PDA

View Full Version : In All Seriousness



progressor
13th Nov 2008, 23:49
Hi all,

Decided to pitch in while I might make a difference.

Big fan of the first game. One thing that struck me when I played it, that from the intro sequence, and until the very end, the game took itself very seriously. This is not to say that there was no humor, but most of the interaction was great precisely because it was "realistic."

I do mean conversations and e-mails, but this comes through even in such mundane things like naming of the weapons and organizations. VersaLife is a perfectly believable name for a health sciences/genetic research building. Even the Dragon Tooth sword was called a "Non-Eutectic Blade" in the official e-mails, which I could easily imagine to be a product of some marketing department of a defence manufacturer. Not to mention, the use of the word "eutectic" is a sign of erudite writers.

Even the augmentations were named without any hint of cuteness. First of all, the word "augmentation" itself is fairly heavyweight/scientific. Then, come the names:

Combat Strength
Microfibral Muscle
Ballistic Shield
Energy Shield
Cloak
Radar Transparency
Synthetic Heart
Power Recirculator
Aqualung
Healing rate
Environmental resistance
EMP Shield
Targeting
Vision Enhancement
Aggressive Defense System
Spy Drone
Stealth
Speed

Now, compare and contrast those with what I've heard of Deus Ex 3:

"Multi-Kill" (more fit for FEAR or some other mindless shooter)
"Bungee Jumping" (more fit for a Rare game, smacks of Banjo & Kazooie, don't get me started on the word "tentacles")
"Wall punch" (uh...dragon punch?)

Now, in a true Deus Ex game, these would be called something like:

"Multi-target Melee Conditioning"
"Tactical Descent Harness"
"Barrier Breacher"

I think that the descriptions might have been dumbed down to make the magazine readers understand. But please make sure the writers do a pass over these details as well -- I really don't want to see uncooked terminology in a Deus Ex game. Consistency will make the game more immersive, and a serious tone plus deep philosophical implications will make it a worthy successor of Deus Ex 1.

GmanPro
14th Nov 2008, 00:09
Hi progressor. Good first post.

I agree with you wholeheartedly and you bring up good point.

Mass Effect was another game that took itself very seriously. I noticed in that game that they tried to use a lot of scientific terms and concepts to explain the sci-fi ultra-futuristic setting/technology. Which definitely helped to immerse me into the game-world.

Those aug names (if they are indeed the official in-game names for them) should be changed to something like you suggested. :thumbsup:

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 00:18
We haven't even heard a preliminary list of ingame aug names.

I bet the originals were called "Go faster" "Mike tyson mod" "see through walls" around the Ion Storm offices at this stage :rolleyes:

SageSavage
14th Nov 2008, 00:19
Yes, I can agree with that. There shouldn't be much cuteness and the overall tone should be serious.

Ritter
14th Nov 2008, 00:20
yes,DX 1 was dead serious but for some reason the death scream and the voice acting always crack me up :nut:

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 00:34
What worries me more is that playing fast and loose with the terminology might be indicative of the underlying design mindset.

I fear the scenario where people who think in terms of "multi-kills" and "wall punches" are principally designing the game.

My suspicions are reinforced by aiming being wholly dependent on the skill of the player. If I am a top-tier Counter-Strike player, I would appreciate if a game handicapped me in the beginning -- I have no problem drawing a bead and getting headshots, and it was refreshing in Deus Ex 1 when the sniper rifle aim was bobbing all over the place. Of course, for console players aiming is hard enough, so maybe precision would help there.

More importantly, "multi-kill" and skill-based aiming suggest hordes of enemies for the slaughter. That is not Deus Ex. It would be better if there were fewer smart enemies that would be hard to defeat, and if they could kill you very quickly -- making danger palpable and alternative approaches equally or more attractive relative to run-in-guns-blazing. I think RE4 got it right where every enemy was pretty dangerous even alone.

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 00:41
Wait, did you just say that Deus Ex was... SERIOUS BUSINESS (http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p180/metallica2k1/internet_serious_business.jpg)? :cool:


My suspicions are reinforced by aiming being wholly dependent on the skill of the player. If I am a top-tier Counter-Strike player, I would appreciate if a game handicapped me in the beginning

Why?

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 00:52
We haven't even heard a preliminary list of ingame aug names.

I bet the originals were called "Go faster" "Mike tyson mod" "see through walls" around the Ion Storm offices at this stage :rolleyes:

That may be, but these terms were never featured in the magazine [p]reviews or official PR. In fact, I distinctly remember the words "conspiracies" and "consequences" being the backbone of the articles, and the first things that were mentioned.

I hope you can see what I mean: the first lot of information about DX3 focuses on lots of things, but *not* on "conspiracies" or "consequences." That might mean that development is not "story-first," it is "engine-first" and "action-first." That might mean that there's no 500-page "bible" document, like there was for DX1 even before a line of code was written.

Or it might just mean that I am being pessimistic.

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 00:54
It's a sequel to everyone's "best game evar".

The basic premise is well established.

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 01:01
Why?

