let me see how frivolous it is on my own. What makes you think your opinion is superior?

You actually defended yourself with a load of completely unrelated drivel -- you didn't once touch upon the issue I was even talking about from the beginning. You just assumed I said they had no right in adding in a COD4 health system... and I didn't say that. I said adding in a CoD4 health system... letting magazines publish it as so... and then tell the core community the magazine has it wrong... there is more to the system than that and then not tell us what more there is to the system? This is known as lying. Not weather or not they have the right to develop the title how they please.... but how they handle the interest in the title. They are trying to gain sales by lying to people. This is not cool. This is not ethical. This is not morally sound. Yet you didn't once touch the fact that they are lying to us.

Let them do what they want.... but force them to tell us the truth about the product we want to invest out money in.

K^2
12th Nov 2008, 02:02
You can't really hold devs reliable for what they tell you during development. Many things are subject to change. Furthermore, devs tend to be not half as zealous about twisting things for sales as publishers are.

Now, if marketing division misrepresents the game once it has gone gold, you have full right to sue them for dishonest advertising. I don't think you'd have much success in it, but I'd fully support your effort.

Right now, it is way too early to judge the game on such grounds. A lot of things that are being talked about now are still only in the imagination of the artists. Some of these things will work out, and some won't. C'est la vie. Main thing to keep in mind is that they are people, and they get carried away. There is no need to look for malicious intent there. And without malicious intent, there is no breach of ethics or laws.

GmanPro
12th Nov 2008, 03:21
Just so long as EM doesn't use a CoD4 or Halo 2/3 style really simple and dumb auto heal, I won't be very upset...

BUT SERIOUSLY DON'T DO IT LIKE COD4!!!!!

Abram730
12th Nov 2008, 11:30
What do people think of my post?
http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?p=866224&highlight=gene+expression#post866224

It's quite condensed and a slow read, but I was curious what people though.

More like fallout 3 then COD4.

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 00:22
EM have said they're not even sure if the game will be coming to console at this point haven't they?

GmanPro
14th Nov 2008, 02:23
If they decided to put it only on PC for initial release. I would eat my foot.

:D

But seriously they should do that. Half Life 2 sold like crazy :nut:

free2game
14th Nov 2008, 03:46
I don't think Regenerating Health makes much sense in the context of how this game is designed. It takes away a lot of tension and strategy from combat engagements.

Blade_hunter
14th Nov 2008, 10:14
When I see in some posts when we talked about biomods, we have some players that wants to disallow the biomod of regeneration, and what we can expect for that auto regen ?

I think gamers wants an health system close to the first deus ex, not something worst than the outrageous simplification of DX 2

I think ressearch items for that is one of the good principles of deus ex, no ?

Lazarus Ledd
14th Nov 2008, 13:39
Regenerating Health is realistic. Your body does it, mine does it. Halo wasn't first, COD4 wasn't first. If you wanna look it realistic, THIS IS REALISTIC!. We regenarate slow, our body can handle light injuries. Although in a very slow rate, depending of how healthy we are in our minds and body.

What's unrealistic with it being featured in a augmented security guy?? A serious situation requires serious approach. If we will chose to play the game in a more action oriented way, that where the Regenating health comes in cause the performance of these augs will/should depend on players health.

I will not hype myself to death and be dissapointed when I play DX3 playtime like you do to yourself now, cooking up and waiting to explode... I see people getting annoyed at Far Cry 2 unwilling to enjoy it cause they don't feel good in the skin at that moment. Being a mercenary is about long driving and SSDD. And the expirience is different depending on your appproach

the easiest way for me to wait till the DX3 comes out and to enjoy it greatly is to have a glance from time to time on the status, not having nerve breakdowns about the way EM choose to go with DX3 and just keep on living cause I have faith in EM, they are smart and you underestimate them. Why worrying about EM decisions about DX3 when there are more important things to worry about in real life.
Just keep it cool!

gamer0004
14th Nov 2008, 14:39
It's not realistic. People's bodies heal best when asleep; and it still take days to heal only minor injuries. So unless there'd be some kind of Morrowind resting system it would not work.
The CoD4 similar health regen which will be used in DX3 heals your body in mere seconds, automatically removing bullets and mending bones :scratch:

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 16:14
It's not realistic.

Neither are first aid kits that instantly heal severed limbs, gunshots and plasma burns.

Blade_hunter
14th Nov 2008, 16:37
I don't talk about realism I talk about gameplay and player expectations, the health regen by a biomod is balanced because it has a limit the cells and bio energy supplies. the medkits have a supply limit too.
the only unlimited supplies are the bots, but we can't use them all the time because they have a recharging time of 60 seconds after using them.

Our body can regenerates itself, yes, but it's very slow and if we took a bullet we loose blood if we do nothing for that.

