PDA

View Full Version : DX3 looks more future like than it should be?



APostLife
20th Nov 2008, 06:25
Looking at the images first thread of this forum makes me think that DX3 looks too future like, even more future like than DX1. DX3 is set in 2027, so how would it look more future than 2052? I'm am very confused?!:mad2:

3nails4you
20th Nov 2008, 06:28
We've been over this a zillion times...

by 2052, large amounts of terrorist attacks as well as the mass spread of the Gray Death ravaged the world's economy. During DX3, there was a huge technological revolution and artistic style was heavily emphasized. This created a huge dynamic and differing styles (newish vs. dark).

Jerion
20th Nov 2008, 06:50
^^

Hence the "Cyber Renaissance" Artistic direction. :)

APostLife
20th Nov 2008, 06:54
Sorry for the inconvenience:(

Jerion
20th Nov 2008, 07:01
Sorry for the inconvenience:(

No worries. :)

René
20th Nov 2008, 14:49
I should put my flack jacket on since I'm about to say something that can be construed as negative against the first game...

APostlELite asks a good question but one of things you have to keep in mind is where the gaming industry was in 1998/1999 when DX1 was in development. From a production point of view, the DX1 dev team was 20 people whereas the DX3 dev team is probably four times that size (I'm not exactly sure). Then take into consideration the improvements not only in engine technology itself but also the tools and supporting software related to game development. So we can do much more today than ten years ago.

But that's just the techy side. When it comes to design, if you look at the future projections in the first game, a lot of things didn’t really fit. For a game based in 2052, we're already today seeing some technology that's more advanced than what they had. I don't have them in front of me but people here on the forums have already been sharing links to super-powered rifles, suits, artificial limbs, etc. When you look at scientific advancement and where prosthetic augmentations are heading right now, for Deus Ex 3 which takes place in 2027, I think that’s the proper timeframe for the way things could end up looking. Now, a city like Shanghai the way it is in our concept art may or may not be possible in that time frame, but don't forget we are making a game after all; but everything is grounded in reality.

imported_van_HellSing
20th Nov 2008, 15:15
I actually always got a "late-eighties-early-nineties cult sci-fi movie" feel from DX1. Much of that was the music, I guess.

ZylonBane
20th Nov 2008, 15:52
A significant part of why DX felt so immersive is because the environments nailed that gritty "not too distant future" aesthetic.

From what I've seen of the DX3 concept art, they've utterly botched this. They're making the exact same mistake the Invisible War team did, throwing together these oh-so-cool futuristic Jetsons environments.

imported_van_HellSing
20th Nov 2008, 16:03
Funny you should say that, since I think I already posted a few times how I'm grateful DX3 doesn't look like Jetsons.

Jerion
20th Nov 2008, 16:37
A significant part of why DX felt so immersive is because the environments nailed that gritty "not too distant future" aesthetic.

From what I've seen of the DX3 concept art, they've utterly botched this. They're making the exact same mistake the Invisible War team did, throwing together these oh-so-cool futuristic Jetsons environments.

You're just full of negativity aren't you?

René
20th Nov 2008, 16:43
From what I've seen of the DX3 concept art, they've utterly botched this. They're making the exact same mistake the Invisible War team did, throwing together these oh-so-cool futuristic Jetsons environments.

I have to say that I completely disagree with this point. Utterly and completely disagree. Do these images look like the Jetsons?

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/office2.jpg
http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/scan3-1.jpg
http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/labs.jpg
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/9577/deusex3169801as8.jpg

These look like a potential 20 years in the future to me.

ZylonBane
20th Nov 2008, 16:51
The first one looks like something out of Blade Runner. Which granted, isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The rest look like a tour of Epcot Center.

René
20th Nov 2008, 16:58
^^ Well, we can't please everyone I guess.

Jerion
20th Nov 2008, 17:03
No, you can't. ZylonBane is especially bad on this point. :rasp:

Bluey71
20th Nov 2008, 17:11
But that's just the techy side. When it comes to design, if you look at the future projections in the first game, a lot of things didn’t really fit. For a game based in 2052, we're already today seeing some technology that's more advanced than what they had. I don't have them in front of me but people here on the forums have already been sharing links to super-powered rifles, suits, artificial limbs, etc. When you look at scientific advancement and where prosthetic augmentations are heading right now, for Deus Ex 3 which takes place in 2027, I think that’s the proper timeframe for the way things could end up looking. Now, a city like Shanghai the way it is in our concept art may or may not be possible in that time frame, but don't forget we are making a game after all; but everything is grounded in reality.

Rene, do you happen to know if there are plans to make any maps/enviroments from blueprints of the real world at all? (Like Liberty Island)

René
20th Nov 2008, 17:22
^^ I don't know. In DX3 you will travel to many real world locations but I don't know about actual blueprints. Did they really use Liberty Island blueprints in DX1? Because I've actually been there and I'm not sure how accurate it is. Yeah there's a couple of docks and whatnot but blueprints?

Bluey71
20th Nov 2008, 17:41
Well yea, was just using that as an expression really. I remember a thread either on Ion Storm forums or elsewhere where ppl had travelled to the various different places and compared them to the game's maps. Anyone else remember this?
Im sure I've also seen youtube vids of a guy doing this - walking around Liberty Island and discussing the simarlarities - or did I dream it :nut:

AaronJ
20th Nov 2008, 17:55
I should put my flack jacket on since I'm about to say something that can be construed as negative against the first game...

APostlELite asks a good question but one of things you have to keep in mind is where the gaming industry was in 1998/1999 when DX1 was in development. From a production point of view, the DX1 dev team was 20 people whereas the DX3 dev team is probably four times that size (I'm not exactly sure). Then take into consideration the improvements not only in engine technology itself but also the tools and supporting software related to game development. So we can do much more today than ten years ago.

But that's just the techy side. When it comes to design, if you look at the future projections in the first game, a lot of things didn’t really fit. For a game based in 2052, we're already today seeing some technology that's more advanced than what they had. I don't have them in front of me but people here on the forums have already been sharing links to super-powered rifles, suits, artificial limbs, etc. When you look at scientific advancement and where prosthetic augmentations are heading right now, for Deus Ex 3 which takes place in 2027, I think that’s the proper timeframe for the way things could end up looking. Now, a city like Shanghai the way it is in our concept art may or may not be possible in that time frame, but don't forget we are making a game after all; but everything is grounded in reality.

Hmm...I've never thought of just rolling with it before. While ZylonBane makes more sense, I don't know, art direction does numb the pain.

Wait a second...


^^ I don't know. In DX3 you will travel to many real world locations but I don't know about actual blueprints. Did they really use Liberty Island blueprints in DX1? Because I've actually been there and I'm not sure how accurate it is. Yeah there's a couple of docks and whatnot but blueprints?

Is Liberty Island just bigger than I imagine, or have you not played Deus Ex?

spm1138
20th Nov 2008, 18:01
Well yea, was just using that as an expression really. I remember a thread either on Ion Storm forums or elsewhere where ppl had travelled to the various different places and compared them to the game's maps. Anyone else remember this?
Im sure I've also seen youtube vids of a guy doing this - walking around Liberty Island and discussing the simarlarities - or did I dream it :nut:

I remember a photo tour from somewhere with pictures of liberty island and battery park.

Videos weren't that common on t'internet back then because everyone was on modems.

K^2
20th Nov 2008, 18:13
Is Liberty Island just bigger than I imagine, or have you not played Deus Ex?
The two are a bit different. Deus Ex Liberty Island is quite a bit smaller than the real deal, and quite a few actual places on the island are absent in DX.

Deus Ex Liberty Island (http://www.visualwalkthroughs.com/deusex/liberty1/7.jpg).
Real Liberty Island (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.689697,-74.044783&spn=0.003128,0.008261&t=h&z=18).

ZylonBane
20th Nov 2008, 18:21
Somewhere on YouTube there's a first-person video of someone touring Liberty Island with the Deus Ex HUD superimposed on it.

gamer0004
20th Nov 2008, 18:23
Looking at the images first thread of this forum makes me think that DX3 looks too future like, even more future like than DX1. DX3 is set in 2027, so how would it look more future than 2052? I'm am very confused?!:mad2:

You're not confused, it doesn't make sense, but this is what Eidos Montreal thinks will sell well. And it will, probably. Of course it breaks with Deus Ex, so you'll just have to try the game as what it will be: different from Deus Ex. Not a very nice "solution", but we (DX fans) can't afford to make a prequel to Deus Ex.

@Rene: I sincerely hope that you don't really believe what you just said ("These look like a potential 20 years in the future to me," "if you look at the future projections in the first game, a lot of things didn’t really fit. For a game based in 2052, we're already today seeing some technology that's more advanced than what they had," and "for Deus Ex 3 which takes place in 2027, I think that’s the proper timeframe for the way things could end up looking.")

René
20th Nov 2008, 18:33
^^ Really? Why not? I completely believe what I just said.

http://www.musion.co.uk/Cisco_TelePresence.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/07/15/bio.tech/index.html
http://gizmodo.com/5039300/real-sim-city-comes-to-life-in-the-desert
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1057574/Paws-thought-Pet-dog-fitted-10-000-bionic-leg.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/08/02/arms.transplant/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12636
http://gizmodo.com/5013018/boeing-successfully-fires-25-kw-solid+state-lasers-laser-weapons-one-step-closer-to-being-a-reality
http://gizmodo.com/356895/infinity-tower--to-twist-by-90-over-dubai-marina
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12251
http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp?enDispWho=Articles^l2202&enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enVersion=0&enZone=Health&
http://www.videosift.com/video/Bionic-Hand
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/oct/26-rise-of-the-cyborgs
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7669159.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7423184.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7712976.stm

Think of all the technology that's arrived since 1988 and what we'll have in 2027.

Yargo
20th Nov 2008, 18:39
I don't understand you all. Sure Shanghai is very futuristic but thats the only art that I have seen showing such. The other city art is comprised of one building that looks like its new while the others are just old buildings still in place. As for the interior art I can't see why you think thats impossible. Anybody who owns any space can design it however they want. You guys remind me of the guy at movies, watching the new Superman, who says "pft, like that could happen" after superman takes a shot to the eye. Sure some parts of DX are grounded in reality. The same can be said about some Comic books. Get a grip and stop complaining about the art direction.

Yargo
20th Nov 2008, 18:42
^^ Really? Why not? I completely believe what I just said.

http://www.musion.co.uk/Cisco_TelePresence.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/07/15/bio.tech/index.html
http://gizmodo.com/5039300/real-sim-city-comes-to-life-in-the-desert
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1057574/Paws-thought-Pet-dog-fitted-10-000-bionic-leg.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/08/02/arms.transplant/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12636
http://gizmodo.com/5013018/boeing-successfully-fires-25-kw-solid+state-lasers-laser-weapons-one-step-closer-to-being-a-reality
http://gizmodo.com/356895/infinity-tower--to-twist-by-90-over-dubai-marina
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12251
http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp?enDispWho=Articles^l2202&enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enVersion=0&enZone=Health&
http://www.videosift.com/video/Bionic-Hand
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/oct/26-rise-of-the-cyborgs
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7669159.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7423184.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7712976.stm

Think of all the technology that's arrived since 1988 and what we'll have in 2027.