Because as a newly augmented guy, my coordination should suck while I'm getting used to the hardware interface? Because Adam is proficient with handguns, but never held a police sniper rifle in his life?

Because I can kill enemies really quickly when not handicapped? That means that the game will either have a lot of enemies swarming me to make it difficult, or that I will breeze through the combat sections and not even be challenged. In effect, this would make the guns-blazing approach the preferred option for any player whose aim is already very good.

Of course, the enemies can be armored and smart. They could move around a lot. That may not help them being headshot if you can aim well enough.

I think that Fallout 3 gets this right: the spread of the weapon fire is a function of skill with the weapon, and weapon quality.

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 01:02
It's a sequel to everyone's "best game evar".

The basic premise is well established.

I beg to differ. We should know nothing about the story and it should pleasantly surprise us. That's the hope, anyway.

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 01:12
Because as a newly augmented guy, my coordination should suck while I'm getting used to the hardware interface? Because Adam is proficient with handguns, but never held a police sniper rifle in his life?

Because I can kill enemies really quickly when not handicapped? That means that the game will either have a lot of enemies swarming me to make it difficult, or that I will breeze through the combat sections and not even be challenged. In effect, this would make the guns-blazing approach the preferred option for any player whose aim is already very good.

Of course, the enemies can be armored and smart. They could move around a lot. That may not help them being headshot if you can aim well enough.

I think that Fallout 3 gets this right: the spread of the weapon fire is a function of skill with the weapon, and weapon quality.

I think that Fallout 3 is more of an RPG and Deus Ex is more a hybrid RPG-FPS.
I think that gimping the player to the degree DX did is irritating and weakens the FPS portion of the game.

I think that you've missed the other mechanisms they are introducing to discourage a straight cowboy approach (mechanisms DX was missing).

I don't see what is wrong with rewarding player skill. DX did this already. The MJ12 commandos drop like a sack of spuds if you hit them in the right place.

I think you missed the part where they said in an interview that in DX you could be super good with a weapon and it be down to player skill. This made it sound like you wouldn't suddenly become L4 with every weapon. I'm pretty sure all of the weapons will require skill to use and won't be straight point and click.

The player will have never picked up the sniper rifle before at the start of the game.

Lo Bruto
14th Nov 2008, 01:24
Now, compare and contrast those with what I've heard of Deus Ex 3:

"Multi-Kill" (more fit for FEAR or some other mindless shooter)
"Bungee Jumping" (more fit for a Rare game, smacks of Banjo & Kazooie, don't get me started on the word "tentacles")
"Wall punch" (uh...dragon punch?)



I'm pretty sure these are only placeholders, you know.

René
14th Nov 2008, 01:52
Don't worry about the names since anything mentioned so far is work-in-progress and isn't official. They were just early ways to get the idea across to the European journalists.

Jerion
14th Nov 2008, 01:54
Don't worry about the names since anything mentioned so far is work-in-progress and isn't official. They were just early ways to the idea across to the European journalists.

I KNEW IT! :D

GmanPro
14th Nov 2008, 02:20
Silly European journalists :rolleyes:

lol, but seriously, I really do want this game to be more along the lines of RPG than FPS. This doesn't necessarily mean that I want the combat to be heavily geared towards my AJ's stats, but more towards a system where even if I'm good at FPS games, I may not want to just shoot everything. I'm talking about choices that affect the combat I may or may not be doing.

In Fallout 3, I upgraded my second character's luck to 10 and then took the finesse perk. So I score a critical on almost everything I shoot. This is cool because I haven't added anything to my energy weapons skill (its still 20 or something) but I can still destroy everything with it easily. And now I have more skill points to spread into the technical fields. So essentially what I mean is that if you are bad at fps games then the skill system should be there to help you improve in that area.

Carter gave you a bonus (I think it was a stealth pistol, not sure) if you completed the caslte clinton objectives without killing anyone. That sort of thing is refreshing.

But more importantly, I think that pretty much every boss fight in this game will be AJ vs some other mech. So if you kill that mech the traditional way, he is going to explode and all of his equipment will be destroyed, you will have lost the option to question him maybe... Little things like that.

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 02:35
Carter gave you a bonus (I think it was a stealth pistol, not sure) if you completed the caslte clinton objectives without killing anyone. That sort of thing is refreshing.

Nah. He gives you a couple of spare mags if you sound too wussy. They had the scripting for it but didn't really go places with it.

DX3 is going to expand it apparently.

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 02:37
I think that Fallout 3 is more of an RPG and Deus Ex is more a hybrid RPG-FPS.


That's incorrect. Fallout 3 is a hybrid RPG-FPS (it's possible to never use VATS, the RPGish probability-based targeting system), and it is eerily in the same vein as DX games -- except the storyline, which left a lot to be desired.



I think that you've missed the other mechanisms they are introducing to discourage a straight cowboy approach (mechanisms DX was missing).


I'm sorry, I might have :) I'd like to know more. Can you share a link to this?



I don't see what is wrong with rewarding player skill. DX did this already. The MJ12 commandos drop like a sack of spuds if you hit them in the right place.