Is DX realistic ? I think it's no. It's semi realistic and it adds some realism to give us a challenge and some choices.

with auto regen the only choice in a fire fight is take cover and wait some seconds to replenish our health, in RF 2 I tried that and it makes the game too easy even on hard difficulty levels (the true challenge of that game is the last boss) I preferred the one because it's a better challenge and the AI was surprising on it's time, even if they are a bit stupid when we have a vehicle

Many modern FPS use that auto regen and seriously I prefer to have classical medkits or medikits that gives that replenish the health slowly, I'm honest, for gameplay reasons I prefer traditional ways.
In the game max payne we have auto regen, but it was 10 - 20% of the health, that give us the opportunity to survive, but the medkits was always useful because we can fight better with full health
When we are under the 10 - 20% Max can't run he walks slowly with some difficulties

In DX 1 it was difficult to engage an enemy group if we have only 2 HP on torso, but the DX health system tell to players a choice, what part we need to cure first, If we haven't our legs we can't jump, failing damage affects directly the torso, if we are hit on our arms we can't aim correctly as well with the legs, many things that makes the game challengeable for everyone

I think the diversion tactics can help a fighter player to save some health, the DX health system should maybe modified but keep some principles of the old system like the separate parts

I don't know but i think Eidos looks always to consoles because even if they made a PC version first I think they want to make a game easy to adapt in the console support, but I hope they look the the ergonomic to give a better access of the game than suppressing elements, some Ideas can become useless because we have an other kind of character in DX than a nano augmented agent

-|°
14th Nov 2008, 19:43
I don't know but i think Eidos looks always to consoles because even if they made a PC version first I think they want to make a game easy to adapt in the console support, but I hope they look the the ergonomic to give a better access of the game than suppressing elements, some Ideas can become useless because we have an other kind of character in DX than a nano augmented agent
Well, about ergonomic, DX on PS2 was pretty good, even though requiring to open inventory and aug menu break the immersion a little. I can't see why EM couldn't keep the same design.
But, something that could have been cool to have, in addition to these menus, would have been PC F1 menu, with the same functionnalities (health, inventory management, notes...) and a cursor. Web browser on PS3 actually do that, and I don't have much trouble in using it (controlling the cursor). Unless time isn't paused while we're in menus, I don't think there would be any problems with something like that featured in DX3 consoles versions.

Of course, the best would be that the game on console would be meant to be played with a mouse and a keyboard with exactly the same interface as PCs (I'd really be glad if EM just gives the possibility, with password typing and everything that do imply).


About auto-health... as about everyone here, I think it depends on what system is being adopted. I'm awaiting for more informations before worrying or rejoicing.

K^2
14th Nov 2008, 20:14
But, something that could have been cool to have, in addition to these menus, would have been PC F1 menu, with the same functionnalities (health, inventory management, notes...) and a cursor. Web browser on PS3 actually do that, and I don't have much trouble in using it (controlling the cursor).
Absitively. Though, if the do a PS3 port, I'd also suggest implementing full keyboard/mouse support, giving controls and menus identical to PC version. So overall, there should be 3 modes of play. Full gamepad mode, with simplified quick menus and full menus in paused mode. Full keyboard/mouse, identical to PC. And combined gamepad/keyboard/mouse, where gamepad is used for gameplay and quick menus, and keyboard/mouse is used for full F1 menus.

Blade_hunter
14th Nov 2008, 21:07
The consoles have some capabilities, but it's often the developers that prefers to suppress than modify, adapt.
It's for that reason I insist with the ergonomics, and try some proposals, the main problem with my proposals is the fact I don't know very well the consoles, I think allow the play with a mouse and keyboard on consoles is right, but don't forget we can type passwords with a pad using a virtual keyboard, many games on consoles use that trick, why not deus ex ?

It's for that reason I suggest to keep the separate body parts in the DX health system, it's not a thing so complicated to made even for a console, we can use the stick and the accept button to refill the health on a selected part in the health screen if we have it

I explain:

Imagine we have the same DX health screen, exactly the same,
when the body is selected (the great part) we have the choice to heal some parts. when the stick is released we cure the torso with the accept button, put up the stick and the accept button cure the head; in right position, the arms; in bottom left the left leg; etc ...
the over health goes randomely into the priority parts.

I don't know if someone can agree, but I hope if my proposal doesn't sounds good, then someone try to propose a better system ...

K^2
14th Nov 2008, 21:43
You are not wrong, Blade. And there are quite a few games that do something like that.

One thing that has been used a number of times is capability to select one of 8 positions with analog stick. For numeric keypads, for example, all you need is have 5 as a default choice, and then use analogue stick to select 8 digits surrounding it. You can then use just two buttons. One to enter selected digit, and a special one to enter 0. It would be extremely fast, ergonomic, and intuitive. On PS3, I'd even set O key to enter zero to help with it being intuitive. X would, of course, enter selected digit. For text entry, a full virtual keyboard can be used or an SMS-style based on num-pad. (Option to use either would be optimal.)