Heres one to add to the list. Though I have a lot more stuff too!

http://gizmodo.com/5090366/g+speak-minority-report-gesture-ui-actually-made-by-minority-report-designer

Spyhopping
20th Nov 2008, 18:45
Thought I'd contribute to the list above
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww

33 seconds in it gets kicked and moves just like an animal

Yargo
20th Nov 2008, 18:48
Thought I'd contribute to the list above
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww

33 seconds in it gets kicked and moves just like an animal

:lol: Have you seen the parody on this its hilarious :thumbsup:

SageSavage
20th Nov 2008, 18:51
Deus Ex: Real Life
http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-4715177930236289844&q=deusex&hl=de

Spyhopping
20th Nov 2008, 18:52
:lol: Have you seen the parody on this its hilarious :thumbsup:

Just looked for it on youtube :lol: here's the link, if anyone hasn't seen it
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=DrmYk_VBelg

deus ex fan
20th Nov 2008, 21:43
here is my opinion.......

Generaly speaking,i believe that every videogame which follow time order should-normal thinking-follow evolution.What i mean.....

(we will play with words and its meanings here......)

i'll express a complex thought though......

Deus Ex,which set in 2052-released in 2000-was and was not futuristic.

It was futuristic because of its technological inventions,e.g appliances of nanotechnology in human body,"augmentations" term entry e.t.c.Things which,at the time deus ex released seemed so new and so cool and they impressed consumers because they somewhat integrated to a world like today world.It was also futuristic because of clothing e.g clothing of agents.It was futuristic because of some details in various levels e.g high-tech bunker structure in liberty island or various bots through the game.

It was not futuristic because some of its settings.It was not futuristic because of locations which at that time-and how videogame tried to depict them in 2052-seemed as they are today.I try to imagine how buildings or cities of our world be at that moment......

It was not so futuristic in relation with Deus Ex 3 because Spector's "approach" to cyberpunk genre was right but it was less visual,Deus Ex somewhat seemed "immature" to cyberpunk environment which Deus Ex 3 will try to provide.I think this is a personal view of each developer.Both developers-and this is so good-based on cyberpunk literature to create such games.And i believe Rene do the exactly right thing as Spector,8 years before...and he and his team-i think-are more close to what we mean pure cyberpunk.

In addition,Deus Ex 3 which will take place in 2027,should have more-near to our reality-version of cities and other things.I dont say that Shangai's city version isn't futuristic but i think that,in 2052 normally should someone see cities like New Shangai(visuals are amazing & shockingly realistic)and not in 2027.This,is not appropriate bad.I say it just for date reference.....

Deus ex 1

2052......

today's version of New York(and why in 2052 New York to be like nowadays????)

Deus Ex 3

2027......

New Shangai.A fictious-but not so fictious-nightmare futuristic version of a densely overpopulated city which "filled" from below till above with humans(of all kinds)and megastructures."Arcologies" & mega corporations everywhere,a multi-layered city,neon lights everywhere.Very intense glow of huge advertisements depict on video-walls.A depiction of blade runner's kind of city.I totally agree with this concept and i give many "bravo" to Deus Ex 3 art direction(guys there did an excellent job).I believe that in this date setting is a little difficult to see cities like New Shangai.More deep into future could someone see them.......maybe in 2050's.

The thing for me which is somekind weird is about dates and how those "match" to the kind of future that 2 games tried-the first-and will try-the third-to depict.

I say that those 2 dates 2052 and 2027 should reversed to this following "order"...........

Deus Ex 1 would have taken place at 2027 and Deus Ex 3 at 2052.It sounds to me more realistically accurate "match".

(i dont say that 2027 is a bad date for Deus Ex 3......)

but i think that Deus Ex 3 visuals seems to be more futuristic than Deus Ex 1.I dont know,maybe i make a mistake.

Deus Ex 3 "concept" is like a cyberpunk novel.And it's futuristic of course.

every comment is acceptable.My point of view is all these things.

Lazarus Ledd
21st Nov 2008, 00:34
Every day the predictions of the future is reshaped.

If you want to check how the future is imagined, read SF novel. They are usually the first at laying ground. These things fire up the imagination of human since Jules Verne....

What I'd like to see in DX in views of political matter is will there be World Government?

EM, Rene, I hope you've heard of sf writer Ben Bova.
- The Kinsman Saga (1987) (combines Millennium (1976) and Kinsman (1979); includes introduction and narrative by Bova explaining the reworking of these two novels)
The introduction was a fine read satelites, first moon base, colaboration in this project and in the end, the world government. But some things don't change and aren't dead just cause they're written in book. These things are very much alive. That why it'd good to read old literature.

Did I went offtopic? =)

Future is now guys. This today that we live was a science fiction decades ago. Don't be suprised if DX3 nails the setting, or if it even becomes surpassed by a notch at 2027 :lmao:
With today's technlogy it's easy two make two steps foward...

Yargo
21st Nov 2008, 02:01
The thing is Deus Ex was a valid prediction of 2052 when it was developed but things change. Buildings and places exist now that didn't when DX was created. Would you rather have DX3 pretend that these buildings were never created. Then if that happens, there is the complaint that DX3 is less grounded in reality than the original. It is entirely possible that there could be a "new" Shang Hai by 2027. Just look at the recent and proposed buildings in Bejing, Paris, and Dubai. So the Design team made a decision live with it or don't play the game. :D

Igoe
21st Nov 2008, 05:30
Back in 2027 life is good for earth. They have the money and the resources to expand and do great things. The DX Bible tells us the sht has yet to hit the fan, which means that life is pretty good. It's only AFTER crap starts going south that things get gritty.

Since SO MUCH can start happening after the events of DX3 to jump-start the cataclysm that is DX1, I'm actually overjoyed we get to play in this era.

We all drive our cars and use up fuel for all kinds of things. Plastics, toys, clothing, car fuel, food additives, all kinds of superfluous things.

Suddenly there's no more gas reserves, and we wonder why oh why did we ever use our precious oil for retarded things.

At THIS time period, things are great in the DX world, but that doesn't mean things cant get bad in a hurry, and out Hero Adam will be right in the thick of it.

GmanPro
21st Nov 2008, 05:35
yyyyyes.... :nut:

gamer0004
21st Nov 2008, 15:29
^^ Really? Why not? I completely believe what I just said.

http://www.musion.co.uk/Cisco_TelePresence.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/07/15/bio.tech/index.html
http://gizmodo.com/5039300/real-sim-city-comes-to-life-in-the-desert
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1057574/Paws-thought-Pet-dog-fitted-10-000-bionic-leg.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/08/02/arms.transplant/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12636
http://gizmodo.com/5013018/boeing-successfully-fires-25-kw-solid+state-lasers-laser-weapons-one-step-closer-to-being-a-reality
http://gizmodo.com/356895/infinity-tower--to-twist-by-90-over-dubai-marina
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12251
http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp?enDispWho=Articles^l2202&enPage=BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enVersion=0&enZone=Health&
http://www.videosift.com/video/Bionic-Hand
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/oct/26-rise-of-the-cyborgs
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7669159.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7423184.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7712976.stm

Think of all the technology that's arrived since 1988 and what we'll have in 2027.

I wasn't talking about augs... Augs don't make a world. Yeah, I think that bionic limbs will be quite common in 2027 (at least it's possible). But not in the DX3 way (too expensive, useless, inefficient, weak... but kewl looking).
Besides that, nobody will decorate his house or company like that. Which is more important, because it's worse than some augs. I mean, I can live with some crazy augs (Deus Ex had some pretty stupid ones - though not nearly as stupid as skull crushers or mechanical tentacles - but at least the world around them was realistic and most of them did make sense), but why would suddenly the whole world change and would all people be killed to be replaced with creatures similar looking to man but thinking completely different?

Yargo
21st Nov 2008, 15:34
At THIS time period, things are great in the DX world, but that doesn't mean things cant get bad in a hurry, and out Hero Adam will be right in the thick of it.

Who's to say he's a hero?

Yargo
21st Nov 2008, 15:39
I wasn't talking about augs... Augs don't make a world. Yeah, I think that bionic limbs will be quite common in 2027 (at least it's possible). But not in the DX3 way (too expensive, useless, inefficient, weak... but kewl looking).
Besides that, nobody will decorate his house or company like that. Which is more important, because it's worse than some augs. I mean, I can live with some crazy augs (Deus Ex had some pretty stupid ones - though not nearly as stupid as skull crushers or mechanical tentacles - but at least the world around them was realistic and most of them did make sense), but why would suddenly the whole world change and would all people be killed to be replaced with creatures similar looking to man but thinking completely different?

Realistic? Have you looked at some of the buildings in Dubai? Realistic is specific to the time period.

Heres an example. The Bahrain World trade Center
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_p6hI6Xmp9AM/RjlRnji82yI/AAAAAAAAACo/AjpdueZEhsE/s576/IMG_1407.JPG

Jerion
21st Nov 2008, 15:51
Exactly. Realistic will be whatever we can imagine and design it to be shortly before then.

Lazarus Ledd
21st Nov 2008, 16:34
Creativity to produce ideas and inovation to produce these ideas into tangible things.

ZylonBane
21st Nov 2008, 20:11
Yeah, I get it-- for some people imagining future society consists of assuming that everyone will own everything from the latest Sharper Image catalog.

Remember how ridiculous 50s futurism looks to us now (http://www.hepcatwilly.com/Miracles-of-the-future.805.0.html). They projected all sorts of crazy advances and cultural transformations that turned out to be simply false. The reality is that you could pluck someone from the 50s and drop them in a 2008 living room (a jump of over half a CENTURY), and pretty much the only thing that would seem strange to them would be how much bigger TVs have become.

gamer0004
21st Nov 2008, 21:18
Realistic? Have you looked at some of the buildings in Dubai? Realistic is specific to the time period.

Heres an example. The Bahrain World trade Center
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_p6hI6Xmp9AM/RjlRnji82yI/AAAAAAAAACo/AjpdueZEhsE/s576/IMG_1407.JPG

What exactly are you trying to say? It's just a normal skyscraper with a lot of glass and some wind mills in between. What's so strange about that?

Yargo
21st Nov 2008, 21:38
What exactly are you trying to say? It's just a normal skyscraper with a lot of glass and some wind mills in between. What's so strange about that?