Right, somewhere in the back as far as I remember; that required sneaking.
It probably was initially revealed in someone's e-mail. So you had to be good at hacking, sneaking, and aiming to be able to drop an MJ12 in one shot.

Rewarding the player skill is ok...it would be nice if I didn't have to play on hard difficulty to be challenged...

spm1138
14th Nov 2008, 02:51
Blah. They took it down. It was in the EDGE interview.

Basically each faction is going to have some recollection of how much damage you've done to them.

You can't go through the game merrily butchering everyone and then kiss and make up in the last level in time for the "choose your own adventure" part. Until you're sure you'll have to treat each faction with kid gloves.

The mere fact that there is a turn based system pushes it much more in that direction for me. I've also see videos of someone plugging a guy in the head like 20 times before he drops. This nevar happened in DX. It did have a shooter component.

The MJ12 commandos went down with a single 30-06 shot to the visor.

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 02:54
Don't worry about the names since anything mentioned so far is work-in-progress and isn't official. They were just early ways to get the idea across to the European journalists.

Rene,

Thank you for the clarification.

I believe that, if the information comes from an EM employee and it is ok'd to be published in a magazine, it is official.

Also, if there is a complete script, or a design doc, it should already contain the "official" names of the augmentations. I realize that you had to explain what they do to foreign journalists, but you had to expand on what they do anyway because neither "wall punch," nor "multi-kill" are sufficiently self-explanatory.

Yargo
14th Nov 2008, 05:19
"Tactical Descent Harness"

Nice euphemism, I hope it turns out not to be tentacles:D
I'm not so much worried about the names, but the Augmentations. You could call it feces but it doesn't change the fact that it is still crap. I have not read any of the articles yet but I have the PCZONE magazine on the way. So I'm not passing judgment, just critiquing what I have heard.

Laokin
14th Nov 2008, 07:15
WOW -- Double Post. Sorry, I'm currently in a hotel in Orlando with some very laggy wifi. I apologize.

Laokin
14th Nov 2008, 07:36
What worries me more is that playing fast and loose with the terminology might be indicative of the underlying design mindset.

I fear the scenario where people who think in terms of "multi-kills" and "wall punches" are principally designing the game.

My suspicions are reinforced by aiming being wholly dependent on the skill of the player. If I am a top-tier Counter-Strike player, I would appreciate if a game handicapped me in the beginning -- I have no problem drawing a bead and getting headshots, and it was refreshing in Deus Ex 1 when the sniper rifle aim was bobbing all over the place. Of course, for console players aiming is hard enough, so maybe precision would help there.

More importantly, "multi-kill" and skill-based aiming suggest hordes of enemies for the slaughter. That is not Deus Ex. It would be better if there were fewer smart enemies that would be hard to defeat, and if they could kill you very quickly -- making danger palpable and alternative approaches equally or more attractive relative to run-in-guns-blazing. I think RE4 got it right where every enemy was pretty dangerous even alone.

I think your first mistake was using Counter-Strike as a point of reference for skill in aiming. While that game has it's own community it's fairly obvious that that game is LOOSE with it's hit boxes... ontop of the fact that the spray isn't random. All good CS players memorize the spray pattern, this is the only reason that game is "BOOM HeadShot!"

Secondly, you imply it's impossible to make an FPS that's shooting oriented with minimal enemy counts. Also, it's not like there was any shortage of bad guys in DX 1 or 2. Had you went guns blazing in every level there were plenty of "Action" game experiences.

In other words, gimping the players accuracy is a little ridiculous. Some people naturally have good hand eye coordination/stability... it doesn't take a rocket scientist to learn how to shoot. Shooting is point and squeeze in practical application. Only when shooting over large distances does one have to worry about breathing and wind... these are Marksmen.

Also, I have read nothing about having perfect accuracy from the beginning. Everything released so far implies that you will have "competent" accuracy in the beginning and leads you to believe you will need weapon mods to make ridiculous shots thus, more or less proving your accuracy will change from the beginning to the end.

I for one am one of those old school CS and Quake players. The notion of gimping somebody to make the game difficult is a real turn off. Essentially Counter-Strike would be easy by your example. It's not.... why? Simple, because you can die just as fast as you can kill. This is the only adjustment that needs to be made to make a game difficult.

Also, everyone is presumably of different skill. Tuning a game to be hard for you may be ludicrous to some one else. A game doesn't have to be bleeding hard to be enjoyable.... especially not Deus Ex considering neither of them were exceptionally hard on "realistic." That's part of what made that game good, it gave you control over your situations.... YOUR mistakes lead to your demise. If you didn't make mistakes in DX.... it really wasn't so difficult. I would say that this is the popular consensus... although it is just my opinion based on my experiences with other DX players.