Very similar thing can be done to use the health menu, item quick menu, etc. In fact, most console FPS already use something like that for quick weapon select. (And even look at Falout 3. If you have it on PC, why do you think you can only assign 8 number keys for weapon select? And why are they arranged in a square around an empty center? ;) )

What it comes down to is not the difficulties with controls. There are a number of standard ways to get around it, and I'm sure EM could come up with some new ones if need arises. It really is about how involved of a game they want to make. Unfortunately, the majority of console owners doesn't give two bits about an involved game. They want to throw the disk into the machine, and be shooting at everything that moves within minutes. After all, if you aren't looking for that kind of experience, you probably play most of your games on PC, where you need to go through setup routines and read a manual to play. Consoles market is bigger, though. And that is why a lot of publishers chose to target these kinds of players. If that is the direction that Eidos wants to take Deus Ex, no arguments about it being possible to make a true DX game run on consoles will make a bit of difference. They simply aren't interested.

Blade_hunter
15th Nov 2008, 00:42
I agree, I have one question about the consoles because I want to use the screen borders as indicators and use the full potential of the sticks for menu quick selection.

for example this HUD example
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/8164/hudexamplezy5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

It's not very funny but it's close to DX hud

for example can I with this hud use the stick pointing on a specific direction for example select the 8th bar icon on the lateral bar to activate a biomod and quickly select the 3rd icon to select a weapon ?

or the sticks can only use their 8 axis ?

GmanPro
15th Nov 2008, 00:47
Seeing your post reminds me just how superior the PC is to the console.

It really makes me worry about the quality of DX3 when EM has to try to appease the console crowd. *shudder*

Jerion
15th Nov 2008, 10:05
Seeing your post reminds me just how superior the PC is to the console.

It really makes me worry about the quality of DX3 when EM has to try to appease the console crowd. *shudder*

Ditto. Although they have said that they are putting the PC version first and foremost.

free2game
19th Nov 2008, 10:49
Neither are first aid kits that instantly heal severed limbs, gunshots and plasma burns.

In the sense of nano tech, it's much more believable than squatting down by a wall for a few seconds to recover.

Blade_hunter
19th Nov 2008, 11:56
Even if they put it on the PCs first I think they make this game in regards of the consoles, I don't think they try to make a "pure" PC game like the first episode was made, nothing was think in the first game for a console port, it's not the case of this game, the uni ammo for example is a thing that exists in the first FPS game (wolfenstein 3D) this game has universal ammo, the game TRON 2.0 has universal ammo, but in TRON 2.0 you have and unlimited ranged weapon (the disk).

For a game like DX universal ammo doesn't fit to the game, the proof is the reaction of the community to this crap ...
The health regeneration sounds to reduce the infiltration possibilities, because to play infiltration, players need to have a "difficulty" like the fact we can't loose some health because the supplies are limited.

I don't think infiltration games have health regen, even Hitman, if someone knows an infiltration game with health regen ....

I think those games uses medkits or the health is the health allowed for the mission - level ...

-|°
19th Nov 2008, 16:05
I don't think infiltration games have health regen, even Hitman, if someone knows an infiltration game with health regen ....

MGS games since MGS2. Although, MGS2 is the only one I actually find good. MGS3&4 allow you to slowly replenish completely your life, no matter how good was your health. On the other hand, when your life gage dropped down to a certain point in MGS2, it becomes orange you begin to lose health and leave blood strain behind you (which can be followed by your foes). You're recovering life, when you remain crouched and immobile for a short while, until the life gage reaches this "bleeding point" and returns blue. It was pretty clever, since you could do that pretty quicly during (long) boss fights, and that it won't work well during shootouts. (the ennemy will try to reach you or throw a grenade). Another way to stop bleeding is to use a bandage, but it won't replenish your health up to that "bleed point".

As I said before, I'd be in favor of DX3 being 100% PC-oriented gameplay-wise. Using a keyboard/mouse combo on consoles should be enabled and even advised. I really wonder why most of console games (even FPS) can't manage keyboard support. I guess it's because console player aren't supposed to have one on their consoles, but do you really think that they don't have a PC with a mouse and a keyboard ? Most of keyboards are USB nowadays, and I don't think it'd be so hard to jack it in the console once in a while.
What scares me, is that there don't seem to have console players worrying about it. Some developpers should implement, promote this feature, and maybe, eventually, others will follow their paths.
I absolutely don't know how hard it is to implement alternative HUDs and keyboard/mouse support. Has anyone an insight ?


nothing was think in the first game for a console port
DX on PS2 isn't that bad. If they remain close to DX gameplay, I don't think the port should be a problem. Concerning upgrades for the console interface, well, my opinion remains the same (same HUD, password typing system for PC and console players with keyboard, and quick menus in addition of the PC menu for those who play with controllers).