It doesn't look like the block sky scrapers that were originally designed, like what you see in Deus Ex. But wait!!! DX is supposed to have taken place in 2052 :scratch:. So what I'm saying is Deus Ex was an accurate prediction of what the world could look like coming from a 1996ish development team. Now there are buildings and styles that are different making it seem ridiculous to think that the building style will be anything like what was in the original. So would you rather have the development team ignore reality and pretend nothing has happened design-wise between Deus EX and Deus Ex 3? Sure thats one of the problems when making a prequel. But I'd rather have that than a crumby game that claims to be believable, but the world looks like it came straight out of the 90's.

But you already have your opinions, so.... think what you want I'm just explaining my point of view.

deus ex fan
21st Nov 2008, 21:41
I should put my flack jacket on since I'm about to say something that can be construed as negative against the first game...

APostlELite asks a good question but one of things you have to keep in mind is where the gaming industry was in 1998/1999 when DX1 was in development. From a production point of view, the DX1 dev team was 20 people whereas the DX3 dev team is probably four times that size (I'm not exactly sure). Then take into consideration the improvements not only in engine technology itself but also the tools and supporting software related to game development. So we can do much more today than ten years ago.

But that's just the techy side. When it comes to design, if you look at the future projections in the first game, a lot of things didn’t really fit. For a game based in 2052, we're already today seeing some technology that's more advanced than what they had. I don't have them in front of me but people here on the forums have already been sharing links to super-powered rifles, suits, artificial limbs, etc. When you look at scientific advancement and where prosthetic augmentations are heading right now, for Deus Ex 3 which takes place in 2027, I think that’s the proper timeframe for the way things could end up looking. Now, a city like Shanghai the way it is in our concept art may or may not be possible in that time frame, but don't forget we are making a game after all; but everything is grounded in reality.

well, i partially agree with this opinion.I agree with your opinion about the first game but the thing is that even in 2027 we will probably may or may not see humans which have prosthetic arms-or seeing even transhumans,i mean it's too early for scientific research to make such progress in human body even in that timeframe,2027.I think this is not for that future,it is something which will become in a more deep future where transhumans will be reality,maybe at 2050's.At that timeframe-my opinion-maybe we will see all these things of Deus Ex 3......:scratch:

but don't forget we are making a game after all; but everything is grounded in reality

Its not alibi this phrase because you make a game based on a particurlar timeframe grounded in near future earth and possible errors will make it a bad game.

Mindmute
21st Nov 2008, 21:49
What exactly are you trying to say? It's just a normal skyscraper with a lot of glass and some wind mills in between. What's so strange about that?

Absolutely nothing! I see trading centers with fully windowed floors and with windmills in between each of the towers on every street corner.


(1)Besides that, nobody will decorate his house or company like that(/1). Which is more important, because it's worse than some augs. I mean, I can live with some crazy augs (Deus Ex had some pretty stupid ones - though (2)not nearly as stupid as skull crushers or mechanical tentacles(/2) - but at least (3)the world around them was realistic and most of them did make sense)(/3),
RE1: Actually, if you look at lot of the emerging trends in design, Deus Ex3 does not look too far-fetched in it's style. There's a very good chance that by oppening any design or fashion magazine that you'll see hints of things that remind you of Deus Ex 3.

RE2: Enough with the "tentacles" already, we have no idea YET if it was just the wording in the magasine. The tentacles can be either figurative or literal. Until we know it's the latter, I'll stick to the plausible notion that they're simply mechanical wire-like extensions for rappeling/stopping your fall.
Can you link me to the "skull crusher" by the way? I might have missed that one.

RE3: DX was a great game because it was realistic, exactly, except when it wasn't. Two examples are the Spybot or the Agressive Defense augmentations, impratical, boderline impossible, even by the state of technology in DX.
Add that to the notion that it seemed as though design and architecture stopped evolving in tendencies on the 90s.
Some parts of it were NOT realistic when you take a good *UNBIASED* look at it. The game still pulled it off astoundingly and became the best game I have played since.

MaxxQ1
21st Nov 2008, 22:39
Remember how ridiculous 50s futurism looks to us now (http://www.hepcatwilly.com/Miracles-of-the-future.805.0.html). They projected all sorts of crazy advances and cultural transformations that turned out to be simply false. The reality is that you could pluck someone from the 50s and drop them in a 2008 living room (a jump of over half a CENTURY), and pretty much the only thing that would seem strange to them would be how much bigger TVs have become.

I want my flying car NOW dammit!:rasp:

Seriously though, check out some of the buildings in the movie Ultraviolet (Milla Jovovich - yum!). I think 90% of the buildings you see in that movie are real buildings, in I think, Hong Kong.

Also, check out this planned design for Moscow or Dubai (where they have plenty of money to throw into fancy-schmancy architecture): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bq-QUkE1DGM

On top of that, look under google images using the search words "Al Burj", and you see quite a few different building designs.

As for the Renaissance-look that the DX 3 team is leaning towards, has anyone seen the interiors architecture for the World Trade Center? The window arches on the ground floors of both buildings were inspired by Gothic achitecture, and that was 30 odd years ago.

What about some of the popular fashions of the '90's? Very MUCH inspired by the late 1960's - '70's hippie style (I grew up then, so I know of which I speak), and in some places in the mid to late '70's, due to the popularity of shows like Happy Days, fashion was very 1950's. Even the Art Deco period of the 1920's has made comebacks once or twice since.

To me, a corporation or individual who starts decorating/designing in a very old style, such as depicted in what we've seen so far for DX3, would be a sign of opulence and decadence - kind of like the person/corporation saying, "I've got all the money I need, so I'm gonna design/build/decorate in some extremely old style just because I can." After all, Rome got more opulent and extravagant right before it fell, and with this sort of thing being depicted in the visuals we've seen, it leads perfectly into the fall of society (as seen in DX), just on a worldwide scale.

As long as the 1980's doesn't show up again, I'll be happy (What? You guys don't have a vomiting smiley? Time to get some more emoticons, I think :D )

Igoe
21st Nov 2008, 22:53
RE3: DX was a great game because it was realistic, exactly, except when it wasn't. Two examples are the Spybot or the Agressive Defense augmentations, impratical, boderline impossible, even by the state of technology in DX.
Add that to the notion that it seemed as though design and architecture stopped evolving in tendencies on the 90s.
Some parts of it were NOT realistic when you take a good *UNBIASED* look at it. The game still pulled it off astoundingly and became the best game I have played since.

Yup, I pretty much agree with that, it's always bothered me that people refer to "realism" as one of DX1's strengths.

What made Deus Ex 1 shine was the attention to detail, not realism. They created their own world, modeled after our own, then paid close attention to detail giving LIFE to their world. It wasn't that it was realistic, it was that it was fleshed out. Immersive. DX3 will create its own world and, hopefully, will flesh it out just as much as DX1 was.

The best games are the ones where you can feel the creators' soul in the presentation. To see those little inside jokes floating around the office that make it into data cubes, to see art on a wall not because its calculated to draw your eye, but because the guy designing the level liked it. To see books on a shelf chosen because somebody on the staff took the time to select them, not grab random ones.

As long as DX3 sucks me in and gives me an interesting world to explore, I will be just as engaged as I was with DX1

GmanPro
22nd Nov 2008, 03:02
The problem is that most of these fantastic futuristic buildings people are designing aren't going to be all over the place. You'll see maybe 1 or 2 in each major city, so the majority of skyscrapers are still going to look like the ones from the 90's. And if there is some sort of economic global meltdown like has been suggested before, then in 2052 the buildings would still look like the ones from the 90's. So therefore, DX1 was all kinds of realistic.

MaxxQ1
22nd Nov 2008, 03:29
The problem is that most of these fantastic futuristic buildings people are designing aren't going to be all over the place. You'll see maybe 1 or 2 in each major city, so the majority of skyscrapers are still going to look like the ones from the 90's. And if there is some sort of economic global meltdown like has been suggested before, then in 2052 the buildings would still look like the ones from the 90's. So therefore, DX1 was all kinds of realistic.

Unless you live in Dubai. I went to a couple of the sites that the Google image search snagged the pics from, and apparently, Dubai has five superscrapers under construction, and plan to add at least seven more, making it the home of not only the tallest (at 800 meters, or half a mile), but also the home of the most "tallest" freestanding constructions.

I agree that, for the most part, buildings will be similar to what we see nowadays, but that doesn't mean that the game can't include some "modern" architecture. Besides, I could see the excuse being used that because of the modernity of the newer designs, they require more maintenance, and when the collapse happened, they were the first ones abandoned to deteriorate, causing them to be possibly torn down to prevent deaths of those living/working in the vicinity of them.

So far, I like what I see from EM regarding the look of the architecture and interior design, but even so, we've only seen a very tiny bit of that, and who's to say the rest of the game will have entirely that look? The buildings themselves may be normal (to us) looking on the outside, but it's fairly cheap and easy for the owners/renters to change up interiors to suit the fashion of the times. I'm old enough to remember that damn near every fast food joint used to be all stainless steel. Can you imagine a restaurant doing that nowadays?

Styles change, and sometimes, the more things change, the more they stay the same. So who's to say the Renaissance look might not be an influence in another 18-19 years? We've already had Art Deco, Gothic, and other influences have a resurgence, and the plantations of the South of the 19th century were evocative of Roman column-type architecture, so why shouldn't an underrepresented time frame make a bit of a modern comeback?

Think of the irony though: The Renaissance was a rebirth of learning, of culture and art, and helped get Europe out of the Dark Ages. As a design style in the DX3 world, it will be presaging a fall towards the Modern Dark Age of DX.

spm1138
22nd Nov 2008, 07:48
The problem is that most of these fantastic futuristic buildings people are designing aren't going to be all over the place. You'll see maybe 1 or 2 in each major city, so the majority of skyscrapers are still going to look like the ones from the 90's. And if there is some sort of economic global meltdown like has been suggested before, then in 2052 the buildings would still look like the ones from the 90's. So therefore, DX1 was all kinds of realistic.

I dunno. Most major cities are covered in cranes and undergoing cell mitosis at a rate of knots. If they want to totally redo a city they could always say it got bombed (like Manchester).

GmanPro
22nd Nov 2008, 08:46
Maybe Shanghai, but I don't see Detroit turning into a super-metropolis of brand-new futuristic skyscrapers within the next 20 years. Cities like Dubai will obviously be full of such buildings but I doubt that they would be all over the place.

gamer0004
22nd Nov 2008, 10:44
Absolutely nothing! I see trading centers with fully windowed floors and with windmills in between each of the towers on every street corner.


RE1: Actually, if you look at lot of the emerging trends in design, Deus Ex3 does not look too far-fetched in it's style. There's a very good chance that by oppening any design or fashion magazine that you'll see hints of things that remind you of Deus Ex 3.