Intentionally handicapping players is like cheating. Nobody enjoys playing against cheaters... it just ruins the "fun" of the game when you die when you know you shouldn't have, especially knowing that they intentionally made your aim "Teh Suck." Fallout 3 suffers from this IMO.... everything takes ridiculous amounts of ammo to kill minus the Rad Roaches -- hell, even humans take more then one shot to the head... even if your dead on. :mad2:


Although, I do agree with your opinion on the campy generic Aug names and while Rene popped in to give a little justification... IMO it's b/s. There is just simply no reason to get all sappy and unoriginal to come up with ridiculous placeholder names like "Multi-kill." If it's only used to describe to the journalists... whats in the alpha build right now? Better yet, how hard is it to come up with a more original name... took you probably under 5 minutes to come up with the excellent names you suggested. If the tentacles stay, I think they should pay you 15$ to use that name.... it's just fantastic. Also, as it's already been addressed, these "names" they submitted to the journalists really aren't "Self-Explanatory." They did need to be elaborated on... and so they were. This implies to me that your 100% correct on the mindset of the developers. Anyone see the correlation in "Multi-Kill" and "Auto-Regen Life"?? Because I do.... it's called Halo. Halo 2 and 3 both featured the UT announced "Multi-Kill" and both feature auto regen life. I think you're absolutely correct. Back to the point though, since they had to elaborate on the aug's functional use... there simply is no excuse why they should of chosen to go with generic ass names.

I'm getting more and more disappointed everyday with the way EM is handling this game. When I arrived -- I defended the hell out of the Auto Heal and the Cover System....

It's become more and more apparent that the healing will be handled exactly like COD4. Although, I still stand with full support over the "cover-sneak" system. I just wish 3rd person would be an option. If it's only to see how "cool" Adam looks and it doesn't serve a functional purpose... then there is no harm if I don't want to see what Adam looks like unless I have a mirror. We know you don't HAVE to use the cover system... which means you can avoid the third person there... but what about the Augs that auto-switch? Really? I'd like an answer.

Vote for Proposition DXPOV.
Include 3rd person toggle option in the game options menu. I'll even take the 3rd person in cover.... since I don't have to use it. Just give the option to enable/disable 3rd person augmentation uses. In fact... I'll go a little further and ask for a "Camera Options" field in the menu.

This option field should include every aug that switches point of view... and ask you your preference for each aug. This way... lets say, the bungee jump is difficult in first person... you can set JUST the bungee jump to switch to third person if the user preferred.

I'm sick of the lameness.... The stupid excuses. We all played DX... we all have a vision of what it's supposed to be. Compromising the communities experience for your personal "vision" is just a tad bit selfish. If you want us to be able to enjoy your vision... give us the choice to enjoy it the way it's meant to be enjoyed. Through the eyes of Adam. F this b/s.****

P.S.
Rene, your my favorite PR rep EVER. Alas, you are just a PR Rep after all.... Your job is to make us feel like we are happy with the decisions Eidos made. Just because he gave an "explanation" doesn't make it A.) True... and B.) Satisfactory.

Also... what doesn't make a lick of sense to me is... WHY ON EARTH is the game being developed in Canada, the target audience being United States... and then send the first exclusive information to European Journalists?

Like... really!??! Who made that decision? Just another sign to me that EM has no head on it's shoulders. :scratch:

progressor
14th Nov 2008, 08:43
Let's not get hot-headed, my friend. We clearly don't have enough information, although the early tidings are not reassuring.


I think your first mistake was using Counter-Strike as a point of reference for skill in aiming. While that game has it's own community it's fairly obvious that that game is LOOSE with it's hit boxes... ontop of the fact that the spray isn't random.


I was not talking about the spray. You probably know as well as I do that the first bullet of an AK-47 or an M4A1 lands smack in the middle of the crosshairs.



Secondly, you imply it's impossible to make an FPS that's shooting oriented with minimal enemy counts. Also, it's not like there was any shortage of bad guys in DX 1 or 2. Had you went guns blazing in every level there were plenty of "Action" game experiences.


You're probably right. I'm only worried about the game being more about the shooting and less about *why* you're shooting, i.e. the plot.



Also, I have read nothing about having perfect accuracy from the beginning. Everything released so far implies that you will have "competent" accuracy in the beginning and leads you to believe you will need weapon mods to make ridiculous shots thus, more or less proving your accuracy will change from the beginning to the end.


This actually sounds good to me and is also what I had in mind, but did not express well enough.



Essentially Counter-Strike would be easy by your example. It's not.... why? Simple, because you can die just as fast as you can kill. This is the only adjustment that needs to be made to make a game difficult.


I am glad we concur on wanting to battle deadly enemies (hopefully, by virtue of having smart AI and not only overpowered bullets).



Vote for Proposition DXPOV.
Include 3rd person toggle option in the game options menu. I'll even take the 3rd person in cover.... since I don't have to use it. Just give the option to enable/disable 3rd person augmentation uses. In fact... I'll go a little further and ask for a "Camera Options" field in the menu.


I actually don't mind the third person view, if executed well. I can imagine how Adam's mechanical body using the augs can look impressive.

But I think that Crysis-style visualization (where you can look at the character's body and hands) is a lot more immersive. Third person does less to help the player associate with the game character. Also, with Crysis-style body visualization, if you don't want to look at how Adam's feet become swimming octopus tentacles, you don't have to.

I think that COD4-style health regeneration makes for cheesy gameplay. It generally encourages camping and idleness. But as long as it is very possible to die even with health regen on, and there are medkits that allow you not to break the stride of the battle, I guess it could work out ok.



Also... what doesn't make a lick of sense to me is... WHY ON EARTH is the game being developed in Canada, the target audience being United States... and then send the first exclusive information to European Journalists?


It's a valid point. I propose we start a conspiracy theory, something probably to do with the French connection :)



Like... really!??! Who made that decision? Just another sign to me that EM has no head on it's shoulders. :scratch:

More important than *who* is *why*.

Look, EM is full of very talented people. We should give them a chance.

If I had to bet, I wouldn't bet on the alpha version being there yet. I can see that the engine is shaping up well, and that the art direction is superb. I think all that's there is a small number of proto-missions that are being used to implement/test scripting and toy with augmentation ideas. That is to be expected at this stage.

My main worry is whether there is a narrative, a coherent vision of the world and of the gameplay mechanics that is driving the development forward. I think there is, but for some reason it's taking the back seat, in a game where it should not be taking the back seat.

Does anyone know who the writers are for DX3? What about the lead game designer?

Laokin
14th Nov 2008, 17:31
Let's not get hot-headed, my friend. We clearly don't have enough information, although the early tidings are not reassuring.



I was not talking about the spray. You probably know as well as I do that the first bullet of an AK-47 or an M4A1 lands smack in the middle of the crosshairs.



You're probably right. I'm only worried about the game being more about the shooting and less about *why* you're shooting, i.e. the plot.



This actually sounds good to me and is also what I had in mind, but did not express well enough.



I am glad we concur on wanting to battle deadly enemies (hopefully, by virtue of having smart AI and not only overpowered bullets).



I actually don't mind the third person view, if executed well. I can imagine how Adam's mechanical body using the augs can look impressive.

But I think that Crysis-style visualization (where you can look at the character's body and hands) is a lot more immersive. Third person does less to help the player associate with the game character. Also, with Crysis-style body visualization, if you don't want to look at how Adam's feet become swimming octopus tentacles, you don't have to.

I think that COD4-style health regeneration makes for cheesy gameplay. It generally encourages camping and idleness. But as long as it is very possible to die even with health regen on, and there are medkits that allow you not to break the stride of the battle, I guess it could work out ok.



It's a valid point. I propose we start a conspiracy theory, something probably to do with the French connection :)



More important than *who* is *why*.

Look, EM is full of very talented people. We should give them a chance.

If I had to bet, I wouldn't bet on the alpha version being there yet. I can see that the engine is shaping up well, and that the art direction is superb. I think all that's there is a small number of proto-missions that are being used to implement/test scripting and toy with augmentation ideas. That is to be expected at this stage.

My main worry is whether there is a narrative, a coherent vision of the world and of the gameplay mechanics that is driving the development forward. I think there is, but for some reason it's taking the back seat, in a game where it should not be taking the back seat.

Does anyone know who the writers are for DX3? What about the lead game designer?

Oh sir, I didn't mean to come across hot headed... I just basically agree with you. Also, I think it's important to note that an Alpha build is the first build of the game that runs on it's own. In that respect.... there is surely an alpha build floating around EM. I'm not concerned with the narrative. I trust whole heartedly that they can come up with a convincing enough DX style plot line. They seem to be taking a bigger focus on the decision making and conversation system, well -- from what we have been told thus far anyway.

The only fear about this game that I have is that it will be dumbed down anywhere from naming Aug's to the health and energy systems. Looks to me that EM played Crysis and viewed it as the "new" way to do super powers. If they are going with regen health that almost automatically means regen Bio Energy as well. If they didn't... it would be like a smack in the face since you'd still be "hunting for packs." Since energy is VERY important in DX, there is always an emphasis on keeping your meter high. Without Auto Regening energy they are essentially in the same exact boat they were in when addressing the Health systems.

I didn't even enjoy crysis for what it was. Just seemed..... well, very "mediocre" to me. The graphics were beautiful... but the trade off isn't really worth it. Playing games like UT3.... there isn't THAT much of a leap. It's mostly the art direction. The graphics are both great, but the performance loss from Crysis and Warhead just aren't worth it.

My system specs are E8500 C2D 3.16 4gb of expensive ass ram and a 9800GX2. My system TOASTS everything out there now.... Crysis pulls 40-50 frames everything set to Ultra with 4x AA. Warhead pulls 19 - 39 frames, the problem is.... I don't notice a difference with warhead... other than it looks a little ugly. The motion blur on enthusiast is practically 1:1 with Ultra High... yet some how roasts my fps.

*Sigh*
I just don't want my beloved franchise to turn into a dumbed down Crysis mode game. The only thing I really did like about Crysis was the A.I., although... I hated the vehicle A.I. as it was pretty terrible. Also + for Delta mode... Love no crosshairs.