RE2: Enough with the "tentacles" already, we have no idea YET if it was just the wording in the magasine. The tentacles can be either figurative or literal. Until we know it's the latter, I'll stick to the plausible notion that they're simply mechanical wire-like extensions for rappeling/stopping your fall.
Can you link me to the "skull crusher" by the way? I might have missed that one.

RE3: DX was a great game because it was realistic, exactly, except when it wasn't. Two examples are the Spybot or the Agressive Defense augmentations, impratical, boderline impossible, even by the state of technology in DX.
Add that to the notion that it seemed as though design and architecture stopped evolving in tendencies on the 90s.
Some parts of it were NOT realistic when you take a good *UNBIASED* look at it. The game still pulled it off astoundingly and became the best game I have played since.

Did you read what I posted?
I said that Deus Ex had some pretty unrealistic augs and that was pretty stupid - and they were often criticized as being too unrealistic. But right now every single aug in DX3 is stupid.
Besides, in Deus Ex they were technically not possible to make, but if it was they would've been produced because they are very useful. Skulol crushers and tentacles aren't. And how can you keep saying that it might've been a magazine who interpreted it wrong if literally every single article mentiones them?

About Dubai, it's nice to see - again - that some new futuristic (for some) looking structres are used as "proof" that in 20 years about everything is possible.
The Dubai sky scraper is just an advancement in sky scraper technology (:rasp:). It's just two smaller buildings which are not square, instead of what we've seen so far, connected with some bridges with wind mills. What's so strange about that? I mean, it looks good and they have the money, the technology has existed for years.
And yet it is very special because it doesn't look exactly like the normal skyscrapers. If we compare that to DX3... People would probably die because of the shock...

Now, if we look at the DX3 style: it will never happen, because nobody likes it. Except for some GitS and Blade runner and Deus Ex fans. I'm a Deus Ex fan and I like the looks, but even then I won't ever decorate my house like that.
I mean, renaissance style in fashion is possible (I don't think it will happen (in 20 years), but it's possible). But that doesn't mean that suddenly all buildings are torn down and replaced by rennaissance/gothic/cyberpunk combination styled buildings! Not just because (most) people don't like it, but because it would be way too expensive. The world doesn't change that much. Most buildings of 20 years back are still there, even some of 50 years back, and new buildings don't even differ that much of the older ones.

And another thing: how many skyscrapers did we see in Deus Ex? Oh, were it like... none? The only thing we saw was in New York, some buildings very far away. It was such low detail that you can't really make out how everything looks (at http://www.planetdeusex.com/ the image is used in the layout, so if you don't know, please go see it).
The rest of the building were all quite low (Hong Kong: no skyscrapers except perhaps for the VL building but you didn't see that from the outside so we don't know, New York: appartments). And there was a crisis situation there, so it is only natural that most buildings weren't replaced, and before that time most buildings wouldn't have been replaced because they were still just fine.

deus ex fan
22nd Nov 2008, 12:40
Did you read what I posted?
I said that Deus Ex had some pretty unrealistic augs and that was pretty stupid - and they were often criticized as being too unrealistic. But right now every single aug in DX3 is stupid.
Besides, in Deus Ex they were technically not possible to make, but if it was they would've been produced because they are very useful. Skulol crushers and tentacles aren't. And how can you keep saying that it might've been a magazine who interpreted it wrong if literally every single article mentiones them?

i dont care about augs:) .


About Dubai, it's nice to see - again - that some new futuristic (for some) looking structres are used as "proof" that in 20 years about everything is possible.
The Dubai sky scraper is just an advancement in sky scraper technology (:rasp:). It's just two smaller buildings which are not square, instead of what we've seen so far, connected with some bridges with wind mills. What's so strange about that? I mean, it looks good and they have the money, the technology has existed for years.
And yet it is very special because it doesn't look exactly like the normal skyscrapers. If we compare that to DX3... People would probably die because of the shock...

when every structure or at least buildings in some places of the world look futuristic,that does not mean that in the future all the major cities of earth will be like New Shangai of Deus Ex 3.Its something which might happen at that time.:scratch:


Now, if we look at the DX3 style: it will never happen, because nobody likes it. Except for some GitS and Blade runner and Deus Ex fans. I'm a Deus Ex fan and I like the looks, but even then I won't ever decorate my house like that.
I mean, renaissance style in fashion is possible (I don't think it will happen (in 20 years), but it's possible). But that doesn't mean that suddenly all buildings are torn down and replaced by rennaissance/gothic/cyberpunk combination styled buildings! Not just because (most) people don't like it, but because it would be way too expensive. The world doesn't change that much. Most buildings of 20 years back are still there, even some of 50 years back, and new buildings don't even differ that much of the older ones.

DX3 style might become a reality but in a not so near future which DX3 plot take place....:scratch:


And another thing: how many skyscrapers did we see in Deus Ex? Oh, were it like... none? The only thing we saw was in New York, some buildings very far away. It was such low detail that you can't really make out how everything looks (at http://www.planetdeusex.com/ the image is used in the layout, so if you don't know, please go see it).
The rest of the building were all quite low (Hong Kong: no skyscrapers except perhaps for the VL building but you didn't see that from the outside so we don't know, New York: appartments). And there was a crisis situation there, so it is only natural that most buildings weren't replaced, and before that time most buildings wouldn't have been replaced because they were still just fine.

you have right in this but i have to mention an exception about the existence of exterior view of the VL building in Hong Kong.I think that everyone can see VL building from outside.If i dont make a mistake there is a building in the temple area which is somewhat curvy.That building is Versalife.If someone has a worry about that,why this particurlar building is possible VL,let me justify it.

spm1138
22nd Nov 2008, 14:26
Nothing I've seen in DX3 concept art would look wildly out of place on any blog featuring current building projects tbh.

They haven't got giant floating orbs suspended on columns of flickering energy or anything.

As futurist predictions go it looks on the modest side for a 50 year timescale because I've yet to see anything in the art I couldn't see someone starting right after the current recession ends.

DX1 didn't really make an effort in this regard. The art was one of the slightly weaker areas if you ask me. Apparently they borrowed artists from other Ion Storm projects for a bunch of stuff.
To be fair most of the game did take place in slums or industrial looking areas but I'd say the fault here was with DX1 for not having the ambition rather than with DX3 for having some ambition.

Also note that we haven't seen the slums in DX3 yet.

We've seen a two tier city with an underlayer of slums but no art of that yet.

If they stick with the Bladerunner / GiTS 2 art direction we can expect some really squalorey squalor.

Yargo
22nd Nov 2008, 17:35
Nothing I've seen in DX3 concept art would look wildly out of place on any blog featuring current building projects tbh.

They haven't got giant floating orbs suspended on columns of flickering energy or anything.

As futurist predictions go it looks on the modest side for a 50 year timescale because I've yet to see anything in the art I couldn't see someone starting right after the current recession ends.

DX1 didn't really make an effort in this regard. The art was one of the slightly weaker areas if you ask me. Apparently they borrowed artists from other Ion Storm projects for a bunch of stuff.
To be fair most of the game did take place in slums or industrial looking areas but I'd say the fault here was with DX1 for not having the ambition rather than with DX3 for having some ambition.

Also note that we haven't seen the slums in DX3 yet.

We've seen a two tier city with an underlayer of slums but no art of that yet.

If they stick with the Bladerunner / GiTS 2 art direction we can expect some really squalorey squalor.

There are the sewer shots. :D

Jerion
22nd Nov 2008, 18:27
^^ Yes.

I think we need to step back a little from the screenshots and realize that we haven't really seen the darker, more run-down areas yet. :)

Mindmute
22nd Nov 2008, 18:56
Did you read what I posted?
I said that Deus Ex had some pretty unrealistic augs and that was pretty stupid - and they were often criticized as being too unrealistic. But right now every single aug in DX3 is stupid.
Besides, in Deus Ex they were technically not possible to make, but if it was they would've been produced because they are very useful. Skulol crushers and tentacles aren't. And how can you keep saying that it might've been a magazine who interpreted it wrong if literally every single article mentiones them?

Okay, so you start by saying Deus Ex is unrealistic. But you like it right?
And now you say you're not liking Deus Ex3 because it's unrealistic too? With minimal info if the things that made you like Deus Ex will be there or not?
That my friend deffies all common sense. Either I am reading it wrong or you are expressing yourself wrong.

I did not say the magazine interpreted it wrong, I just said we might have done it ourselves. And I was under the impression that only a few actually talk about that "Bungee Jump" Aug, and only the one that has been going around this forum actually said 'Tentacles'. Please quote your sources for the other mentions of tentacles or a 'skull crusher' because, like I said I might have missed those.


And every single Aug is stupid? Are you implying we have access to information about every single Aug? If so please quote that too, because as far as I knew, we only read about a handful out of 20ish so far.



About Dubai, it's nice to see - again - that some new futuristic (for some) looking structres are used as "proof" that in 20 years about everything is possible.
The Dubai sky scraper is just an advancement in sky scraper technology (:rasp:). It's just two smaller buildings which are not square, instead of what we've seen so far, connected with some bridges with wind mills. What's so strange about that? I mean, it looks good and they have the money, the technology has existed for years.
And yet it is very special because it doesn't look exactly like the normal skyscrapers. If we compare that to DX3... People would probably die because of the shock...

Please read an architecture magazine about emerging trends in building design, before posting something like that. You'll find buildings a lot more shocking than here.

I haven't seen anything a lot more shocking than that particular skyscraper in the DX3 screens so far.
Please, understand the implications of making a structure with that shape and those quirks, before saying "it's just two buildings connected with windmills".



Now, if we look at the DX3 style: it will never happen, because nobody likes it. Except for some GitS and Blade runner and Deus Ex fans. I'm a Deus Ex fan and I like the looks, but even then I won't ever decorate my house like that.
I mean, renaissance style in fashion is possible (I don't think it will happen (in 20 years), but it's possible). But that doesn't mean that suddenly all buildings are torn down and replaced by rennaissance/gothic/cyberpunk combination styled buildings! Not just because (most) people don't like it, but because it would be way too expensive. The world doesn't change that much. Most buildings of 20 years back are still there, even some of 50 years back, and new buildings don't even differ that much of the older ones.


Firstly, Nobody likes it? I'd hate to be repetitive, but please read a magazine about emerging trends in design before you say something like that.

Secondly, the old buildings are still there, but when you say the new ones aren't so different you are utterly wrong, my friend. If you want a concrete example of a place that's not too futuristic but still proves this, look for pictures of Lisbon, Portugal: look at the Pombalina area and then at the Oriente area.

To finish, we've seen what? Less than 10 screens of buildings. And from 10screens you assume there are going to be no run down areas or old buildings?



And another thing: how many skyscrapers did we see in Deus Ex? Oh, were it like... none? The only thing we saw was in New York, some buildings very far away. It was such low detail that you can't really make out how everything looks (at http://www.planetdeusex.com/ the image is used in the layout, so if you don't know, please go see it).
The rest of the building were all quite low (Hong Kong: no skyscrapers except perhaps for the VL building but you didn't see that from the outside so we don't know, New York: appartments). And there was a crisis situation there, so it is only natural that most buildings weren't replaced, and before that time most buildings wouldn't have been replaced because they were still just fine.

While maps in DX were huge we saw an incredibly small portion of the world and the cities where they happen. The Hong Kong area was a market area, Liberty Island is a scenic location (and DX's one doesn't even fit in that well with the real one) and Hell's Kitchen, even today is not an area where you expect to find a skycraper.
If all the world in DX were like the tiny portions of it that we saw, then quite frankly the world in DX would have been flawed, wrong and unrealistic. The presence of a skyscraper does not make an argument for Deus Ex3 being unrealistic in any way, so I fail to see your logic in making that long rant about it.

Nevermind that a possible reason for the lack of skyscrapers might have been the limitations of the engine used. They did after all have to cut out the part of the skyline NY that has the WTC, because of limitations like those.

ZylonBane
22nd Nov 2008, 21:10
All I know for sure is that if I see any NPCs walking around wearing those awful neo-renaissance puffy shirts, I'm going to have a very hard time not killing every single one of them.

deus ex fan
23rd Nov 2008, 03:14
lets say my opinon.I will not say that i agree or disagree.Just my opinion.....

Spector with DX1 tried to show us how something futuristic would look like in our days or when future blend with our reality,and this made it without changing e.g the building's look or other things.Its a Cyberpunk game of course but also grounded to nowadays if realize someone what i mean.I think it was a personal Spector's perspective on cyberpunk.A kind of cyberpunk set in today earth or at least some years ahead of our time.I think that was the concept,to make it believable,without put sci-fi stuff.And i think he did it.

DX3 concept is another "chapter".The whole DX3 is a giant leap into deep future trying to present a not so fictious nightmarish world of near future earth e.g New Shangai,Asian setting which is a basic element of cyberpunk genre.Speaking about cyberpunk literature,DX3 art seems very close to cyberpunk novels,a little bit more close than of DX1.DX3 has all these things for someone to define it as the most perfect depiction of cyberpunk-i think.

futuristic depiction of New Shangai is amazing:eek:

Shangai (http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthias79/3014635865/sizes/l/) today

Mindmute
23rd Nov 2008, 12:48
All I know for sure is that if I see any NPCs walking around wearing those awful neo-renaissance puffy shirts, I'm going to have a very hard time not killing every single one of them.

Well, in all honesty, I can relate to that.
If only the society's elite wears that sort of thing though (which would probably be the reality) I wouldn't mind so much.

AaronJ
23rd Nov 2008, 16:10
All I know for sure is that if I see any NPCs walking around wearing those awful neo-renaissance puffy shirts, I'm going to have a very hard time not killing every single one of them.

DAMMIT, I forgot about those...


Anyway, EM is sounding a lot like the team behind the new Star Trek movie..."a few continuity errors are forgivable to make a good film". I can't even believe how stupid that is...

jordan_a
23rd Nov 2008, 16:11
DX3 is set in 2027, so how would it look more future than 2052? I'm am very confused?!:mad2:If you were the developers, you'd certainly look at what DX1 looks like but would you consider it sacred, untouchable? Even in DX1 is a great game, thank god it is not intangible, and back then they made mistakes too.

AaronJ
23rd Nov 2008, 16:18
This also brings up the good ol' friend of the forums...

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w234/GlobalNode/RemakeHorse.png

They could do it, although it would take A LOT more effort.

ZylonBane
23rd Nov 2008, 16:40
This weekend I've been replaying Half-Life 2, and have been reminded once again how absolutely perfectly Valve understood what people want in a sequel: more of the same. Instead of trying to "modernize" or "fix" or otherwise change the gameplay, they just took what was already there and refined the hell out of it. And people loved it, and they made millions.

Meanwhile, back in Deus Ex land... sigh...

jordan_a
23rd Nov 2008, 16:59
Why a horse? ^^

El_Bel
23rd Nov 2008, 17:12
If you were the developers, you'd certainly look at what DX1 looks like but would you consider it sacred, untouchable? Even in DX1 is a great game, thank god it is not intangible, and back then they made mistakes too.

The atmosphere is a core value of deus ex. Deus Ex world is our world, just a bit dirtier. If they change that they might as well change the name and write "Inspired by Deus Ex" on the back cover! I mean from what i see from the pictures it's a completely different world. Maybe its closer to reality but its far away from Do Sex. Deus Ex intentionally chose to be unrealistic to give the players a feeling of familiarity.

I blame the new style on Canada!!

jordan_a
23rd Nov 2008, 17:17
Basically what you're saying is: Since DX3 doesn't look like DX1, why calling it Deus Ex?

You should keep in mind that they're still pretty early in developement. I saw the game running and it was contemporary-ish (not sure about that one) to my mind.

ZylonBane
23rd Nov 2008, 18:14
Deus Ex intentionally chose to be unrealistic to give the players a feeling of familiarity.
The concept you're mutilating is called "verisimilitude".

And I disagree anyway. Mainstream architecture, fashion, and society simply DO NOT change quickly. The New York of today looks largely the same as it did a hundred years ago.

spm1138
23rd Nov 2008, 18:30
http://www.svvs.org/genpics7/1908_Zust_New_York_to_Paris.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2363/2204722755_ca21b92d61.jpg?v=0

(BIG)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Madison_square_new_york_1908.jpg

(BIG)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/2/22/20080519112232!New_York_City_at_night_HDR.jpg

(BIG)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2271/2251051148_d44113e1e4_o.jpg

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/01/14/JTPANTS_narrowweb__300x428,0.jpg

ZylonBane
23rd Nov 2008, 18:58
And predictably, someone dredges up pictures intentionally selected to demonstrate differences, perhaps genuinely convinced that they're making a point.

spm1138
23rd Nov 2008, 19:13
I'm more taking the mick than making a point.

gamer0004
23rd Nov 2008, 19:24
Okay, so you start by saying Deus Ex is unrealistic. But you like it right?
And now you say you're not liking Deus Ex3 because it's unrealistic too? With minimal info if the things that made you like Deus Ex will be there or not?
That my friend deffies all common sense. Either I am reading it wrong or you are expressing yourself wrong.

Why is it so hard to read :scratch: ?

I said that, despite some unrealistic elements in DX, it was still a great game. Bu right now, all the augs so far released by EM are unrealistic.



I did not say the magazine interpreted it wrong, I just said we might have done it ourselves. And I was under the impression that only a few actually talk about that "Bungee Jump" Aug, and only the one that has been going around this forum actually said 'Tentacles'. Please quote your sources for the other mentions of tentacles or a 'skull crusher' because, like I said I might have missed those.
And every single Aug is stupid? Are you implying we have access to information about every single Aug? If so please quote that too, because as far as I knew, we only read about a handful out of 20ish so far.


Please read the Deus Ex 3 information thread for sources. I believe it was mentioned in PCZone UK, EDGE, some French magazine and a Belgian magazine. I'm sure about PCZone and PCGameplay (the Belgian one).



Please read an architecture magazine about emerging trends in building design, before posting something like that. You'll find buildings a lot more shocking than here..

Shocking is something different than "unrealistic". Not within a hundred years will people design houses like that. People. Con't. Like. It. It's depressing, too small, too expensive, too dark, not practical enough...



I haven't seen anything a lot more shocking than that particular skyscraper in the DX3 screens so far.
Please, understand the implications of making a structure with that shape and those quirks, before saying "it's just two buildings connected with windmills".


So far the outside of the DX3 buidling don't look so bad, no. But you do have to realize that the city is completely differen from what it is now (even though it might not differ much) and it would be such a conincidence if Shanghai would decide to destroy everything and build a new and way worse city from the ground up...



Firstly, Nobody likes it? I'd hate to be repetitive, but please read a magazine about emerging trends in design before you say something like that.
.
No. Nobody wants to have dark rooms like that, with no places to store tuff or to put things down, with very thick iron walls which are very expensive and impracitcal and noisy, on which you can't even hang a painting because you can't simply drill a hole in it.



Secondly, the old buildings are still there, but when you say the new ones aren't so different you are utterly wrong, my friend. If you want a concrete example of a place that's not too futuristic but still proves this, look for pictures of Lisbon, Portugal: look at the Pombalina area and then at the Oriente area.


No, those are all new buildings, though similar to what is already there.



To finish, we've seen what? Less than 10 screens of buildings. And from 10screens you assume there are going to be no run down areas or old buildings?


And all the images are bad except for one or two. And it's a bit more than 10 (if you look for them)... The whole style is stupid and won't happen. But yeah, Eidos Montral would really be pathetic if they weren't even able to create just one or two acceptable images...



While maps in DX were huge we saw an incredibly small portion of the world and the cities where they happen. The Hong Kong area was a market area, Liberty Island is a scenic location (and DX's one doesn't even fit in that well with the real one) and Hell's Kitchen, even today is not an area where you expect to find a skycraper.
If all the world in DX were like the tiny portions of it that we saw, then quite frankly the world in DX would have been flawed, wrong and unrealistic. The presence of a skyscraper does not make an argument for Deus Ex3 being unrealistic in any way, so I fail to see your logic in making that long rant about it.


What a coincidence, in DX we simply only saw precisely all the old-fashioned buildings, while in DX3 we simply happen to see only the most futuristic looking ones? Please...



Nevermind that a possible reason for the lack of skyscrapers might have been the limitations of the engine used. They did after all have to cut out the part of the skyline NY that has the WTC, because of limitations like those.

Yes, and didn't it turn out great?*
Either way, I don't care if the engine was crap or not, if that was the style of Deus Ex and DX3 is a prequel to that it should have the same style or at least make sense within the bounds set by Deus Ex. It's no excuse to simply do whatever you like however stupid or conflicting.

*That was simply a problem of some texture size kind of thing, I should know what it's called but I forgot.
And it doesn't matter that DX had so few skyscrapers, I'm not saying that because there weren't any there weren't any supposed to be in DX, the player simply only visited areas where they wouldn't be (but we did get some "hints").

Yargo
23rd Nov 2008, 21:43
No. Nobody wants to have dark rooms like that, with no places to store tuff or to put things down, with very thick iron walls which are very expensive and impracitcal and noisy, on which you can't even hang a painting because you can't simply drill a hole in it.

No where to store things? :scratch:

GmanPro
23rd Nov 2008, 21:47
You could use magnets to hang pictures up on the walls :thumbsup:

imported_van_HellSing
23rd Nov 2008, 21:55
This weekend I've been replaying Half-Life 2, and have been reminded once again how absolutely perfectly Valve understood what people want in a sequel: more of the same. Instead of trying to "modernize" or "fix" or otherwise change the gameplay, they just took what was already there and refined the hell out of it.

What?

As for people loving it, my initial reaction to HL2 was "AWESOME!". However, once the shock and novelty wore off, I discovered I'm liking it less and less. Since HL2's release, I finished HL1 5 or 6 times. I only finished HL2 twice, including the initial playthrough, and I'm not sure I want to play it again ever, unless someone creates some incredible mod.

GmanPro
23rd Nov 2008, 21:59
That's incredible dude. How could you not love Half Life 2? It goes into the top ten best game of all time in my book. Have you played episode 1 or 2? If not, then you need to go do that.

Half Life 1 was awesome. I think I beat it about 12 times. Opposing Force was almost better tho imo, but it was just a little bit too short. I'm still waiting for Valve to make a OppForce Source or something. I wanna know what happens to Adrian Shephard!

Mindmute
23rd Nov 2008, 22:04
Why is it so hard to read :scratch: ?

I said that, despite some unrealistic elements in DX, it was still a great game. Bu right now, all the augs so far released by EM are unrealistic.

There it is again!

You claim DX's Augs were unrealistic, but it was still a great game. Then in the next sentence you say that DX3's Augs are unrealistic and that's why they're bad.
If they could be unrealistic in the first game and still have the game turn out great, why can't they be unrealistic in this one and have it turn out great aswell?



Please read the Deus Ex 3 information thread for sources. I believe it was mentioned in PCZone UK, EDGE, some French magazine and a Belgian magazine. I'm sure about PCZone and PCGameplay (the Belgian one).


I happen to be quite short on time, but the parts of the articles I was able to check did *not* mention the word tentacles other than the one from PCZone.
Mind directly quoting them? If you know where they are it should be trivial to cut and paste (please note, I'm not saying you're not right on this point, I am merely asking for the articles you've been reading).



Shocking is something different than "unrealistic". Not within a hundred years will people design houses like that. People. Con't. Like. It. It's depressing, too small, too expensive, too dark, not practical enough...


It's cyberpunk.
If it wasn't dark and depressing, you can be sure you'd be here complaining about that in exchange.




So far the outside of the DX3 buidling don't look so bad, no. But you do have to realize that the city is completely differen from what it is now (even though it might not differ much) and it would be such a conincidence if Shanghai would decide to destroy everything and build a new and way worse city from the ground up...


Liberty Island, Battery Park and the Champs Elisés from DX1 were also quite different from their real world counterparts. There was streamlining for gameplay, stylising, etc.
Let the artists have their way with Shaghai, if it becomes a vibrant place that makes a memorable part of the game, then I don't see the problem with it being utterly different from real life.
If it ends up wrongly done and boring or too cliché, then count on me for the rioting. ;)


No. Nobody wants to have dark rooms like that, with no places to store tuff or to put things down, with very thick iron walls which are very expensive and impracitcal and noisy, on which you can't even hang a painting because you can't simply drill a hole in it.

The inside pics I've seen remind me of some lofts.
They don't make pratical houses for most people, but they are actually not that bad..
They are noisy, often dark, and have thick walls, yet people still live in them.
If this happens in real life, why not let something similar happen in Deus Ex3 and let it further reflect the grittiness of the world, the idea that past the surface things aren't so clean any more.



You could use magnets to hang pictures up on the walls :thumbsup:
I do, they even sell those types of magnets at a "A-Very-Well-Known-Sweddish-Furniture-Shop-Whose-Name-Starts-With-An-I (Avoided blatant advertising, but phew that is a mouthful to say, try it ;))



No, those are all new buildings, though similar to what is already there.

Does it say that in the magasines?



And all the images are bad except for one or two. And it's a bit more than 10 (if you look for them)... The whole style is stupid and won't happen. But yeah, Eidos Montral would really be pathetic if they weren't even able to create just one or two acceptable images...


The style is actually one of the truest representations of cyberpunk that I've seen, it's utterly reminiscent of Blade Runner and the like.
To me, if it is cyberpunk, then it fits in well with DX.



What a coincidence, in DX we simply only saw precisely all the old-fashioned buildings, while in DX3 we simply happen to see only the most futuristic looking ones? Please...


No, not a coincidence, a story-telling element, it showed you right in your face, that the world as we know it, can become very fubar, very soon.
It was dark, gritty and... Hey! Wait... weren't those the aspects of the DX3 buildings you were criticizing earlier?



I'm not saying that because there weren't any there weren't any supposed to be in DX, the player simply only visited areas where they wouldn't be (but we did get some "hints").

This quote seems to conflict with the one above.





ps:I am not trying to be an arse here, I'm sorry if I'm passing myself off that way, I just very seriously feel that people are now complaining for the very sake of complaining.
So far I haven't seen anything in DX3 that doesn't scream Cyberpunk or that makes me feel it doesn't really belong in the DX world (other than autohealing).

imported_van_HellSing
23rd Nov 2008, 22:08
I don't know. The gameplay in HL2 just doesn't appeal to me:

-the feeling of being constantly on rails is more prevalent than HL1 actually, despite HL2 being set largely in outdoor areas (maybe because of that?).

-the AI is somehow dumber than the AI from HL1 (my "favourite" part is when I shoot a Combine soldier in the groin repeatedly from where he can't see me, and he just stands there and groans).

-most weapons don't feel fun to shoot, probably to make people use the gimmicky one.

GmanPro
23rd Nov 2008, 22:18
I thought the AI was some of the best I've ever seen, at least for 2004 . I loved when they would form up into small groups and try to surround me when I tried to barricade myself in the upper floor of an abandoned house.

Plucking grenades out of their hands right as they are about to throw them, and then shooting them right back at them is always fun. :thumbsup:

DXeXodus
24th Nov 2008, 05:38
I think it should be fairly easy to see that there is a massive amount of "old-style" areas in Deus Ex 3. And a fair amount of modern/New areas. I don't see how people can say that it is too futuristic. It is an artistic vision and representation of what the future looks like. I, for one, have not seen the future (maybe some of you have:) ). But I am pretty sure that things will look quite advanced and at the same time there will still be many instances where we can see elements from the past. Deus Ex 3 is not even coming anywhere near the "star-Trekiness" of Invisible War. That, to me, is extremely obvious.

GmanPro
24th Nov 2008, 05:44
I don't see the - its too futuristic - argument here. It looks fine imo. We are capable of building cities that look that way right now. It wouldn't be entirely practical to do it today but maybe in 20 years it will be.

deus ex fan
25th Nov 2008, 00:54
There it is again!

You claim DX's Augs were unrealistic, but it was still a great game. Then in the next sentence you say that DX3's Augs are unrealistic and that's why they're bad.
If they could be unrealistic in the first game and still have the game turn out great, why can't they be unrealistic in this one and have it turn out great aswell?



I happen to be quite short on time, but the parts of the articles I was able to check did *not* mention the word tentacles other than the one from PCZone.
Mind directly quoting them? If you know where they are it should be trivial to cut and paste (please note, I'm not saying you're not right on this point, I am merely asking for the articles you've been reading).



It's cyberpunk.
If it wasn't dark and depressing, you can be sure you'd be here complaining about that in exchange.




Liberty Island, Battery Park and the Champs Elisés from DX1 were also quite different from their real world counterparts. There was streamlining for gameplay, stylising, etc.
Let the artists have their way with Shaghai, if it becomes a vibrant place that makes a memorable part of the game, then I don't see the problem with it being utterly different from real life.
If it ends up wrongly done and boring or too cliché, then count on me for the rioting. ;)



The inside pics I've seen remind me of some lofts.
They don't make pratical houses for most people, but they are actually not that bad..
They are noisy, often dark, and have thick walls, yet people still live in them.
If this happens in real life, why not let something similar happen in Deus Ex3 and let it further reflect the grittiness of the world, the idea that past the surface things aren't so clean any more.



I do, they even sell those types of magnets at a "A-Very-Well-Known-Sweddish-Furniture-Shop-Whose-Name-Starts-With-An-I (Avoided blatant advertising, but phew that is a mouthful to say, try it ;))


Does it say that in the magasines?



The style is actually one of the truest representations of cyberpunk that I've seen, it's utterly reminiscent of Blade Runner and the like.
To me, if it is cyberpunk, then it fits in well with DX.



No, not a coincidence, a story-telling element, it showed you right in your face, that the world as we know it, can become very fubar, very soon.
It was dark, gritty and... Hey! Wait... weren't those the aspects of the DX3 buildings you were criticizing earlier?



This quote seems to conflict with the one above.





ps:I am not trying to be an arse here, I'm sorry if I'm passing myself off that way, I just very seriously feel that people are now complaining for the very sake of complaining.
So far I haven't seen anything in DX3 that doesn't scream Cyberpunk or that makes me feel it doesn't really belong in the DX world (other than autohealing).

these answers satisfy me.....:)

but later in this thread i'll express my own opinion about what is and what is not futuristic and how we define it....

we play with words and meanings here.....:nut:

DX3 would be the blade runner of the 21st century.

Dead-Eye
25th Nov 2008, 03:03
We've been over this a zillion times...

by 2052, large amounts of terrorist attacks as well as the mass spread of the Gray Death ravaged the world's economy. During DX3, there was a huge technological revolution and artistic style was heavily emphasized. This created a huge dynamic and differing styles (newish vs. dark).

That still makes no scenes. If the world went through a Renaissance of architecture and style Deus Ex would look the same but unmaintained. I like the idea that this Renaissance was happening in other parts of the world excluding the Americas and most of Europe. Hong Kong has always been a little different then the rest of china so it is possible that I would stay the same too. Most likely the majority of the game takes place in one city that did go through a Renaissance. MJ12 would need to have places for their loyal populous to live and most likely these places would be beautiful.

imported_van_HellSing
25th Nov 2008, 13:28
So far we've seen:

- Shanghai, which looks rather over the top. But... it's Shanghai. It's growing at an exponential rate right now, with a crapload of money thrown into it and eccentric designers getting large contracts. And it's in China ffs. Everything seems possible there.

- Montreal(?). Now tell me, aside from some stress on renewable energy and one unusual looking building, what is so damn futuristic about that pic?

- Labs, clinics, which look somewhat futuristic and sterile. Just like, you know, labs and clinics.

- A Blade Runner - like apartment with some fancy windows, a retro - looking office.

- Some usual sewers.

- Preposterous high-class fashion. Something which certainly doesn't exist today, of course. :rolleyes:

- A bunch of mech-augs (also descriptions). Some are more over-the-top than DX stuff, but consider two things:
1. DX1's nano-augs were specifically designed to allow agents to blend in better in a populace opposed to over-the top mechanical augs.
2. The mech augs we did see in DX1 were quite certainly limited by the game engine and ability of the model animators. Then again, do consider the MJ12 commandos.

spm1138
25th Nov 2008, 14:22
2. The mech augs we did see in DX1 were quite certainly limited by the game engine and ability of the model animators. Then again, do consider the MJ12 commandos.

How do you mean?

They're a good looking model (actually they're one of the best looking models) but they don't do anything that out of character for the engine.

Their attack animation is running towards you with their arms outstretched. Not a million miles away from Skaarj.

imported_van_HellSing
25th Nov 2008, 14:31
I meant them as an example of heavy augmentation that does exist in DX1. The "Then again" part of the sentence implies contrast to the previous sentence, no? ;)

spm1138
25th Nov 2008, 14:32
Ahhh. Gotcha.

gamer0004
25th Nov 2008, 18:33
There it is again!

You claim DX's Augs were unrealistic, but it was still a great game. Then in the next sentence you say that DX3's Augs are unrealistic and that's why they're bad.
If they could be unrealistic in the first game and still have the game turn out great, why can't they be unrealistic in this one and have it turn out great aswell?


Okay, this time I'll higlight things to make it even easier, because apparently your brains can't handle long sentences :scratch:

I said that, "despite some unrealistic elements in DX, it was still a great game. But right now, all the augs so far released by EM are unrealistic."

You do know the difference between "some" and "all", I hope?
In DX the score was like 3/24 unrealistic augs, in DX3 it's 4/4. One is like 15% and the other 100%. That (I'll make it easy this time) is a difference of roughly 85%.

Now comes part two of the story. With DX having less unrealistic augs then DX3, it doesn't just make it better game, it's at least acceptable. Nothing is perfect, and really, I won't complain if not everything is as realistic as it could get. But it should at least be acceptable, and Deus Ex 3 is, based on what I have seen, "out of line there (JC" ;))



I happen to be quite short on time, but the parts of the articles I was able to check did *not* mention the word tentacles other than the one from PCZone.
Mind directly quoting them? If you know where they are it should be trivial to cut and paste (please note, I'm not saying you're not right on this point, I am merely asking for the articles you've been reading).


Please, if you don't have the time to read them, then don't come and ask me to scan them (because there is no other way). I don't even have a scanner. Again, please read (that alone is a good advice, but there's more: ) the DX3 general discussion thread. I think that around page 14 someone else has given a summary and he says the same. If you do happen to have the PCZone (but you apparently don't, so it would be good if you'd order it at www.myfavouritemagazines.co.uk/ so we can at least continue this discussion properly after it has arrived), it's below on page 46.



It's cyberpunk.
If it wasn't dark and depressing, you can be sure you'd be here complaining about that in exchange.


I agree. The point is, it isn't dark. It's just depressing in style which will simply not happen. Yeah, of course can parts of cities become very depressing because of bad maintenance, emptyness, criminality etc. but it will never be built to be depressing, which these houses are. Can you image?
"Let's build some nice depressing buildings, so more people will hang themselves." Yeah, those'll definately sell :rolleyes:



Liberty Island, Battery Park and the Champs Elisés from DX1 were also quite different from their real world counterparts. There was streamlining for gameplay, stylising, etc.
Let the artists have their way with Shaghai, if it becomes a vibrant place that makes a memorable part of the game, then I don't see the problem with it being utterly different from real life.
If it ends up wrongly done and boring or too cliché, then count on me for the rioting. ;)


First of all, liberty island was just smaller, but of course that was just an engine problem. And as the devs have never been to paris they didn't know what it exactly looks like. The difference, it could've looked like that, because not much had changed. But in DX3, based on what I (we) have seen, every single building in Shanghai should have been destroyed, to be replaced with newer buildings. Within 20 years.
I mean, yeah, Shanghai might grow a lot, but no city expands/evolves that much...



The inside pics I've seen remind me of some lofts.
They don't make pratical houses for most people, but they are actually not that bad..
They are noisy, often dark, and have thick walls, yet people still live in them.
If this happens in real life, why not let something similar happen in Deus Ex3 and let it further reflect the grittiness of the world, the idea that past the surface things aren't so clean any more.


I'm not saying every house is as practical as it can get. But at least it was not the main goal to be built to be impractical and depressing, and these DX3 buildings are. And if houses would be built this way, it would be slightly over budget... (that was an understatement, just to make sure...)



I do, they even sell those types of magnets at a "A-Very-Well-Known-Sweddish-Furniture-Shop-Whose-Name-Starts-With-An-I (Avoided blatant advertising, but phew that is a mouthful to say, try it ;))


Surely you don't mean IKEA? :nut:
Sure, they can be practical when, for instance, your fridge is made out of metal. But whole walls? There are only downsides to it (even in terms of money), no advantages, so it. will. never. happen.



Does it say that in the magasines?


No, but I can, like, think for myself and do some "research" (random googling <- that was a joke, just to make sure). Not a single building there looks only slightly similar to those buildings.



The style is actually one of the truest representations of cyberpunk that I've seen, it's utterly reminiscent of Blade Runner and the like.
To me, if it is cyberpunk, then it fits in well with DX.


I'd like to quote someone called Mr_Cyberpunk:


"And that's the biggest problem with Cyberpunk at the moment, its more about Over doing it on the Baditude and not enough on the philosophical stuff.. see Deus Ex and Gibson's SPRAWL trilogy (ie. Neuromancer) but also Blade Runner. The visual Aesthetics are also wrong in many cases. Deus Ex is possibly the most purest Cyberpunk I've seen because as DaveW would say "its not cyberpunk".. that's pretty much what Gibson was doing in the first place.. it was a remark on Post-Modernism in America.. it was observing Japanese impact on Western culture.. so obviously the aesthetic has to be Post-Modern- or in layman's terms "REAL and Much like Today's world"."

(FYI (this means: for your information, just to make sure), I quoted this because it reflects my opinion perfectly).



No, not a coincidence, a story-telling element, it showed you right in your face, that the world as we know it, can become very fubar, very soon.
It was dark, gritty and... Hey! Wait... weren't those the aspects of the DX3 buildings you were criticizing earlier?


It's not dark, that's the problem. Besides that, there is a difference between a game showing that the world can be ****ed up and a game creating a world that's ****ed up... just because they can. There aren't many (this is again an understatement, of course I actually mean "any leaders"; just to make sure) world leaders who can or want to ruin the world in such a devestating way...



This quote seems to conflict with the one above.


No it doesn't.

I was saying that you can't say that "according to DX the world had come to a halt" because all the skyscrapers still looked the same. I then responded saying that you can't say that, because we didn't see any in-game. Which of course doesn't mean there weren't any supposed to be in the DX "realm", you simply didn't visit "skyscraper areas". Which of course was probably due to engine restrictions, and this was a very subtle solution. I don't think anyone ever really noticed. I mean, people here are even inventing seeing skyscrapers in-game :rasp: .



ps:I am not trying to be an arse here, I'm sorry if I'm passing myself off that way, I just very seriously feel that people are now complaining for the very sake of complaining.
So far I haven't seen anything in DX3 that doesn't scream Cyberpunk or that makes me feel it doesn't really belong in the DX world (other than autohealing).

If you think I (among other people) am compaing for the sake of complaining I can't do anything to change that: it's your opinion and it's your right to tell it to other people. And I will be honest: of course my responses are very negative, even dooming whole DX3, while we can't be sure it will be so bad. But so far all their decisions are bad (in my humble (of course "humble" is not meant seriously) opinion).
And it doesn't scream "cyberpunk" (as the quote of Mr. Cyberpunk above illustrates), it just screams "w00t! Kewl! Awesome! And we call it cyberpunk because there are some similarities to what some people call cyberpunk!"

Now, if you're still saying that I am saying that DX was as unrealistic as DX3 I'm going to smash my head into my pc screen ;)

Igoe
25th Nov 2008, 19:25
Now, if you're still saying that I am saying that DX was as unrealistic as DX3 I'm going to smash my head into my pc screen ;)

Dude, you're totally saying that DX3 is as unrealistic as DX1.

















(pics or it didn't happen)

GmanPro
25th Nov 2008, 20:27
Lol, go ahead, it will be funny.

It doesn't matter if it's perfectly realistic, because I guarantee you that we aren't going to have mechanical augmentations in 20 years at all. So turn off the nerd switch and try to enjoy the game it comes out... methinks thou dost complain too much ;)

Mindmute
25th Nov 2008, 21:21
[Insert Last Post Here]

Not quoting the whole thing, because I think we'll just have to agree that we disagree.
We both seem to be using arguments the other one completely disagrees with and we're not being able to find some sort of middle ground.
All we'll be doing is quoting each other endlessly until we're both utterly fed up with the other and everyone else is fed up with us. ;)


Having said that, I'll stick my opinion, you stick to yours. Time will tell which one of us was right afterall (unless we're both wrong).





ps: when the game's out, loser buys the beers :cool:

LeatherJacket
25th Nov 2008, 21:26
The complaints over the game being unrealistic based on some bits of info have gotten way too ridiculous lately. :D

René
25th Nov 2008, 21:26
Let's just let people have their opinions without this turning into an 11 page argument!

deus ex fan
25th Nov 2008, 21:32
my opinion is this.......

DX1:A cyberpunk game grounded to our reality,seemed less sci-fi than true cyberpunk genre which is a kind of sci-fi.<<Future in our days>> i think was its concept.And i also believe that Spector tried-successfully-to present us a nightmarish world but during our days and used not something "out of this world" or something not so futuristic.He wanted to make it realistic,believable.....

i think that true cyberpunk-speaking literally-in Deus Ex started from Invisible War

DX2:It was more cyberpunk than its predecessor making a big leap in the future presented us an even more nightmarish futuristic world.The only thing that was bad it was the futurism of DX2 which tended to become almost.....sci-fi.Cyberpunk for sci-fi is an exception.DX2 universe was truly cyberpunk-at least for me.

DX3 will be-maybe-the ultimate cyberpunk/dark future videogame ever.I dont know if it will be a perfect game as DX1.But from what i've seen so far it will be one of the most atmospheric videogames ever.The nightmarish,futuristic art depiction of New Shangai is brilliant.

Another thing is about plot dates of DX.........

DX1 took place in 2050's,DX2 in 2070's,and last DX3 in 2027.....

I'll try to put them in an order which follow evolution of society and cities of the world.......

2027 for DX1

2050 for DX2

2070 for DX3

finally,i think that DX3 visuals is as futuristic as it could be.

GmanPro
25th Nov 2008, 21:32
^^
You there! ... I disagree! :D :D

just joking of course...

Yargo
25th Nov 2008, 22:28
Lol, go ahead, it will be funny.

It doesn't matter if it's perfectly realistic, because I guarantee you that we aren't going to have mechanical augmentations in 20 years at all. So turn off the nerd switch and try to enjoy the game it comes out... methinks thou dost complain too much ;)

Can I get a gut punch in if your wrong? :D

Jerion
25th Nov 2008, 22:54
Can I get a gut punch in if your wrong? :D

You get a free punch. I'll even hold him. :D

gamer0004
26th Nov 2008, 15:29
Not quoting the whole thing, because I think we'll just have to agree that we disagree.
We both seem to be using arguments the other one completely disagrees with and we're not being able to find some sort of middle ground.
All we'll be doing is quoting each other endlessly until we're both utterly fed up with the other and everyone else is fed up with us. ;)


Having said that, I'll stick my opinion, you stick to yours. Time will tell which one of us was right afterall (unless we're both wrong).





ps: when the game's out, loser buys the beers :cool:

Okay, fine with me :)

GmanPro
26th Nov 2008, 15:33
You get a free punch. I'll even hold him. :D

:rasp:

Torley
28th Nov 2008, 21:35
As has been said before, but emphasized for simplicity: go beyond thinking linearly. Certain technological advances could exponentially accelerate creativity and construction. (Witness how far the microchip's come!)

Considering this is a fictional timeline inspired by our own but with no hard basis to substantiate what's going to happen, it's not hard to swallow. :)

Spyhopping
28th Nov 2008, 21:55
You get a free punch. I'll even hold him. :D

I think he meant it in a nice way, really :rasp:

deus ex fan
29th Nov 2008, 02:17
DX3 looks as future as it should be.:)

jc_lemon_lime
29th Nov 2008, 07:06
We've been over this a zillion times...

by 2052, large amounts of terrorist attacks as well as the mass spread of the Gray Death ravaged the world's economy. During DX3, there was a huge technological revolution and artistic style was heavily emphasized. This created a huge dynamic and differing styles (newish vs. dark).

that may be, but most of the art and screens from DX3 thus far do not look like look like they're from only 19 years in the future. maybe 2227...

spm1138
6th Dec 2008, 01:35
http://www.designboom.com/tools/WPro/images/10v/dl1.jpg

http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/9/view/4726/daniel-libeskinds-green-new-york-tower.html

GmanPro
6th Dec 2008, 03:40
Cool pic. How long do you think it will take to build that?

Necros
6th Dec 2008, 07:51
So far we've seen:

- Shanghai, which looks rather over the top. But... it's Shanghai. It's growing at an exponential rate right now, with a crapload of money thrown into it and eccentric designers getting large contracts. And it's in China ffs. Everything seems possible there.
I don't think that it's really over the top. But I agree with everything else. What we've seen so far isn't too futuristic, at all. And like others said it, we've seen a very small portion of the world in DX1 and there were limitations to the engine too, so there's no proof some more futuristic-looking buildings couldn't exist. And the devs haven't really shown us a lot of DX3 yet. A tiny teaser of outdoors environments (neither of them screenshots) and that's it. There could be (and I'm sure there will be) darker, more DX1-like building, places too.


And someone mentioned the new Star Trek movie. As a Trek-fan I find the design there ridiculous... They are over the top, way over... Eidos Montreal isn't, IMHO.

K^2
6th Dec 2008, 17:54
that may be, but most of the art and screens from DX3 thus far do not look like look like they're from only 19 years in the future. maybe 2227...
You are forgetting the word "alternate". It is an alternate future, as the story of original DX begins to diverge from real world history at least a decade back from now. Some of the events required for DX might have happened, but we wouldn't know about it. Of course, by Russel's Tea Pot, we can assume they did not. So that decade becomes a few hundred years of diverging histories.

DX time line saw a beginning of economical and technological boom in the early 21st century. What we are actually seeing is a strong world-wide recession. If the state of development was the same as in the 60's and 70's, as DX predicts, instead of what we have now, the technology we see in DX3 by 2027 would be entirely reasonable. As it stands, it will take a bit longer. How much longer is anyone's guess. For all we know, we might go the way of a global nuke-out in the next few years. Then DX3 would be about right for 3027.

Laokin
6th Dec 2008, 20:34
that may be, but most of the art and screens from DX3 thus far do not look like look like they're from only 19 years in the future. maybe 2227...

Yes. You are correct. In reality there will be very few buildings actually standing that have that "Future" taste to them by 2027 (real time).

On the same page, I think most people don't realize how futuristic the first one was. Because.... we are EVER going to have nanites in your body with the capability to turn every inch of you and your clothing as well as what ever your holding in your hand, invisible.

That's too futuristic for 2050.

I explained this by saying the DX universe is obviously ahead of real life in terms of technology.

If we had commercial computers by 1980, DX had them in 1960. It's a fantasy world based on a "near future vision." This doesn't specify what time certain technology is available, this specifies what ever time line they choose will automatically be a vision of the near future. Nor do they ever imply that it follows real events. I.E. MJ12 started in the 40's for real. In DX 1 they didn't come around till 2030. This is enough to prove DX doesn't take place on the real earth. It takes place in a literary fictional fantasy interpretation of earth, where technology is the key to global domination as well as it's salvation. Stop saying "We won't have ect etc, or THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT IN DX 2027!"

What you saw in DX 1 was a small portion of the world of DX. Nobody said the whole world looked like that. Is it feasible that certain cities were built up and evolved while others didn't? Look at Japan compared to Idaho. Japan DOES look futuristic, Idaho looks rural and natural and old. You guys are saying they are messing with Continuity when there was never any indication of what the entire world was like in 2027. I.E. It wasn't written, so now they write it.... who are you to say that's not how it was?

Plus, would you find it enjoyable amongst today's games to be playing something ugly and boring compared to DX 1? If you took out the tech and dumbed it back down to a real life proportion of 2027, It would be half life. Some gadgets, and practically useless in fun gameplay sense augmentations. Imagine having an augmentation that let you let you swim faster, only problem is you have to spend 15 minutes changing your prosthetic before you jump in the water. BORING.

One can take that in numerous ways but it's only logical to assume that if all the DX games had Impossible technology then why wouldn't the third one. Even if it's a prequel, a staple of DX is impossible technology. Missing this staple the premise falls apart. AKA, it wouldn't really be a Deus Ex game.

Igoe
6th Dec 2008, 21:33
I pretty much 100% agree. As long as we don't visit a retconned area in DX3, I'm happy with the degree of tech as it applies to gameplay and immersion.

My TWO small qualm are of course holograms and invisibility. In DX1 holograms were a bulky luxury only the most affluent of facilities had. They look pretty commercial in DX3, there better be a good explanation for it.

Invisibility I also kind of have a problem with, but I guess its because EVERY BIT of a person seems to go invisible, even the hair and clothing and such. I'm happier with a mech aug agent being invisible since most of their body is mechanical and their hair and such would be synthetic, but I kinda have a problem with clothes disappearing too. Could be solved with a sort of light field that uses gravity or some such to bend the light around a sphere with the agent at the epicenter, so give the illusion of nothing there from all angles, but thats not how it was in DX1.

Anyway, semantics. Gotta have cloak in DX, otherwise its not as fun stealth wise!

deus ex fan
7th Dec 2008, 02:31
Yes. You are correct. In reality there will be very few buildings actually standing that have that "Future" taste to them by 2027 (real time).

On the same page, I think most people don't realize how futuristic the first one was. Because.... we are EVER going to have nanites in your body with the capability to turn every inch of you and your clothing as well as what ever your holding in your hand, invisible.

That's too futuristic for 2050.

I explained this by saying the DX universe is obviously ahead of real life in terms of technology.

If we had commercial computers by 1980, DX had them in 1960. It's a fantasy world based on a "near future vision." This doesn't specify what time certain technology is available, this specifies what ever time line they choose will automatically be a vision of the near future. Nor do they ever imply that it follows real events. I.E. MJ12 started in the 40's for real. In DX 1 they didn't come around till 2030. This is enough to prove DX doesn't take place on the real earth. It takes place in a literary fictional fantasy interpretation of earth, where technology is the key to global domination as well as it's salvation. Stop saying "We won't have ect etc, or THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT IN DX 2027!"

What you saw in DX 1 was a small portion of the world of DX. Nobody said the whole world looked like that. Is it feasible that certain cities were built up and evolved while others didn't? Look at Japan compared to Idaho. Japan DOES look futuristic, Idaho looks rural and natural and old. You guys are saying they are messing with Continuity when there was never any indication of what the entire world was like in 2027. I.E. It wasn't written, so now they write it.... who are you to say that's not how it was?

Plus, would you find it enjoyable amongst today's games to be playing something ugly and boring compared to DX 1? If you took out the tech and dumbed it back down to a real life proportion of 2027, It would be half life. Some gadgets, and practically useless in fun gameplay sense augmentations. Imagine having an augmentation that let you let you swim faster, only problem is you have to spend 15 minutes changing your prosthetic before you jump in the water. BORING.

One can take that in numerous ways but it's only logical to assume that if all the DX games had Impossible technology then why wouldn't the third one. Even if it's a prequel, a staple of DX is impossible technology. Missing this staple the premise falls apart. AKA, it wouldn't really be a Deus Ex game.

i agree-not totally-with this opinion.

My opinion take a different path.......

About DX1.....

I think that DX1 was/is Spector's personal vision of what near future earth would look like.An alternative approach to cyberpunk.A kind/version of cyberpunk envisioned by Spector.A really near future earth-with everything grounded in it-but simultaneously futuristic but at least not visually.Bad technology everywhere.He tried-Spector-to show us how something futuristic seem nowadays,at least in 2050's.2050 in DX1 was not a sci-fi date setting.It was a nowadays date setting.And urban backgrounds evolution for example is not appropriate to follow date order.To me at least,DX1 was semi-cyberpunk,or at least,an immature cyberpunk.He tried-Spector-to make familiar/believable to us a literary fictious in-a-not-so-distant-future society or world(he followed literary cyberpunk references of course).DX1 is/was a gloomy game with urban decay like settings.The concept of DX1 was/is totally right-i havent doubt about that.But seem less nightmarish than the world that DX3 devs try to present us......

About DX3.........

DX3 is different kind of "beast",a giant leap in the future,at least it seems to be.An almost totally nightmarish,almost decayed portrayed world where-at least in Shangai-the rich live above,the poor below.I think that DX3 concept is even more close to what cyberpunk literature depict.A totally dystopian,post apocalyptic,post-industrial world,an urban decay.All these elements are core elements of cyberpunk genre.Lets see someone dev's art depiction of how Shangai would look like in a near future......a "multi-layered" overpopulated city,a "monster" indeed,with a divided society live in it.......at least visually DX3 seems totally.....cyberpunk.

(i continue having a small argument about dates order in DX though)

Necros
7th Dec 2008, 06:45
Invisibility I also kind of have a problem with...
As far as I know it hasn't been confirmed yet. Or did I miss something?

spm1138
7th Dec 2008, 07:14
It'd better be in. Running up behind somebody cloaked with a shotgun is what DX is all about.