Mindmute
14th Nov 2008, 17:38
Also... what doesn't make a lick of sense to me is... WHY ON EARTH is the game being developed in Canada, the target audience being United States... and then send the first exclusive information to European Journalists?

Are you sure the target isn't closer to "people-who-enjoy-conspiracies-and-cyberpunk" than just the US?

Myself and quite a few people on this forum, maybe even the majority, aren't from the States, you know?

GmanPro
14th Nov 2008, 19:16
I'm pretty sure that the majority of sales for DX3 will come from the US

:thumbsup:

SageSavage
14th Nov 2008, 19:26
Cyberpunk is popular in many western countries and so is DX1. It's just that the territory of the USA is bigger then most other countries.

GmanPro
14th Nov 2008, 19:29
^^

Sure, but still

the majority of sales will come from the US :whistle:

K^2
14th Nov 2008, 19:45
It's just that the territory of the USA is bigger then most other countries.
Territory doesn't make the sales. Population does. 300M in US vs 700M in Europe. Of course, software piracy is more widespread in parts of Europe. All things considered, either one could make more sales.

SageSavage
14th Nov 2008, 19:56
Yes, but my point was that if you compare a huge country like the USA with a small country like Germany, than it's obvious which country makes more sales - because of it's population numbers. Would be interesting to compare the actual continents America and Europe though.

GmanPro
14th Nov 2008, 20:20
If you're comparing continents, then you would have to include Canada and Mexico with the US.

Pretty sure NA would have more sales.

Laokin
14th Nov 2008, 20:53
While I do agree it will sell equally well in Europe.... it still hardly shakes the feeling of the Target Audience. It's more cost efficient to launch in USA before Europe especially since the game is being made just north of the border. What's Eidos' history of simultaneous international release?

This fact will help narrow down the scope to the original target audience.

Jerion
15th Nov 2008, 10:07
Why before? I think it would be best for them to do a simultaneous launch in North America and Europe.

Laokin
15th Nov 2008, 19:08
Why before? I think it would be best for them to do a simultaneous launch in North America and Europe.


Yeah, a simultaneous release is always better, but you miss the business side of things. It's pointless launching simultaneously if there is no promotion globally. The reason to launch delays is usually marketing. It costs money for commercials and if you want your game to sell well, you better have commercials globally. The costs is amazingly high to do such a thing.

Only the best of the best highest budget games ever get released internationally from day one. A preview magazine a year or two before release doesn't really count either. I just can't see a game that is such a "hope" monster being close to the budget of a game like TRU. I just don't think it's a smart move financially for EM.... especially since this is the studio's first game.

spm1138
15th Nov 2008, 23:46
Fail to launch simultaneously and you're encouraging piracy in the territories you miss.

There's a reason they started airing TV shows so close together in the US and Europe.

Romeo
16th Nov 2008, 07:12
Hi all,

Decided to pitch in while I might make a difference.

Big fan of the first game. One thing that struck me when I played it, that from the intro sequence, and until the very end, the game took itself very seriously. This is not to say that there was no humor, but most of the interaction was great precisely because it was "realistic."

I do mean conversations and e-mails, but this comes through even in such mundane things like naming of the weapons and organizations. VersaLife is a perfectly believable name for a health sciences/genetic research building. Even the Dragon Tooth sword was called a "Non-Eutectic Blade" in the official e-mails, which I could easily imagine to be a product of some marketing department of a defence manufacturer. Not to mention, the use of the word "eutectic" is a sign of erudite writers.

Even the augmentations were named without any hint of cuteness. First of all, the word "augmentation" itself is fairly heavyweight/scientific. Then, come the names:

Combat Strength
Microfibral Muscle
Ballistic Shield
Energy Shield
Cloak
Radar Transparency
Synthetic Heart
Power Recirculator
Aqualung
Healing rate
Environmental resistance
EMP Shield
Targeting
Vision Enhancement
Aggressive Defense System
Spy Drone
Stealth
Speed

Now, compare and contrast those with what I've heard of Deus Ex 3:

"Multi-Kill" (more fit for FEAR or some other mindless shooter)
"Bungee Jumping" (more fit for a Rare game, smacks of Banjo & Kazooie, don't get me started on the word "tentacles")
"Wall punch" (uh...dragon punch?)

Now, in a true Deus Ex game, these would be called something like:

"Multi-target Melee Conditioning"
"Tactical Descent Harness"
"Barrier Breacher"

I think that the descriptions might have been dumbed down to make the magazine readers understand. But please make sure the writers do a pass over these details as well -- I really don't want to see uncooked terminology in a Deus Ex game. Consistency will make the game more immersive, and a serious tone plus deep philosophical implications will make it a worthy successor of Deus Ex 1.
You honestly think "Aqualung" sounds serious? lol

And we don't know if those are descriptions or the actual names. But "Barrier Breacher" sounds terrible, I'm sorry.

But on a related note: Why wouldn't augmentations have catchy names? They were marketted after all (Look at the female bartender in Hell's Kitchen. She doesn't strike me as a secret agent). When marketting, you want the consumer to be excited, not your scientists. In Deus Ex it makes sense that your augs are blandly-titled, you're one of a very select few that have nano-augs, so they're going to use no-nonsense military designations. Just my opinion.

GmanPro
16th Nov 2008, 18:41
It seems to me that the general public shouldn't have access to military-grade augmentations at all. Why would an ordinary citizen need an aug to punch out a wall or prematurely explode incoming missiles? The augs that AJ uses throughout DX3 need to be no nonsense, all business (possibly illegal?). So they should sound like they are.

Jerion
16th Nov 2008, 18:43
Dude, Are you kidding? There are so many times when I've been stuck in traffic down in Delaware that I would LOVE to have biotenacles. Screw waiting behind cars...I'll just walk my car over the poor fellows in front of me. :D

GmanPro
16th Nov 2008, 18:48
^^
:lol:

Still, I'm pretty sure that it would be illegal to bust out giant tentacles because of the possibility of smashing all the cars in front of you. :thumbsup:

Igoe
16th Nov 2008, 19:07
I still wonder why everyone thinks the Bungee Aug makes you like Doc Oc.

How did we get from support wires for repelling off buildings for emergency escape to swimming and crushing cars with tentacles??

Did I miss something??

Mindmute
16th Nov 2008, 19:14
I still wonder why everyone thinks the Bungee Aug makes you like Doc Oc.

How did we get from support wires for repelling off buildings for emergency escape to swimming and crushing cars with tentacles??

Did I miss something??

I believe it was the wording in one of the articles and that odd image, we still can't understand too well, of something swimming with long tentacles.

Some people developed that mental image and it seems to be influencing everyone else who just reads a few lines from the threads.
Let's hope they're all wrong and silly ;)

Jerion
16th Nov 2008, 19:15
Yeah, lets hope. :)

GmanPro
16th Nov 2008, 19:17
Those tentacles remind me of that bad guy from Spiderman 2.

So yeah, I think u'd need a license for something like that.

Jerion
16th Nov 2008, 19:25
Exactly why they won't copy the Doc Oc ones. They don't want to pay royalties.

Mindmute
16th Nov 2008, 19:28
Exactly why they won't copy the Doc Oc ones. They don't want to pay royalties.

That and the rioting...

Jerion
16th Nov 2008, 19:31
That too. :D

I can see it now...A horde of angry fans converging on the studio... one of them brings forward a battering ram to breach the front doors...and from the roof you hear a quiet "beep...beep...beep beep beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep"...:D

K^2
16th Nov 2008, 20:51
Dibs on building a trebuchet.

GmanPro
16th Nov 2008, 21:55
I already have one :thumbsup:

http://aok.heavengames.com/pics/units/trebuchet.jpg

Just in case... You never know when a trebuchet might come in handy ;)

K^2
16th Nov 2008, 22:35
Somehow, I don't see EM employees running in fear at sight of a CGI trebuchet, but good luck to you.

Oh, and I had modern materials in mind and VW bugs for ammo.

Jerion
16th Nov 2008, 23:04
Somehow, I don't see EM employees running in fear at sight of a CGI trebuchet, but good luck to you.

Oh, and I had modern materials in mind and VW bugs for ammo.

VW bugs? Excellent.

SageSavage
16th Nov 2008, 23:17
I think he means those cars made by Volkswagen...
http://static.zooomr.com/images/3853220_b56887e5de_b.jpg

They are deadly weapons, if pushed hard enough.

K^2
17th Nov 2008, 02:26
I think he means those cars made by Volkswagen...
http://static.zooomr.com/images/3853220_b56887e5de_b.jpg

They are deadly weapons, if pushed hard enough.
I like your choice of the paint scheme for ammo used to breach the walls of a Canadian HQ.

imported_van_HellSing
17th Nov 2008, 02:33
I like your choice of the paint scheme for ammo used to breach the walls of a Canadian HQ.

Dude, everyone's playing Fallout right now, that would absolutely fit in there.

K^2
17th Nov 2008, 02:42
You mean annexation of Canada, et cetera?

imported_van_HellSing
17th Nov 2008, 02:53
Yep.

progressor
18th Nov 2008, 00:35
What the **** kind of forum is this?

The moderators are allowed to change the titles of threads? I've never even heard of such frivolous practice, especially on official forums whose purpose is to interact with fans and gather suggestions.

What rules has my thread violated to warrant the change of its title? I request that you revert the title of the thread to what it was originally: "In All Seriousness."

What's next? The content of the posts? Why not add smiley faces to my every sentence to make it more (un)serious? Or even add a few sentences falsely suggesting that I liked the magazine previews which focus on guns and locations instead of characters and conspiracies?

progressor
18th Nov 2008, 01:05
You honestly think "Aqualung" sounds serious? lol


I honestly do, and you should also consider it further. The word "aqualung," in a number of languages, refers to scuba diving gear: the oxygen/nitrogen tanks, the valve and the mask. The word flows great when pronounced out loud and precisely refers to its function: your *lungs* can now breathe in water (aqua).



And we don't know if those are descriptions or the actual names.


This is what they are called in a number of articles. If that's what they are called in the game's design document, we're in trouble. If EM has better names for them, why not use them? They still have to explain what they do.



But "Barrier Breacher" sounds terrible, I'm sorry.


"Barrier breach" is a technical term referring to an application of a special kind of a tank which SWAT teams can use to make new holes in walls to enter buildings in avoidance of fortified/booby trapped entrances.



But on a related note: Why wouldn't augmentations have catchy names? They were marketted after all (Look at the female bartender in Hell's Kitchen. She doesn't strike me as a secret agent). When marketting, you want the consumer to be excited, not your scientists. In Deus Ex it makes sense that your augs are blandly-titled, you're one of a very select few that have nano-augs, so they're going to use no-nonsense military designations. Just my opinion.

I'm not arguing against catchy names. I'm arguing for catchy names which sound like they can help market the equipment to the Department of Defense and/or the police. I'm also arguing for serious treatment of the material, which I guess is discouraged around here because mods have negated the title of my thread (making it (un)serious).

For example, consider GPS-guided bombs. The kit which converts regular (dumb) bombs into GPS-guided bombs is called JDAM. It's called a Joint Direct Attack Munition, which is even more official than a "GPS guidance kit" because it is weapon-related. Its success is measured in human lives, which is neither civilian nor silly.

Similarly, if you develop a robotic hand that can crush something into small bits, it's either designed for the augmented military units, or for the augmented workers. There might be street slang for its name, but officially, in the marketing leaflets of whoever spent $30 million on its development, it's not going to be called a "skull crusher." I'm sure its original application has to do with, perhaps, pulverizing minerals in mines, or bending metal rods at the factories. So they should be called something like "Compression/Fragmentation Utility Limb."

I guess that's why grenades in the Original Deus Ex were called LAMs. Right?

Jerion
18th Nov 2008, 03:26
I've just changed it back to "In All Seriousness". My apologies.

DXeXodus
18th Nov 2008, 04:52
What the **** kind of forum is this?

One where the majority of members have a sense of humour ;)

spm1138
18th Nov 2008, 07:52
What the **** kind of forum is this?

The moderators are allowed to change the titles of threads? I've never even heard of such frivolous practice, especially on official forums whose purpose is to interact with fans and gather suggestions.

What rules has my thread violated to warrant the change of its title? I request that you revert the title of the thread to what it was originally: "In All Seriousness."

What's next? The content of the posts? Why not add smiley faces to my every sentence to make it more (un)serious? Or even add a few sentences falsely suggesting that I liked the magazine previews which focus on guns and locations instead of characters and conspiracies?

DEUS EX FORUMS ARE SERIOUS BUSINESS.

http://tracksuitceo.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/serious-cat.jpg

I DEMAND YOU TREAT MY OPINIONS ABOUT VIDEOGAMES WITH THE FULL SERIOUSNESS THEY DESERVE.

ENOUGH OF THIS FRIVOLITY BEFORE I WRITE A LETTER TO MY OMBUDSMAN.

progressor
18th Nov 2008, 22:15
http://www.roflcat.com/images/cats/270911970_db35fdd4ca.jpg

That's right :)

Yeah, I overreacted. Sorry. Contact your ombudsman :)

Jerion
19th Nov 2008, 03:51
^^ That cat reminds me of one of my friends. Not the caption...just the face. It's creepy. :eek:

K^2
19th Nov 2008, 06:22
I honestly do, and you should also consider it further. The word "aqualung," in a number of languages, refers to scuba diving gear[...]
That's precisely why it doesn't sound serious. Aqualung does not sound at all techy or military to someone in whose native language it is used to describe recreational gear that you'd typically use on a sunny island to look at fish and sea turtles.

But I agree with you on most of your points. If they start calling augs "Skull Crusher", they might as well put Adam in an oversize "armored" suit that looks like it is built from cardboard and painted by colorblind children and strap a chain saw to his gun bearing a muzzle of ridiculous caliber. Then again, if auto heal is any indication, that's where we are heading.

Jerion
19th Nov 2008, 06:29
^^^

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a276/aznfox/4084332b8477c4e7df03818962a21ef66a6.jpg

GmanPro
19th Nov 2008, 06:37
^^
http://codebloo.net/stuff/picard-headesk.jpg

Jerion
19th Nov 2008, 06:41
^

Anything is possible. :lol:

APostLife
19th Nov 2008, 07:18
Totally agree with this topic. Hope EM takes this into consideration:)

GmanPro
19th Nov 2008, 07:21
Yes, take this game as seriously as possible. Like Predator did :thumbsup:

But that's not to say that there shouldn't be a scene where AJ walks into the ladies restroom :D

Yargo
20th Nov 2008, 18:26
^^
http://codebloo.net/stuff/picard-headesk.jpg

Star Trek Movie announced. :D

jordan_a
23rd Nov 2008, 16:58
Totally agree with this topic. Hope EM takes this into consideration :)I'm still trying to figure it out actually. :scratch: