PDA

View Full Version : New article: CD-Action



imported_van_HellSing
2nd Dec 2008, 18:40
The new issue of the polish magazine CD-action has a four-page article on Deus Ex 3, with extensive quotes from Jean-Francois Dugas, project lead. Below you can find the full translation, by yours truly ;). I tried to keep formatting more or less intact, so anything in italics is quotes from Dugas and anything bold is also bold in the article. No comments from me within the text.

***

DEUS EX 3

Computer games are still light, easy and pleasant entertainment - a few hours of relaxation after a hard day at school or work. Though the average gamer's age is increasing year by year, creators of biggest hits rarely touch the great problems of the modern world. "Rarely" doesn't mean "never" though.

Possibilities offered by genetics and biotechnology are the topic of heated discussion among the greatest minds of our times - biologists and engineers, but also philosophers and ethics specialists. Wondering how far we can go in tampering with the human body, they ask what exactly is it that makes us homo sapiens, and what is the essence of humanity. These fundamental questions are one of the biggest challenges brought to our society by the rapid technological progress of recent decades. And though you would expect discussions over these topics in magazines such as "Science" or "Lancet", we mention them here in CD-Action not by chance - for they are the inspiration to developers from the Eidos Montreal studio, where Deus Ex 3 is being produced.


Bioquestions

- Modern biotechnology and all the questions it poses have long fascinated us; they are also the fundaments upon which the previous Deus Ex games were made - explains Jean-Francois Dugas, the project lead. He adds: - They were not as explicitly expressed though, since both in Deus Ex and DX: Invisible War were set in a world where the technology allowing augmentation of human abilities had already existed for a long time and doesn't create much awe or controversy. We on the other hand show another period of this alternate history of mankind, so in our game biotechnology is not only a gameplay mechanic but also weighs heavily on the story, it defines the look, style and feel of the game.

Yes, the plot of the third Deus Ex game, though set in the future as in the frevious games, happens a bit earlier, just in under 20 years from now. The game begins in the year 2027, in a period of rapid biotechnological breakthrough ( - It is a time of innovation and progress, but also chaos and clandestine conspiracies - adds Dugas). In rich societies, people start to appear who can afford to get mechanically augmented. This elevates them above the average people of the future world. Corporations specialising in these types of technology gain tremendous amounts of money, but also spend a lot on securing their research, as each new patent can give an advantage over the competition and lead to a monopoly over this lucrative market. This is where the game's protagonist comes in - Adam Jensen, security specialist employed by one of the leading biotech companies of America. One day he is faced with a conspiracy that can turn the world on its head.


Secrets and rumours

- We won't tell you the details of the plot of Deus Ex 3, because we want the players to find out themselves when they buy our game, sit comfortably in a chair and immerse themselves in our world - says Dugas. - However I'm sure that both fans of the previous games and newcomers will like what we've come up with. We're discussing crucial, exceptional matters: market control, future societies, human evolution; also lies, truth, and how difficult it is to discern between them sometimes. We show the conflict that occurs when some have access to advanced technology and revel in its possibilities; while others do not, which puts them below the priviledged ones. Already today we can see tension stemming from the fact that people are divided into those who "have" and those who "have not". In our opinion, such conflicts will become more severe in the future.

The developers try to compensate for a lack of concrete information regarding the plot by stating that they are making a game not just for fans of the originals but also for newcomers, who haven't had the chance to experience the classic first game and it's somewhat inferior sequel. This is one of the reasons Deus Ex 3 is a prequel. As Degas explains, the new iteration is set earlier due to various reasons. - Firstly, we wanted a new start to the series, so we couldn't continue the events of Invisible War. It was also our ambition to create a game which felt fresh and different not only from other franchises but also the previous Deus Ex titles. This is why we have a completely new protagonist, supporting cast and a script set in in different locations and following different events. We were also fascinated by this period in the history of the games' universe. In the first Deus Ex we discovered that there was such a period earlier when mechanically augmented people played an important part in society - nanoaugmentation, used by the protagonists of both DX and DX: IW, only appeared later on. The difference between the two technologies is substantial. Nanoaugmentations are mostly inconspicuous, while anyone can spot mechanical body parts. We came to the conclusion that this would be interesting to weave into the gameplay mechanics - we can show in a tangible, very visual way how your character changes, and how it affects his abilities. And so, there are some moments in the game (for example when you execute someone with your bare hands), when the perspective changes from first to third person ( - We show the players what exactly their character is capable of and how superior to unaugmented people he is - adds Dugas.)


Invisible War? Forget it!

The nod to newcomers shouldn't however trouble fans of the originals - before starting production, the Eidos Montreal team thouroughly analysed both Deus Ex and Invisible War. This was highgly important, as the godfather of the franchise, Warren Spector, is not involved with the making of the new addition to the cycle. The developers wanted to preserve the spirit of the previous games - We spent a lot of time discussing what makes Deus Ex what it is. - recalls Dugas. - The consensus was that it's an action game with RPG elements, with gameplay mechanics based on four elements: combat, stealth, hacking and and advanced social interaction. Additionally, freedom of choice must be offered, with various choices having their consequences, sometimes really meaningful.

For their own needs, the Eidos Montreal team have devised a set of seven key elements of the Deus Ex brand (more in the corresponding box) which decided the character of the first two games in the series. Both, though in some aspects similar, were substantially different from each other. Dugas has no doubt which one should be the more important inspiration for the team producing Deus Ex 3.

- We quickly decided that we should look that our model should be the first game - he explains. - Invisible War did have a few interesting ideas, but the proposed changes did not go in a good direction. You can notice we're inspired by the first Deus Ex on several different levels, beginning with trying to capture the atmosphere, and ending with some of the very simple, basic gameplay mechanics. Obvious example? No unified ammo like the one in Invisible War. Each weapon has it's own ammo. Even our inventory screen is much like the one from DX1.


Four paths

That's good news for PC gamers - Invisible War was primarily designed for consoles, and as such several elements were exceedingly simplified. The new game is designed to be complex and multifaceted, also in terms of plot. - The game world is built in such a way that multiple paths should be viable, and at least a handful of solutions for any problem - claims Dugas. - Basically, you could say that Deus Ex 3 offers four main playstyles, but the distinction during the game is not so clear-cut and obvious; in most situations you can progress using a combination of two or three styles. Two basic ones are combat and stealth. I guess you could complete the game either by seeking confrontation and constantly fighting enemies or by trying to discretely achieve what's necessary at the moment.

The two other playstyles are possible thanks to the ability to hack computer systems and electronic devices; and the interaction, achieved mostly through conversations with npcs. The freedom of choice allows you to shape the gameplay to your needs - of course, some conversations and situations will be mandatory, but most of the time, what you do depends only on your decisions. If you wanted to, you could go through the whole game guns a'blazing - just be prepared to miss at least half of the attractions.

And it would be a pity to do that, as the developers of Deus Ex 3 are convinced they are creating something exceptional. - You ask what currently available game ours can be compared to, but honestly , I'm unable to answer that question - says Dugas. - There's a few titles out there that touch some of the themes we concentrate on, a few similar genre hybrids combining action and RPG, but none has as complex a story and none provides as elastic plot driving possibilities. Concisely and firmly: There is no other game like Deus Ex 3. Whether that's true, we will decide march 2009.



***


infoboxes:

___
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE FUTURE

Deus Ex (2000)
The classic RPG depicting a dark, cyberpunk vision of the world of the future. It offered unprecedented nonlinearity, allowing for shaping bot of the plot and the world of the game. Another asset of the game was the way in which typical RPG elements were combined with a first person shooter. The protagonist was JC Denton - an agent for UNATCO, an organisation fighting global terrorism - who discovered a conspiracy allowing one of the corporations to rule the world. Full version can be found in the 100th issue of CD-action.


Deus Ex: Invisible War (2003)
Published primarily for the Xbox, the continuation of Deus Ex somewhat disappointed the fans of the original - a lot of the elements were simplified in hopes of making the game more accessible for console gamers. The plot took place 20 years after the original; this time the hero was Alex D., adept of the Tarsus military academy, a place training augmented special ops agents. Invisible War compensated for less complex gameplay mechanics with an interesting plot - starting with a bang (the destruction of Chicago), the story gets even more engaging when the ties to the first game become apparent. The full version of the game was also in CDA, April 2008 issue.

Project Snowblind (2005)
Unofficial addition to the Deus Ex series. The game started life as the third part of the series, with the subtitle Clan Wars - and was supposed to be centered on multiplayer and more action-like than the predecessors. Low sales of Invisible War ultimately prompted a title change. Project Snowblind still has some characteristics typical of the Deus Ex brand - a future setting (Hong Kong 2065), that you can choose multiple solutions in many situations, and gameplay which involves using nanomodifications increasing your character's abilities. This game too can be found in full on our cover CD (issue 13/06).
___


___
Deus E...ssence

During the production of the third part of Deus Ex, the Eidos Montreal team chose seven elements crucial to preserving the core of the series. They are:

1) Choice and consequence - Deus Ex offers many options and solutions, which can be used freely by players. Each of them affects the world and changes it sometimes in subtle ways, sometimes wery noticeably.

2) Action - Deus Ex depicts dynamic, thrilling events that can be directly participated in and which sometimes demand quick, even instant decisions.

3) Role-playing - Deus Ex allows to play a character however the players imagine, offering freedom of choice and also allowing multiple modification paths and increasing of abilities of the character.

4) Open-endedness - Deus Ex has a world where the main plot is only part of the bigger picture, with additional subplots, tasks, situations to find by yourself.

5) Conspiracy theories - Deus Ex relies on an extensive, complex, multifaceted plot, dealing with important matters, and uncovering a conspiracy leading to world domination.

6) Memorable characters - Deus Ex is full of colourful, defined characters that inspire authentic emotions from the player and don't leave the player indifferent; they're the foundation the story is built upon.

7) Near future visions - Deus Ex depicts a world far from perfect, an anti-utopia set in our world's near future.
___


***

So, that's it, hope you enjoyed reading, sorry for any typos and bad english. :)

IH-Denton
2nd Dec 2008, 19:02
:eek: brilliant work Van!
Thank you!

But i dont understand about "march 2009"... What this date about?

Cugros
2nd Dec 2008, 19:05
That seems real good.
Developers try to make this a serious game instead of a game for the wide group of casual gamers.
Somewhat inferior sequel has been analyzed and the mistakes made have been recognized.
I personally did not notice any typos or bad english. But that may be due to the fact that this text was about DX3. Any info about DX3 is good enough.

BTW, What happened to the original DX3 information thread, and why?

EDIT: that's a good question, IH-Denton. What could it be, has something been leaken out? Another preview? A large press conference?

jordan_a
2nd Dec 2008, 19:13
Posted on our Facebook group

http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/7669/sanstitresj9.jpg

Great work, seminal thread here. :thumbsup: I had the chance to talk to M.Dugas about the game and it made me sure they're heading in the right direction.

imported_van_HellSing
2nd Dec 2008, 19:15
About the date - the usual tiny infobox at the top of the article with the title, genre, publisher etc. gives the release date as March 2009. I'm very sceptic about this, but CDA did visit the EM studio for the article, so who knows...

jordan_a
2nd Dec 2008, 19:18
It's not March 09 that's for sure.

i_is_a_moose
2nd Dec 2008, 19:29
Thanks. That article rippd my face off.

Spyhopping
2nd Dec 2008, 19:41
Thanks very much for translating :)


The new game is designed to be complex and multifaceted, also in terms of plot.
....
Memorable characters - Deus Ex is full of colourful, defined characters that inspire authentic emotions from the player and don't leave the player indifferent; they're the foundation the story is built upon.

Reading that article has upped my confidence again. Although I've never followed a game's development this closely before, so its hard to know what to expect- I just hope EM are being realistic about it. If they are.... Wow... I'm really excited!
I don't know what else to say really :D

René
2nd Dec 2008, 20:22
It's not March 09 that's for sure.

Nope, no it's not. I don't know where that date came from. Sorry to disappoint!

Yargo
2nd Dec 2008, 20:27
It's not March 09 that's for sure.

Evidence? You have to support your statement. 24 month dev cycle seems to end around that time.

The article was very cool thanks for the translation Van_Helsing.:thumbsup:


Edit:

Nope, no it's not. I don't know where that date came from. Sorry to disappoint!
Way to slap me in the face there Rene =D

imported_van_HellSing
2nd Dec 2008, 20:28
Disappointment? More a sigh of relief ;).

Probably a messup on part of the proofreaders or something.

Earendil
2nd Dec 2008, 20:42
Must...contribute...awesomeness...

Lady_Of_The_Vine
2nd Dec 2008, 21:01
Thank you so much for taking the time to share this article with us.
Very interesting too. :)

GmanPro
2nd Dec 2008, 21:10
OMG OMG OMG! I'm so excited! :nut:

Lol but seriously, they are going in the right direction with this. HUGE sigh of relief on my part...

Igoe
2nd Dec 2008, 21:27
Nice to hear, but once again, just words.

When a game is in development they can say ANYTHING, because nothing is concrete yet. I have THE UTMOST CONFIDENCE AND TRUST IN EM, but remember to take everything with a grain of salt.

When DX:IW was in development they promised more underwater action and augs, they promised far more personal connections to NPCs, and that since the game would be shorter than DX1 length wise, all the levels would be larger and more detailed.

Whoops.

While I do believe DX3 is in the hands of very capable people, and that Rene and the others have handled their media coverage with mature restraint, the real DX3 will be made in the final months, when things get hairy and choices have to be made to make deadlines.

A game can have a 500 page script with thousands of lines of NPC dialog, but eventually people will get tired of keeping track of them and lines will be cut.

Plot is always whittled down in crunch time and during testing to make sure the over all story is clear to most playtesters. It just happens.

Everyone knows DX1 had a bunch of levels in DC and Texas that were cut in crunch time and because they didn't fit the over all story arc the developers wanted to create.

News is good, a healthy relation to the media is good, I just wouldn't use this as stone just yet.

(Rock, rock on)

redfordd
2nd Dec 2008, 21:30
Thank you for the article and for the translation.

AaronJ
2nd Dec 2008, 21:44
We won't tell you the details of the plot of Deus Ex 3, because we want the players to find out themselves when they buy our game, sit comfortably in a chair and immerse themselves in our world

Great way to get people interested. Especially people who don't rely on plot as much as action.

Mainstream.

rhalibus
2nd Dec 2008, 22:03
"Even our inventory screen is much like the one from DX1."


Hallelujah! :)

Thanks, van_HellSing, for your great translation. This article makes me even more excited!

rynn taylor
2nd Dec 2008, 22:06
Thanks for taking the time to translate van_HellSing :thumbsup:

Jerion
2nd Dec 2008, 22:11
Excellent! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


:eek: brilliant work Van!
Thank you!

But i dont understand about "march 2009"... What this date about?


Nope, no it's not. I don't know where that date came from. Sorry to disappoint!

I dunno where it came from either. :whistle:

Mindmute
2nd Dec 2008, 22:45
Great way to get people interested. Especially people who don't rely on plot as much as action.

Mainstream.



The new game is designed to be complex and multifaceted, also in terms of plot

Honestly Aaron, blablabla to you ;)

pha
2nd Dec 2008, 23:05
Hurray for the article and for the translation.


Even our inventory screen is much like the one from DX1.

Hurray for Tetris I guess...

Laokin
2nd Dec 2008, 23:08
Nope, no it's not. I don't know where that date came from. Sorry to disappoint!


Somebody told them something. My guess, probably some sort of internal milestone or maybe another more in depth media release. I doubt they just made it up Rene.

jordan_a
2nd Dec 2008, 23:18
Everyone knows DX1 had a bunch of levels in DC and Texas that were cut in crunch timeNot only this, one IA programmer told me that if they had had 2 or 3 more months, ennemis could climb ladders.

SemiAnonymous
2nd Dec 2008, 23:48
Excellent, I'm even more anticipated.
Right about now, I'd kill for some gameplay of any sort.

René
3rd Dec 2008, 01:11
Somebody told them something. My guess, probably some sort of internal milestone or maybe another more in depth media release. I doubt they just made it up Rene.

Fair enough. But I can guarantee the game is not coming out then. If it does, I'll eat a greasel.

Jerion
3rd Dec 2008, 01:39
If René eats a greasel, I got dibs on putting it on Youtube. :D

K^2
3rd Dec 2008, 02:04
If René eats a greasel, I got dibs on putting it on Youtube. :D
Dibs on cooking tofu greasel meat. I mean, we don't want transgenic animal activists bothering us.

Laokin
3rd Dec 2008, 06:09
Fair enough. But I can guarantee the game is not coming out then. If it does, I'll eat a greasel.

To be honest, I was only kidding. I'm sure some one THOUGHT they heard that... I was just playing advocate to see if you were holdin' out!

:nut:

DXeXodus
3rd Dec 2008, 06:23
Fair enough. But I can guarantee the game is not coming out then. If it does, I'll eat a greasel.

:lol: If the game comes out then, I will buy it and play it while you all watch René eat a greasel!

jordan_a
3rd Dec 2008, 07:25
Sorry buddy but no. You'll just stay on the forum and moderate all the technical issues enquiries... :D

Jerion
3rd Dec 2008, 07:29
Sorry buddy but no. You'll just stay on the forum and moderate all the technical issues enquiries... :D

Oh, is that what you think?

*picks up duct tape*

I think you need to be silenced.

K^2
3rd Dec 2008, 08:40
Oh. I thought the tape was for technical issues...

Jerion
3rd Dec 2008, 08:44
That too. Although it never hurts to use some for other purposes. Especially if those purposes mean me getting to DX 3 faster.

GmanPro
3rd Dec 2008, 08:54
I'm gonna come here on release day and spam on purpose. Muahahah! You will be trapped here forever! :lmao:

Jerion
3rd Dec 2008, 08:56
I'm gonna come here on release day and spam on purpose. Muahahah! You will be trapped here forever! :lmao:

My cursor hovers over that "Give Infraction" button...and I'm so tempted to press it...:D

GmanPro
3rd Dec 2008, 09:02
:eek:
Oh nooez! I've awakened the beast from it's slumber!http://fc19.deviantart.com/fs15/f/2006/365/b/3/_frightened__by_Taimotive.gif

imported_van_HellSing
3rd Dec 2008, 09:12
AHEM.

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/9066/derailedfx3.jpg

GmanPro
3rd Dec 2008, 09:19
Ahh yes, of course. Yay for DX3 once again! I haven't felt this excited about an upcoming game since the months right before Baldur's Gate 2! I seriously hope EM can follow through on what they've just promised. Though I remember, in the years prior to Fable coming out, the devs were saying that it was going to have more freedom than any other RPG. They promised so many great things but in the end it just turned out to be a decent action-rpg. Which is fine btw, I just wish that they would have told me beforehand that it was only going to be a consoley action-rpg. That's all I was expecting when I went to buy Fable 2, and I wasn't disappointed. :thumbsup:

Jerion
3rd Dec 2008, 09:26
^^ exactly.

If you're right up front about what something is, then you don't have a problem. :)

Also, AWESOME derailment pic Van. :lol:

progressor
3rd Dec 2008, 10:27
van_hellSing,

Thank you very much for the translation, you're the man!

Regarding the article:

Now, that's what I'm talking about! That Deus E..ssence box contained a remarkable replica of my own internal definitions of a good Deus Ex game.
This reassures me that the team has put in due diligence in the analysis phase.

All that, plus some arousing hints from Degas regarding the plot. I think the hair on the back of my neck just perked up a little. Of course, it's all too general at this point, but hints at conspiracies of grand scale and significance are exactly what I want to hear :)

Right. Give me a mechanically augmented US president whose body (and, as it turns out, the mind) is secretly remote-controlled by the manufacturer. Corporate espionage and sabotage of the competitors. The stigma of and the discrimination against mechaugs (although that is a classical X-Men storyline). The transfer of human brains onto silicon hardware, and the effortless cloning of the personalities and people that it would enable. What would the effect of computer viruses be on such "software?" Etc etc.

FrankGuy
3rd Dec 2008, 14:06
I also want to add my thanks in the long list to van_HellSing for translating and sharing this piece here. Thank you sir it was a great read. However the game turns out due to certain difficulties and budget restraints at least the developers seem to be *planning* a worthy sequel which is, at this point, all we can hope for. I am very encouraged, though, because I believe the old truism that failing to plan *is* planning to fail.

Thanks again van_HellSing for the derailment picture and the article.

rhalibus
3rd Dec 2008, 22:03
Deus E...ssence

During the production of the third part of Deus Ex, the Eidos Montreal team chose seven elements crucial to preserving the core of the series. They are:

1) Choice and consequence - Deus Ex offers many options and solutions, which can be used freely by players. Each of them affects the world and changes it sometimes in subtle ways, sometimes wery noticeably.

2) Action - Deus Ex depicts dynamic, thrilling events that can be directly participated in and which sometimes demand quick, even instant decisions.

3) Role-playing - Deus Ex allows to play a character however the players imagine, offering freedom of choice and also allowing multiple modification paths and increasing of abilities of the character.

4) Open-endedness - Deus Ex has a world where the main plot is only part of the bigger picture, with additional subplots, tasks, situations to find by yourself.

5) Conspiracy theories - Deus Ex relies on an extensive, complex, multifaceted plot, dealing with important matters, and uncovering a conspiracy leading to world domination.

6) Memorable characters - Deus Ex is full of colourful, defined characters that inspire authentic emotions from the player and don't leave the player indifferent; they're the foundation the story is built upon.

7) Near future visions - Deus Ex depicts a world far from perfect, an anti-utopia set in our world's near future.


That's a very well thought out and reassuring list...although a wish list of two additional elements would be:

8) Interactivity - Deus Ex allows for an unprecedented level of interactivity within the game: desk drawers and lockers can be opened and searched, books, newspapers and email can be read; if it looks like it can be picked up and used, then it can.

9) Immersive world - Deus Ex strives to make you believe that you are a single person living in an actual place in real life, by using huge, detailed, dynamic environments filled with people, machines, and other active entities.

Perhaps the first seven elements include these two already, due to their nature...but no harm putting these out there anyway...:)

gamer0004
4th Dec 2008, 16:53
Great work, seminal thread here. :thumbsup: I had the chance to talk to M.Dugas about the game and it made me sure they're heading in the right direction.

Yeah, every time I read some quotes I think: "oh, they do sound reasonable". And then two lines on in the text they completely contradict themselves by making tentacle augs, a world that's way more advanced than even IW...

"I'm sure that both fans of the previous games and newcomers will like what we've come up with. We're discussing crucial, exceptional matters: market control, future societies, human evolution; also lies, truth, and how difficult it is to discern between them sometimes. We show the conflict that occurs when some have access to advanced technology and revel in its possibilities; while others do not, which puts them below the priviledged ones."

And then "to create a game which felt fresh and different not only from other franchises but also the previous Deus Ex titles"

WHAT THE HELL?

"We show the players what exactly their character is capable of and how superior to unaugmented people he is"

WHAT THE HELL? (FYI: augs do not make you that much superior, they just make people better at some things.



What's also extremely funny:

"It was also our ambition to create a game which felt fresh and different not only from other franchises but also the previous Deus Ex titles"
And then, half a page further:
"The developers wanted to preserve the spirit of the previous games"

I'm sorry, but I really can't conclude anything. Really, I haven't read in any article anything that made any sense, especially not with regard to DX, but also in other ways...



"We spent a lot of time discussing what makes Deus Ex what it is"

Not a very smart thing to say if you're screwing up a franchise so badly... Kicking DX in his nuts "haha, you game without any oversized weapons or even bloom lighting! We have renaissance style cyperbunk and it's awesome!"





"Obvious example? No unified ammo like the one in Invisible War. Each weapon has it's own ammo."

True. But he did "forgot" to mention that every weapon will only have one type of ammo, which is as bad as uni ammo (at least in that game every weapon had multiple functions).



"You ask what currently available game ours can be compared to, but honestly , I'm unable to answer that question"

Huh? It's kind of simple. He should have answered:

"We're making a game which totally breaks with DX, but hey, Bioshock had art deco style so we wanted renaissance style. Of course, added to that we have the very *inspired* cyberpunk environment in which literally everything is ****ed up and dark and with guys which huge weapons and badass armour just because we like that."



And then, he is the winner
"In our game biotechnology is not only a gameplay mechanic but also weighs heavily on the story, it defines the look, style and feel of the game."

Yeah, because terrorism, for instance, which had a huge impact on western society, heavily influenced the look of our cities. And of course all the immigrants, yes, we just decided to burn down all buildings and replace them with pink cottages...
Oh wait, we didn't...

"Wow there are people with bionic limbs just because it offers advantages... Let's now tear down every building we have to replace them with expensive depressing and impractical buildings... I mean, we can't just let everything be as it is while there are dozens of mechanically augmented people walking around..."

René
4th Dec 2008, 19:37
Here we go! :)


a world that's way more advanced than even IW...

Some things may look more advanced, sure, but in what specific ways are you referring to? Please provide evidence.


"I'm sure that both fans of the previous games and newcomers will like what we've come up with. We're discussing crucial, exceptional matters: market control, future societies, human

evolution; also lies, truth, and how difficult it is to discern between them sometimes. We show the conflict that occurs when some have access to advanced technology and revel in its possibilities; while others do not, which puts them below the priviledged ones."

And then "to create a game which felt fresh and different not only from other franchises but also the previous Deus Ex titles"

WHAT THE HELL?

Can't we do both? What if Deus Ex 3 kept parts of the original you loved but also added to it? Would that be a bad thing? Would it be bad to say that we're trying to make the best game we possibly can? Or would you prefer the bar to be set so low that we trip over it?


"We show the players what exactly their character is capable of and how superior to unaugmented people he is"

WHAT THE HELL? (FYI: augs do not make you that much superior, they just make people better at some things.

The augmented people of Deus Ex 3 can do some pretty amazing things both physically and cerebrally. What if you were undoubtedly stronger, faster, and smarter than half the people around you? What if those people knew it? What if they wanted those abilities too but couldn't get them for whatever reason? I'm guessing there would be a conflict.


"We spent a lot of time discussing what makes Deus Ex what it is"

Not a very smart thing to say if you're screwing up a franchise so badly...

Heh. Is analyzing Deus Ex 1&2 a bad thing? gamer0004, it's no problem to disagree with points or hate the game. That's fine, whatever, but there seems to be no pleasing you. For someone so disappointed you sure seem to be spening a lot of time and effort here. And dev team members from DX1 don't seem to think we're screwing up the franchise so what do we make of that?


"Obvious example? No unified ammo like the one in Invisible War. Each weapon has it's own ammo."

True. But he did "forgot" to mention that every weapon will only have one type of ammo, which is as bad as uni ammo (at least in that game every weapon had multiple functions).

Really? Each weapon having it's own ammunition is as bad as every weapon using the same ammunition? Does 1+1=3 today? Odd.


"You ask what currently available game ours can be compared to, but honestly , I'm unable to answer that question"

Huh? It's kind of simple. He should have answered:

"We're making a game which totally breaks with DX, but hey, Bioshock had art deco style so we wanted renaissance style. Of course, added to that we have the very *inspired* cyberpunk environment in which literally everything is ****ed up and dark and with guys which huge weapons and badass armour just because we like that."

*sigh* I'll respond to individual points.


"We're making a game which totally breaks with DX."

Really? Totally breaks with DX? Perhaps you missed these points from the same article: Choice and consequence, Action, Role-playing, Open-endedness, Conspiracy theories, Memorable characters, Near future visions, etc.


Bioshock had art deco style so we wanted renaissance style.

Can you please provide links to some screenshots that scream renaissance over a near future Cyberpunk setting? Because I can't find them. The Renaissance style in the game adds flavour but it does not overwhelm the Cyberpunk feel.


Of course, added to that we have the very *inspired* cyberpunk environment in which literally everything is ****ed up and dark

Yeah it's Cyberpunk. DX is Cyberpunk. As above, please provide images of these ****ed up and dark environments. Perhaps your referring to this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=907920&postcount=428)?

Nope, apparently we're too bright...


with guys which huge weapons and badass armour just because we like that."

First off, it's just one character. But may I remind you of Deus Ex 1's "guys with huge weapons and badass armour"?
http://www.visualwalkthroughs.com/deusex/paris2/39.jpg


"In our game biotechnology is not only a gameplay mechanic but also weighs heavily on the story, it defines the look, style and feel of the game."

Yeah, because terrorism, for instance, which had a huge impact on western society, heavily influenced the look of our cities. And of course all the immigrants, yes, we just decided to burn down all buildings and replace them with pink cottages...

Um, biotechnolgoy does weigh heavily in all aspects of Deus Ex 3. Furthermore, you know it's a video game, right? A work of fiction? Terrorism as we in the West know it today is still relatively new. What about in 20 more years? In any case, have you been to the U.S. recently? There are often soliders with MP5 submachine guns at airport terminals. And metal detectors are everywhere as are video surveilance

cameras (nevermind the U.S., ask anyone who lives in London about that one). I could provide more examples but I think I'll stop there. And what's with the immigrants and villagers comment? I don't get it.




"Wow there are people with bionic limbs just because it offers advantages...

People are doing things like this now. I could provide more examples, but here's just one. Why carry around a security badge when you can implant a chip beneath your skin to open doors?

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/02/13/1368724.htm Again I ask: what about in 20 more years?


Let's now tear down every building we have to replace them with expensive depressing and impractical buildings... I mean, we can't just let everything be as it is while there are dozens of mechanically augmented people walking around..."

Please show me how these "expensive, depressing, and impractical buildings" dwarf normal buildings in Deus Ex 3.




Anyway gamer0004, I don't mind posts like these. At least it keeps things interesting. I just think you're way off with almost all of your analysis.

GmanPro
4th Dec 2008, 19:56
pwned :cool:

Yargo
4th Dec 2008, 19:59
Why carry around a security badge when you can implant a chip beneath your skin to open doors?

Because the RFID can be used to track you! Think Minority Report eye scanners! :( Bad idea. I'm not some conspiracy theorist or anything like that, but being tracked like a package in the mail does not bode well in my opinion.

GmanPro
4th Dec 2008, 20:07
That's really only a problem if you're participating in illegal activities. Don't be so paranoid. Think of it as a good thing. If you ever get kidnapped, then the police know where to find you. :thumbsup:

Yargo
4th Dec 2008, 20:13
That's really only a problem if you're participating in illegal activities. Don't be so paranoid. Think of it as a good thing. If you ever get kidnapped, then the police know where to find you. :thumbsup:

Its not so paranoid. Sure finding people in trouble is one side of the coin, but what if the government puts in two scanners on the highway. Then they just mail you a ticket for speeding because you passed the first checkpoint at time X and the second at time Y. Sure its unlikely but I would rather not have one in case I do decide on doing something illegal:whistle:.
I have a mixed opinion about RFID's and I can see how they could benefit. I don't care to be tracked though.

GmanPro
4th Dec 2008, 20:18
I really don't have a counter-argument for that lol. The right to speed when no cops are looking :D should be held sacred.

René
4th Dec 2008, 20:31
I agree with Yargo but that doesn't mean it isn't happening. People are doing it.

imported_van_HellSing
4th Dec 2008, 20:44
I for one am eagerly awaiting for an mp3 player I can implant in my head and charge with kinetic energy so I never forget it or run out of batteries. ;)

Spyhopping
4th Dec 2008, 20:58
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7764537.stm

Here you go- a mobile phone which is charged by the sound of your voice!

foxberg
4th Dec 2008, 21:10
Great job! I'm especially glad to know there's no more of that infamous uni-ammo!

Igoe
4th Dec 2008, 21:24
Aside from Regen health (which I'm waiting for more details on before i decide to not like it) everything I've heard about DX3 is outstandingly positive. A clear refreshing art direction, a detailed conspiracy driven plot, interesting character design, cyberpunk influence, multiple paths to choose in each level, careful planning of NPC interaction, RPG elements, Lots of weapons both deadly and non, and a dedicated staff who seem enthusiastic.

To me, DX3 is every bit as DX as DX1. Sure, it's different, but different is good. It means they AREN'T trying to make DX 1 better, they are RESPECTING the game for what it is and trying to make a new game inspired by it, not trying to redo it.

Why can't we enjoy DX1 AND DX3, instead of expecting one to be better than the other? If you want attention gamer0004, I suggest you post something else other than "They are ruining the franchise, how I see DX3 is the ONLY way it can be"

imported_van_HellSing
4th Dec 2008, 21:24
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7764537.stm

Here you go- a mobile phone which is charged by the sound of your voice!

Oh well, at least I got my trusty crank-powered flashlight :rasp:.

Spyhopping
4th Dec 2008, 21:51
Aside from Regen health (which I'm waiting for more details on before i decide to not like it) everything I've heard about DX3 is outstandingly positive. A clear refreshing art direction, a detailed conspiracy driven plot, interesting character design, cyberpunk influence, multiple paths to choose in each level, careful planning of NPC interaction, RPG elements, Lots of weapons both deadly and non, and a dedicated staff who seem enthusiastic.

To me, DX3 is every bit as DX as DX1. Sure, it's different, but different is good. It means they AREN'T trying to make DX 1 better, they are RESPECTING the game for what it is and trying to make a new game inspired by it, not trying to redo it.

Why can't we enjoy DX1 AND DX3, instead of expecting one to be better than the other? If you want attention gamer0004, I suggest you post something else other than "They are ruining the franchise, how I see DX3 is the ONLY way it can be"

:thumbsup: thats pretty much how I'm feeling. They seem to be doing a brilliant job. Although I am trying not to form as much of a strong opinion yet because I feel I know too little for it to be a reasonable one.
There are so many ways to go wrong with something like this- but there is certainly more than just one way of getting it right.



Oh well, at least I got my trusty crank-powered flashlight :rasp:.

Ahh- perhaps Adam will have a little crank to power his flashlight aug when power is low :D

imported_van_HellSing
4th Dec 2008, 22:01
It's pretty handy, you know. I work shifts, and often I finish work at 5am, then have to walk home some 5 kilometers through the woods. This time of the year it's still black as pitch at this hour.

K^2
4th Dec 2008, 22:31
It's pretty handy, you know. I work shifts, and often I finish work at 5am, then have to walk home some 5 kilometers through the woods. This time of the year it's still black as pitch at this hour.
Is it uphill both ways?

imported_van_HellSing
4th Dec 2008, 22:44
Pretty much, actually. :p

gamer0004
5th Dec 2008, 16:45
Here we go! :)

Same here... ;)



Some things may look more advanced, sure, but in what specific ways are you referring to? Please provide evidence.


To specify "advanced": I mean "advanced" as in the way many people would describe or draw "advanced" objects (bigger, very dark or very light, lots of metal) or futuristic elements.
So, what's (too) advanced:
Tentacle augs, the computers (I mean, the screen consists of no more than a few circles... by 2027...?), Barret (his gear and his weapon), the hallways (made entirely out of steal...), a city that's completely new (not a single city will be destroyed and then completely rebuild within 20 years without a special reason (like having to move the besides "looking cool" (please refer to the balcony view picture), completely modified riot cops (MJ-12 commandos weren't modified, they used an exoskeleton suit, and even they were specialisists working for a secret top organisation, not just some everyday cops)... About every released screenshot/art looks too "advanced".



Can't we do both? What if Deus Ex 3 kept parts of the original you loved but also added to it? Would that be a bad thing? Would it be bad to say that we're trying to make the best game we possibly can? Or would you prefer the bar to be set so low that we trip over it?


Yes, I would like that, no, no and no.
The point is, the feel of Deus Ex was what made that game so brilliant. The feel was consists of gameplay elements (which, as far as we know, will only be worse (auto-heal, ridiculous augs, no skill aiming, single ammo types for every weapon), storyline (of which we know nothing, except for some extremely standard "the rich live above, the boor below" crap we've seen in IW in which it didn't work either, and possible brain hacking, which, too, is ridiculous), music (of which we don't know a thing), graphics/environment looks (though technically fine, the art is ridiculous).
Adding things is fine, because it improves the gameplay. EM, however, is only removing things (multiple ammo per weapon, health management, shadow sneak), not adding things.
They're only (as far as we know) adding stupid things to the story as well.
Same thing with the environment, they're adding Rennaissance, but that doesn't make the game any better, just worse.



The augmented people of Deus Ex 3 can do some pretty amazing things both physically and cerebrally. What if you were undoubtedly stronger, faster, and smarter than half the people around you? What if those people knew it? What if they wanted those abilities too but couldn't get them for whatever reason? I'm guessing there would be a conflict.


Smarter? Why would augs make you smarter? They wouldn't (it's impossible... but on the other hand, tentacle augs are "possible" in DX3 as well, so...)
Like I said, augs do make you better at some things, but not superior. Augmented people would probably feel inferior because of their looks, and nearly all people define their self esteem on looks. And augs wouldn't make you feel any better in terms of capabilities, because it's not "you", it's "cheating". Of course, some people like to show off their wealth and like augs. But then it's not actually the augs that make the difference, it's the money. Yes, augs are a very interesting concept, but not in the way EM thinks it is. They just think "things make people better, people who can't have it hate people who do, ideal recipe for action! w00t!".



Heh. Is analyzing Deus Ex 1&2 a bad thing? gamer0004, it's no problem to disagree with points or hate the game. And dev team members from DX1 don't seem to think we're screwing up the franchise so what do we make of that?


Analyzing is good. But they clearly screwed that part up, because they're removing everything that made DX good. If you then say you properly analysed the game... it shows you're dumb. It's like saying (just abusing your example :P): "after analysing this calculation, I've come to the conclusion that 1+1=3" (or, in EM's case, that 1+1= the root of -478 (which FYI is impossible))



That's fine, whatever, but there seems to be no pleasing you. For someone so disappointed you sure seem to be spening a lot of time and effort here.


Yes, can you believe it? Hating a game so much (because really, I hate it now), and yet spending so much time watching those awful screenshots, reading those offensive quotes? That's because I love DX so much. I even want to be there at it's destuction.



Really? Each weapon having it's own ammunition is as bad as every weapon using the same ammunition? Does 1+1=3 today? Odd.


Well, every weapon in DX3 has only one type of ammo, so no switching between grenades and bullets (DX assault rifle, nearly every assault rifle IRL). In IW at least we had the choice between multiple sorts of "ammo" for each weapon (every weapon had 2 functionalities).



Really? Totally breaks with DX? Perhaps you missed these points from the same article: Choice and consequence, Action, Role-playing, Open-endedness, Conspiracy theories, Memorable characters, Near future visions, etc.


It breaks with DX in terms of everything except, possibly, some aspects of gameplay. Role-playing? No skill aiming, which was the main role-playing element in DX (in terms of RPG systems). Action? Lol, DX wasn't about action. Of course, Dugas can't believe that. "What? A game without action? Impossible!" "No tentacle augs? No martial arts? No oversized weapons? Haha, you're trying to fool me, aren't you?"
No, we're not. DX did not have much action. Unless you call crouching behing an enemy and then hitting him once with a baton in a very unspectacular way action. Or standing still for several seconds in a firefight because of firearm accuracy.
Memorable characters? We still don't know anything about them, except that one of them looks pathetic (*cough*Barret*cough*).
Open-endedness, Conspiracy theories? Still don't know anything about them. I do know that IW was said to have them, and it failed.
"Near future visions"? Lol, destroying everything on earth, including the human race, just to build everything up again but then in an expensive, unpracitcal way and replacing the humans with a race which only goal is to kill itself as fast as possible (the DX3 artwork says so anyway, everything is depressing, just to be depressing, and every building is not like the ones that are there right now).
I don't call that "near future visions", I call that "stupid visions".



Can you please provide links to some screenshots that scream renaissance over a near future Cyberpunk setting? Because I can't find them. The Renaissance style in the game adds flavour but it does not overwhelm the Cyberpunk feel.


http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/scan7.jpg

And the office picture of course, but I can't find it right now.



Yeah it's Cyberpunk. DX is Cyberpunk. As above, please provide images of these ****ed up and dark environments. Perhaps your referring to this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=907920&postcount=428)?

Nope, apparently we're too bright...


Do you honestly think this:
http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/office2.jpg
isn't dark and depressing just for being dark and depressing? That dark metal, it doesn't offer any advantages, it's expensive, and hardly anyone would like it (except for some geeks :P).
It's dark and depressing, but it isn't cyberpunk (even though some seem to think it is). Cyberpunk is about a world that's screwed up because of power abuse, science flaws, capitalism, diseases, which is all very plausible. The fact that the world is fubar is just a logical result of that. DX3 is screwed up, just because somehow a new race has replaced mankind, a race that likes "screwed up".

Besides, I read nearly eveyr post posted here, so yes, I had seen that already. But it only makes matters worse: DX3 is making the world dark in places where it shouldn't and wouldn't and won't be, while making it light at places where is should and would and will.



First off, it's just one character. But may I remind you of Deus Ex 1's "guys with huge weapons and badass armour"?
http://www.visualwalkthroughs.com/deusex/paris2/39.jpg


I already wrote it in above, but I'll repeat it here:
MJ-12 commandos weren't modified, they used an exoskeleton suit. "Two weeks and I make commando". And he wasn't in hospital. If those were augs (and we have no reason at all to assume they are, except that they don't look human) it would've taken months to actually install all those "augs". So he wouldn't make it in two weeks time...



Um, biotechnolgoy does weigh heavily in all aspects of Deus Ex 3. Furthermore, you know it's a video game, right? A work of fiction? Terrorism as we in the West know it today is still relatively new. What about in 20 more years? In any case, have you been to the U.S. recently? There are often soliders with MP5 submachine guns at airport terminals. And metal detectors are everywhere as are video surveilance

cameras (nevermind the U.S., ask anyone who lives in London about that one). I could provide more examples but I think I'll stop there. And what's with the immigrants and villagers comment? I don't get it.


I'm not saying surveillance is a logical step from terrorism. I mean, DX was for a big part about surveillence! What I am saying, social changes don't influence things he was (likely) referring to, such as rennaissance style.



People are doing things like this now. I could provide more examples, but here's just one. Why carry around a security badge when you can implant a chip beneath your skin to open doors?

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/02/13/1368724.htm Again I ask: what about in 20 more years?


As to: "Wow there are people with bionic limbs just because it offers advantages..." I wasn't saying that that idea is stupid (it was, like, you know, a huge factor in DX), I was saying that the idea that because of that people suddenly decide to throw all ratio overboard and replace it with depression and trying to make life as unpleasent as possible is stupid.



Please show me how these "expensive, depressing, and impractical buildings" dwarf normal buildings in Deus Ex 3.


Again,
http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/office2.jpg

Metal is a lot more expensive than concrete, it's harder to produce, harder to use, it takes a lot of space (in this art), you can't even drill a hole in them, it's dark and depressing (and most people want a home in which they can be happy, not the whole world is gothic or emo thank god), it echoes like hell...



Anyway gamer0004, I don't mind posts like these. At least it keeps things interesting. I just think you're way off with almost all of your analysis.

You are entitled to your opinion. But I think you and all the DX3 devs that so far have said things (except perhaps D'Astous, but how could he let his team make such hideous art or make decisions like that?). And I'm not the only one. Nearly all fans since the beginning, modders, people who wrote complete articles about DX, heavily dislike DX3. We don't want Gears of War 3, we want a Deus Ex 3!

InGroove2
5th Dec 2008, 17:15
5 words brah:

GO MAKE THE GAME YOURSELF.

gamer0004
5th Dec 2008, 17:18
I wouldn't, because at least I know I'm not able to make a proper prequel to such a great game. I do think I would do it better (but that's not a real challenge).

Jerion
5th Dec 2008, 17:19
gamer, You sure seem confident that a lot of people share your views.

You also like to cling to that office picture...and the way I see it you're comparing an upscale interior environment to a dark, decrepit outdoor environment. Apples & Oranges- that's like saying that manderly's office should be filthy because the NYC streets were. :rasp:


Also...

You want to make it better?

Assemble a dev team. Go familiarize yourself with a free but powerful game engine. I recommend Unity. Learn how to create entire games, and I'll await your creation in 2012.

AdamJensen
5th Dec 2008, 17:20
...
And I'm not the only one. Nearly all fans since the beginning, modders, people who wrote complete articles about DX, heavily dislike DX3. We don't want Gears of War 3, we want a Deus Ex 3!

No. You are one of the few vocal ones who "heavily dislike DX3". In general people tend to post a lot more when they disagree rather than when they agree. So all of this.. "all fans since the blah blah" heavily dislike DX3 is pretty much dishonest.

I first of all am happy that a game in the same franchise is being made. And while I'm not sure of all the decisions, over all it seems to be pretty good.

The like the tech. I love the tentacles! I loooove the art direction. And that image is by no means depressing.. dark for sure. Maybe in the future they want to conserve power so they don't use too much lighting when not necessary :D

InGroove2
5th Dec 2008, 17:22
that's totally ludicrous.

you realize you've painted yourself into a corner here?
there's no way to please you. you want more DX but none will ever be the same/good enough.

you're like.. addicted to heroine, looking for that FIRST TIMER experience again.

it's a new game. you're bound to hate it. stop bothering Rene with your totally over analyzed reasoning.

i'm pretty certain i will like the game and have problems with it... i have problmes with every game... but you have to make a choice to like it... make a choice to ignore the obvious short comings of gaming and industry and accept the universe they give you.

because clearly, as you said, YOU ARE NOT making the game. They are.... so if they don't then we have nothing.

would you rather have nothing? if you would, then there is an easy way... don't buy it!

otherwise... your opinion is great. but your post to rene... seemed offensive, IMO. so i guess i'm sticking up for his side of things.

Unstoppable
5th Dec 2008, 17:39
So just to be clear there won't be a female version of Adam Jensen, only Male right?

Jerion
5th Dec 2008, 17:40
So just to be clear there won't be a female version of Adam Jensen, only Male right?

Let me say this once:

No Comment Yet.

InGroove2
5th Dec 2008, 17:40
i believe you will be able to choose from Adam and Adamina May Jensen.

gamer0004
5th Dec 2008, 17:41
gamer, You sure seem confident that a lot of people share your views.

You also like to cling to that office picture...and the way I see it you're comparing an upscale interior environment to a dark, decrepit outdoor environment. Apples & Oranges- that's like saying that manderly's office should be filthy because the NYC streets were. :rasp:


Sigh...

Here we go again...

No, I'm not. I'm saying that that office looks stupid and unrealistic. What does it have to do with outdoor environments?


No. You are one of the few vocal ones who "heavily dislike DX3". In general people tend to post a lot more when they disagree rather than when they agree. So all of this.. "all fans since the blah blah" heavily dislike DX3 is pretty much dishonest.

I first of all am happy that a game in the same franchise is being made. And while I'm not sure of all the decisions, over all it seems to be pretty good.

The like the tech. I love the tentacles! I loooove the art direction. And that image is by no means depressing.. dark for sure. Maybe in the future they want to conserve power so they don't use too much lighting when not necessary :D

I'm one of the few guys here that dislike this game. There were some more, but most of them have left (at least I haven't heard much of them here since).
But this is not the only forum I visit... Nobody here is actually a modder, or someone who is a fan since it was released. Most people camer here after coincidentally playind DX some time ago and haven't done anything beside playing the game. There are even people who like IW better than DX here...
Of course, everybody is entitled to his own opinion, but I do think that people who are actually doing things with DX know better.


that's totally ludicrous.

you realize you've painted yourself into a corner here?
there's no way to please you. you want more DX but none will ever be the same/good enough.

you're like.. addicted to heroine, looking for that FIRST TIMER experience again.

it's a new game. you're bound to hate it. stop bothering Rene with your totally over analyzed reasoning.

i'm pretty certain i will like the game and have problems with it... i have problmes with every game... but you have to make a choice to like it... make a choice to ignore the obvious short comings of gaming and industry and accept the universe they give you.

because clearly, as you said, YOU ARE NOT making the game. They are.... so if they don't then we have nothing.

would you rather have nothing? if you would, then there is an easy way... don't buy it!

otherwise... your opinion is great. but your post to rene... seemed offensive, IMO. so i guess i'm sticking up for his side of things.

He responds to me, so Rene thinks they are doing the right thing. I then respond by showing why I don't. Why is that hard to accept for you?

There's no way to please me? I was one of the few who liked IW besides DX, I played it between 7 and 10 times, including a no-item run.
I liked the first concept art, I read all the interviews, and I thought DX3 was in good hands. But once they released the rest of the information... It's not that hard to please me, but there is a line and they have crossed it many, many times.

I would rather have nothing, yes. But I can't ignore it! It's Deus Ex! It's a prequel to the best game ever! How could any real fan ignore that?

And to which post are you referring? To the last one? Please tell me which part was offensive, it was not meant to be offensive and I don't think it was.

Unstoppable
5th Dec 2008, 17:41
Let me say this once:

No Comment Yet.

I like the sound of that. :wave:

Jerion
5th Dec 2008, 17:50
Sigh...

*post*

So...you are responding to it by *****ing about how EM has messed everything up? You seem to know that things are exactly what you don't want...but I haven't seen much of anything from you that works toward a solution.

InGroove2
5th Dec 2008, 17:53
Sigh...

Here we go again...

No, I'm not. I'm saying that that office looks stupid and unrealistic. What does it have to do with outdoor environments?



I'm one of the few guys here that dislike this game. There were some more, but most of them have left (at least I haven't heard much of them here since).
But this is not the only forum I visit... Nobody here is actually a modder, or someone who is a fan since it was released. Most people camer here after coincidentally playind DX some time ago and haven't done anything beside playing the game. There are even people who like IW better than DX here...
Of course, everybody is entitled to his own opinion, but I do think that people who are actually doing things with DX know better.



He responds to me, so Rene thinks they are doing the right thing. I then respond by showing why I don't. Why is that hard to accept for you?

There's no way to please me? I was one of the few who liked IW besides DX, I played it between 7 and 10 times, including a no-item run.
I liked the first concept art, I read all the interviews, and I thought DX3 was in good hands. But once they released the rest of the information... It's not that hard to please me, but there is a line and they have crossed it many, many times.

I would rather have nothing, yes. But I can't ignore it! It's Deus Ex! It's a prequel to the best game ever! How could any real fan ignore that?

And to which post are you referring? To the last one? Please tell me which part was offensive, it was not meant to be offensive and I don't think it was.



off the top of my head... much "Lol"ing and "are you serious" and "they screwed that up" ("they" being the group of people who rene works for and with and among). i believe you reffered to something they said being "stupid" or "dumb". besides, the overall tone of your email was blatantly condescending... or at least smug.

furthermore, you should be a little more self aware. "modders" and ultra fans like yourself are a relative minority and you should be used to and expecting a major game company to figure you in at a percentage to your representation in the population.

i think Rene's response to you had a whole bunch of refferences to how aggressive your original post was signaling that you were dancing on the line between argumentative and "i'm totally right and your company is ruining the world".

the fact remains, many fans in your camp will never accept that they HAVE the holy grail in the first game. if there were TWO holy grails, they BOTH would be devalued, as is the way of scarcity. you have the gratest game of all time. let's just wait and see how it is expanded and elaborated upon. because no matter what happens, dear gamer004, DX will always be as it has been and you can mod the crap out of it till... til... the years that Deus Ex is supposed to be happening and find out that JC will not ever exist and maybe then realize that you all along have had the best game ever whether they make DX 100 or 106 or 107 crappy sequels.

i plan on loving this game... and i suggest that maybe you're not a real fan of the story if you're so ready to hate on a game that's not even out.

imported_van_HellSing
5th Dec 2008, 17:54
Solution according to gamer004 and the rest of the the No Transgenics Allowed (dibs on the name) crowd:

1. Repackage Deus Ex and call it Deus Ex 3.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!

gamer0004
5th Dec 2008, 18:44
So...you are responding to it by *****ing about how EM has messed everything up? You seem to know that things are exactly what you don't want...but I haven't seen much of anything from you that works toward a solution.

People have been posting more than enough... They haven't paid any attention... So what am I supposed to do? Go to Montreal and burn the whole building down? It's not that bad :rasp:


off the top of my head... much "Lol"ing and "are you serious" and "they screwed that up" ("they" being the group of people who rene works for and with and among). i believe you reffered to something they said being "stupid" or "dumb". besides, the overall tone of your email was blatantly condescending... or at least smug.

furthermore, you should be a little more self aware. "modders" and ultra fans like yourself are a relative minority and you should be used to and expecting a major game company to figure you in at a percentage to your representation in the population.

i think Rene's response to you had a whole bunch of refferences to how aggressive your original post was signaling that you were dancing on the line between argumentative and "i'm totally right and your company is ruining the world".

the fact remains, many fans in your camp will never accept that they HAVE the holy grail in the first game. if there were TWO holy grails, they BOTH would be devalued, as is the way of scarcity. you have the gratest game of all time. let's just wait and see how it is expanded and elaborated upon. because no matter what happens, dear gamer004, DX will always be as it has been and you can mod the crap out of it till... til... the years that Deus Ex is supposed to be happening and find out that JC will not ever exist and maybe then realize that you all along have had the best game ever whether they make DX 100 or 106 or 107 crappy sequels.

i plan on loving this game... and i suggest that maybe you're not a real fan of the story if you're so ready to hate on a game that's not even out.

Yes, I said that a certain remark of Dugas was stupid. I still think it is.
Thankfully, Eidos Montreal doesn't have the power the ruin the world :) But they are ruining Deus Ex for me.
DX will be affected by this game. It's impossible to ignore DX3, just as it was impossible to ignore IW even though it had such a terrible storyline.
I don't want to have another DX, in the sense that I want again a game, set in that universe, that's as special as Deus Ex. It's impossible, because DX was the first game I played of the series. What I do want, is a game that doesn't conflict with DX and therefore devaluates it. If they turn it into a shooter: fine, as long as you don't have auto-regen because that conflicts with DX (DX had special augs for that, so it would be strange if they wouldn't be needed in 2027 but they would be in 2052). I don't care whether the game will feature sneaking or not, as long as the environment, the storyline, the weapons, the augs and the characters don't conflict. If they don't I can simply dislike that game (because it is no immersive enough because I can't do what I want: sneaking). But if it conflicts with Deus Ex... How can I like the DX world?


Solution according to gamer004 and the rest of the the No Transgenics Allowed (dibs on the name) crowd:

1. Repackage Deus Ex and call it Deus Ex 3.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!

No, I don't want DX revamped. In fact, I'm not even sure I'll install HDTP and/or New Vision.
What I want is a prequel that fits DX perfectly in storyline and environment, so it adds to the greatness of Deus Ex. And, if possible, I want it to have decent gameplay and music and graphics. In fact, I would love it if it would feature gameplay as good as Deus Ex's and in fact improve it where necesarry.

Skill aiming wasn't brilliant, but it was better than nothing. Just improve it. Make it less extreme (JC is a trained agent), there should be less difference between "untrained" (although you should of course start at "trained") and "master". And it should start easier (I mean, if you have just a slight amount of training aiming doesn't take 5 seconds).
DX featured shadow sneak in combination with line-of-sight sneak. It should be improved. Sometimes the AI saw me when I was practically invisible, and sometimes I was very visible but I could not be seen. If I'm hid behind something (or in a vent), I should not be seen (but I could be heard). If I'm in a really dark area, I shouldn't be seen unless the enemy is very close. But the system should be there.

As to augs: it should only be possible to install around 6 augs. I know, IW had that too and it was annoying, but I think nano-augs would have a huge advantage in that area. Mech augs are actually solid and if you have a bionic leg, there's no room for an ice-cream machine there.

The world should look believable. Infrastructre doesn't change much. Gadgets and small appliances do. So I want improved televisions, computers, security systems... But it should make sense...

There would of course be strife between augmented people and unaugmented people. But how far would that go? Not very far. People would probably be scared of augmented people, but the group of augmented people is too small for mass hysteria. They can be a nice scapegoat, but they own much of the production factors and would have a lot of political influence, so people wouldn't be able to do much about them. Except beeting them up, which would probably happen, and trying to ignore them as much as possible.

The world could be in a financial crisis, with lots of unemployment. Of course, the rich would be disliked more than they do now, especially the augmented ones.
I want homeless guys everywhere, I want the state trying to do something about the social problems but failing because it has no money nor expertise with problems as big as these, I want to see new technology which could improve life again, but which the masses can't affort. But I want a posssibility to handle these problems, because there always are.

That's pretty close to Deus Ex, yes. But it's not the same. The storyline could be different, the state of the world and the social problems would be different (especially those with regard to augs), and of course the gameplay can be improved. A game like this would appeal to the old Deus Ex fans, and at the same time many new ones, as long as it is advertised properly. Nearly all people who ever played DX are hooked. For that the game (this kind of games) has to be immersive. And it can only really be immersive if it's all at least believable. There are a lot of gamers who are older than 12 and want a proper game. DX is such a game. Make such a game again and you'll sell more than enough. Do that rather then abusing the franchise to sell more copies to all the old fans craving for a sequel/prequel and using it's good name for (p)reviews. If you call it Deus Ex, it should stay true to the world of Deus Ex and preferably to the DX gameplay.
The best way to make a prequel is not to contradict thhe thing to which it is a prequel :rasp:

Mindmute
5th Dec 2008, 18:52
Honestly, gamer004 the people who were strongly against the direction of the game didn't complain about everything unlike you seem to do.
They complained about a few points, you seem to dislike every single thing done so far, it's very different.
It's actually ironic that this happens with someone who claims to have liked DX:IW...


I'm going to say this, because I am sure some people would like to, but can't for a reason or another:

If you complain, do it in a constructive way. State exactly what you disagree with rather than just call it "stupid" and afterwards give a suggestion or two to take the place of that idea you disliked (I've seen a fair share of half-assed suggestions by some people here, but at least they were trying to help).
You remind me of old ladies sitting on the bus-stop argueing about how recent government administrations are ruining their country, while knowing next to nothing about politics.

However, if you keep claiming to dislike the game badly enough that you won't play it and prefer it wouldn't even exist, then please leave.
Let the players who will play the game, try to get more information, talk to each other about it and give more suggestions to the team.
All you're doing is cluttering the forum with junk.

InGroove2
5th Dec 2008, 19:00
People have been posting more than enough... They haven't paid any attention... So what am I supposed to do? Go to Montreal and burn the whole building down? It's not that bad :rasp:



Yes, I said that a certain remark of Dugas was stupid. I still think it is.
Thankfully, Eidos Montreal doesn't have the power the ruin the world :) But they are ruining Deus Ex for me.
DX will be affected by this game. It's impossible to ignore DX3, just as it was impossible to ignore IW even though it had such a terrible storyline.
I don't want to have another DX, in the sense that I want again a game, set in that universe, that's as special as Deus Ex. It's impossible, because DX was the first game I played of the series. What I do want, is a game that doesn't conflict with DX and therefore devaluates it. If they turn it into a shooter: fine, as long as you don't have auto-regen because that conflicts with DX (DX had special augs for that, so it would be strange if they wouldn't be needed in 2027 but they would be in 2052). I don't care whether the game will feature sneaking or not, as long as the environment, the storyline, the weapons, the augs and the characters don't conflict. If they don't I can simply dislike that game (because it is no immersive enough because I can't do what I want: sneaking). But if it conflicts with Deus Ex... How can I like the DX world?



No, I don't want DX revamped. In fact, I'm not even sure I'll install HDTP and/or New Vision.
What I want is a prequel that fits DX perfectly in storyline and environment, so it adds to the greatness of Deus Ex. And, if possible, I want it to have decent gameplay and music and graphics. In fact, I would love it if it would feature gameplay as good as Deus Ex's and in fact improve it where necesarry.

Skill aiming wasn't brilliant, but it was better than nothing. Just improve it. Make it less extreme (JC is a trained agent), there should be less difference between "untrained" (although you should of course start at "trained") and "master". And it should start easier (I mean, if you have just a slight amount of training aiming doesn't take 5 seconds).
DX featured shadow sneak in combination with line-of-sight sneak. It should be improved. Sometimes the AI saw me when I was practically invisible, and sometimes I was very visible but I could not be seen. If I'm hid behind something (or in a vent), I should not be seen (but I could be heard). If I'm in a really dark area, I shouldn't be seen unless the enemy is very close. But the system should be there.

As to augs: it should only be possible to install around 6 augs. I know, IW had that too and it was annoying, but I think nano-augs would have a huge advantage in that area. Mech augs are actually solid and if you have a bionic leg, there's no room for an ice-cream machine there.

The world should look believable. Infrastructre doesn't change much. Gadgets and small appliances do. So I want improved televisions, computers, security systems... But it should make sense...

There would of course be strife between augmented people and unaugmented people. But how far would that go? Not very far. People would probably be scared of augmented people, but the group of augmented people is too small for mass hysteria. They can be a nice scapegoat, but they own much of the production factors and would have a lot of political influence, so people wouldn't be able to do much about them. Except beeting them up, which would probably happen, and trying to ignore them as much as possible.

The world could be in a financial crisis, with lots of unemployment. Of course, the rich would be disliked more than they do now, especially the augmented ones.
I want homeless guys everywhere, I want the state trying to do something about the social problems but failing because it has no money nor expertise with problems as big as these, I want to see new technology which could improve life again, but which the masses can't affort. But I want a posssibility to handle these problems, because there always are.

That's pretty close to Deus Ex, yes. But it's not the same. The storyline could be different, the state of the world and the social problems would be different (especially those with regard to augs), and of course the gameplay can be improved. A game like this would appeal to the old Deus Ex fans, and at the same time many new ones, as long as it is advertised properly. Nearly all people who ever played DX are hooked. For that the game (this kind of games) has to be immersive. And it can only really be immersive if it's all at least believable. There are a lot of gamers who are older than 12 and want a proper game. DX is such a game. Make such a game again and you'll sell more than enough. Do that rather then abusing the franchise to sell more copies to all the old fans craving for a sequel/prequel and using it's good name for (p)reviews. If you call it Deus Ex, it should stay true to the world of Deus Ex and preferably to the DX gameplay.
The best way to make a prequel is not to contradict thhe thing to which it is a prequel :rasp:


ahhh... so what you're saying is that it's merely the storyline aspects that are bugging you? that you need 100% continuity or the game DEVALUES DX1? You can't be 100% continuous to a game that was made to maximize the limiations of the technology at the time... a game that had it's own story and universe holes. if that is the perpective in which you are now HATING this "unborn" game, then there is no hope for you.

there are some people refferenceing the most recent star wars movies and how dumb it was that the technology there was superior to the tech in the old movies, despite the timeline.

you really think the public was gonna accept a new star wars with 1977 technology? it's crazy. to try and recapture a LACK of technology... it's totally unreasonable.

like i said before. the only way to enjoy DX is to just accept THAT universe for what the makers say it is. much like DX3, you have to just accept the premise on which it's based or else the hwole thing falls apart... because it's a fantasy.

it's like deciding that since the FED prints money and makes money out of thin air that it's not worth anything, then going to a store and trying to buy something with a pound of gold because it has ACTUAL value.... no siur, you have to play by the rules set up for you. you have to use the worthless money to buyy things despite it being made from nothing.

much like you have to accept that the story premiuse that they give you before you can really play DX3. didn't you have to accept that all the implausible things that go on in DX, the inconsistencies.

Spyhopping
5th Dec 2008, 19:11
I'm sorry to break down your posts so much, gamer 0004- but they are rather long.



...The feel was consists of gameplay elements (which, as far as we know, will only be worse (auto-heal, ridiculous augs, no skill aiming, single ammo types for every weapon)
...storyline (of which we know nothing, except for some extremely standard "the rich live above, the boor below" crap we've seen in IW in which it didn't work either, and possible brain hacking, which, too, is ridiculous), music (of which we don't know a thing)
...They're only (as far as we know) adding stupid things to the story as well
...It breaks with DX in terms of everything except, possibly, some aspects of gameplay
...Conspiracy theories? Still don't know anything about them.


It is important to remember that we really know so little about the game!
By all means you are entitled to your own opinion (<< everyone is saying that). But it even rings true in your post-- look at everything I have put in bold.

I fail to understand how you can hate something when there are so many things central to the game that we are completely unaware of.


Nearly all fans since the beginning, modders, people who wrote complete articles about DX, heavily dislike DX3. We don't want Gears of War 3, we want a Deus Ex 3!

and


Nobody here is actually a modder, or someone who is a fan since it was released. Most people camer here after coincidentally playind DX some time ago and haven't done anything beside playing the game.

I'm no modder, but I got the game when I was 12 and now I am 20. And from what I have read, a lot of people who like what they have seen of DX3 share the same story and faithfully call DX their favourite game

spm1138
5th Dec 2008, 20:27
I don't know if I agree with anything gamer0004 says. I find it impossible to objectively evaluate his posts because the tone he takes renders anything he says irritating.

You know how some people just have one of those faces you want to punch? Same goes for his posting style. He is like an especially whiny goth teenager's livejournal.

Everything he types I imagine being read out in this slightly squeakier version of comic book guy from the Simpson's voice.

I just know if I do some internet detectiveing on his username I'm going to find a) Sonic the hedgehog fanfic or b) Youtube videos complaining about self diagnosed ass burgers. It's possible he has some good points I'd recognise if I didn't find him so massively dislikeable.

Spyhopping
5th Dec 2008, 21:18
I don't know if I agree with anything gamer0004 says. I find it impossible to objectively evaluate his posts because the tone he takes renders anything he says irritating.

You know how some people just have one of those faces you want to punch? Same goes for his posting style. He is like an especially whiny goth teenager's livejournal.

Everything he types I imagine being read out in this slightly squeakier version of comic book guy from the Simpson's voice.

I just know if I do some internet detectiveing on his username I'm going to find a) Sonic the hedgehog fanfic or b) Youtube videos complaining about self diagnosed ass burgers. It's possible he has some good points I'd recognise if I didn't find him so massively dislikeable.


It would probably be boring on here if none of us were strongly opinionated though. At least Gamer0004 is going about things in a controlled way:)

Unstoppable
5th Dec 2008, 22:48
Stop feeding the troll. Simple as that. Gamer or whatever you are are too passionate about the game to a degree of not being healthy. Just enjoy the game for what it is. I got all hyped up for Invisible War and set my expectations to high, won't do that this time.

Sure I'm excited and I will purchase the game no matter what, however this time I won't be blindsided by passion.

GmanPro
5th Dec 2008, 23:02
So basically patience, oh ye of little faith.

EM is going in the right direction. They are making a prequel. That right there shows their commitment to making a game that is more along the lines of DX1 than DX2. And they are making it primarily for the PC. You're almost guaran-****ing-teed a good game just based off of those two points. :thumb:

InGroove2
5th Dec 2008, 23:11
like i said, man, you got me. you know where i'm comin from.

progressor
6th Dec 2008, 00:53
I think I get what Gamer... is trying to say.

He's trying to say that the photos we've seen so far present far too beautiful a world for a Deus Ex to take place in.

I agree.

But consider this. It is entirely possible that the game starts out showing you upper echelons of society (after all, these augmentation companies are swimming in cash) -- and the neighborhoods where they are located are ultra-posh.

A nice plot progression would then slowly peel off the bright-any-shiny from your initial perception of the game like an onion, layer by layer. Then, at midgame, the world might show you its true colors. And then, you might finally understand how bad things really are, and where they will be heading. And if we're lucky, we'll get to witness and participate in that process during the rest of the game.

I think that's what's being planned here. After all, just because the top floor office is all decked out in mahogany, steel and leather, doesn't meat there aren't unemployed people down in the sewers eating industrially polluted rats. It is possible that the world will rot from the feet up, and the head won't know what hit it until it's too late.

SageSavage
6th Dec 2008, 01:00
But consider this. It is entirely possible that the game starts out showing you upper echelons of society (after all, these augmentation companies are swimming in cash) -- and the neighborhoods where they are located are ultra-posh.

A nice plot progression would then slowly peel off the bright-any-shiny from your initial perception of the game like an onion, layer by layer. Then, at midgame, the world might show you its true colors. And then, you might finally understand how bad things really are, and where they will be heading. And if we're lucky, we'll get to witness and participate in that process during the rest of the game.


Yeah, that would actually be a nice plot twist but the idea collides with the promised free roaming element.

Sense/Net
6th Dec 2008, 01:38
Thanks for the translation van_Hellsing! I'm glad to see EM taking the DX name seriously.
Epic thread, this whole gamer004 saga has been hilarious. Faulty people entertain me.:lol:

Unstoppable
6th Dec 2008, 02:01
I think I get what Gamer... is trying to say.

He's trying to say that the photos we've seen so far present far too beautiful a world for a Deus Ex to take place in.

I agree.

But consider this. It is entirely possible that the game starts out showing you upper echelons of society (after all, these augmentation companies are swimming in cash) -- and the neighborhoods where they are located are ultra-posh.

A nice plot progression would then slowly peel off the bright-any-shiny from your initial perception of the game like an onion, layer by layer. Then, at midgame, the world might show you its true colors. And then, you might finally understand how bad things really are, and where they will be heading. And if we're lucky, we'll get to witness and participate in that process during the rest of the game.

I think that's what's being planned here. After all, just because the top floor office is all decked out in mahogany, steel and leather, doesn't meat there aren't unemployed people down in the sewers eating industrially polluted rats. It is possible that the world will rot from the feet up, and the head won't know what hit it until it's too late.

For me no one can give a fair judgement on the game and how it will turn out till it's released. I thought Invisible War was the greatest thing next to slice bread before it came out. Boy was that wrong.

Where I'm getting at is that it's not possible to judge a book by it's cover. These shots are simply concept art. They are just ideas that might make it to the final game, or might not.

They are representative of the game look and feel to a certain point. Until I play the finished product I can't render any judgement. I believe the game will be stellar however and that's just my faith in the developers.

GmanPro
6th Dec 2008, 03:36
Just look at some of the Deus Ex 1 art (http://www.planetdeusex.com/dx1/files/art/).

Plenty can change between the concept and the game.

Necros
6th Dec 2008, 11:09
Yeah, that would actually be a nice plot twist but the idea collides with the promised free roaming element.
The free roaming is only promised for each level, not the whole game. You can't go anywhere at any time, just explore the area you're currently at. Like in DX 1 & IW. So, that idea could work.

"Obvious example? No unified ammo like the one in Invisible War. Each weapon has it's own ammo."

True. But he did "forgot" to mention that every weapon will only have one type of ammo, which is as bad as uni ammo (at least in that game every weapon had multiple functions).
And what about the weapon mods, hm? ;) There will be plenty of options without different ammo types or weapons with multiple functions (by default).

SageSavage
6th Dec 2008, 11:33
The free roaming is only promised for each level, not the whole game. You can't go anywhere at any time, just explore the area you're currently at. Like in DX 1 & IW. So, that idea could work.

I am aware of that but I take it that it's a bit like in DX1 and a level would be entire Shanghai for example (minus certain large, story relevant, areas like VersaLife maybe). This would make it impossible to hide the poorer part of the city from the player - at least without heavy use of artificial barriers.

Necros
6th Dec 2008, 11:51
Or they just wouldn't let you enter that area before you do certain things to gain acces.

SageSavage
6th Dec 2008, 12:54
progressor's idea was to hide the poorer sides from the player for quite a while into the game. If you deny the player access to such a large part of the world for half the game this would definately collide with the free roaming aspects known from DX1 and you can be sure that most players want to get an opverview of the new DX-world as soon as possible. I believe they almost must use some sort of establishing shot very early on in the game, people are especially interested in how the majority of people live - the dark side of the city.

gamer0004
6th Dec 2008, 15:41
Honestly, gamer004 the people who were strongly against the direction of the game didn't complain about everything unlike you seem to do.
They complained about a few points, you seem to dislike every single thing done so far, it's very different.
It's actually ironic that this happens with someone who claims to have liked DX:IW...

I'm going to say this, because I am sure some people would like to, but can't for a reason or another:

If you complain, do it in a constructive way. State exactly what you disagree with rather than just call it "stupid" and afterwards give a suggestion or two to take the place of that idea you disliked (I've seen a fair share of half-assed suggestions by some people here, but at least they were trying to help).
You remind me of old ladies sitting on the bus-stop argueing about how recent government administrations are ruining their country, while knowing next to nothing about politics.

However, if you keep claiming to dislike the game badly enough that you won't play it and prefer it wouldn't even exist, then please leave.
Let the players who will play the game, try to get more information, talk to each other about it and give more suggestions to the team.
All you're doing is cluttering the forum with junk.

Okay, mindmute, we've been through this before... If you complain, do it in a constructive way. Read my post before you respond. I'm not saying everything is bad. I liked the first concept art. I like the idea of a prequel. I like mech augs. Of course I love shooting, sneaking... What I'm saying is that despite these elements they're screwing up (IM"H"O). They're removing things that were so great about Deus Ex. They're making a prequel, which I like, but they're doing the opposite of why I wanted a prequel. You see, I didn't want a sequel because not even the devs of DX were able to create a world that was as believable and intresting as DX. If they opted for a prequel, I reasoned, they would have to stick to the path chosen in Deus Ex. And they didn't. They apparently just decided that Deus Ex wasn't worth paying attention to because their renaissance style was waaaaaayyy cooler. They thought that conflicting with DX was no problem because what they are doing is so much better. For me, that is both stupid and offensive.

I liked IW (just like I just posted, but apparently reading is very hard for you) despite it's many flaws. It was at least acceptable, unlike DX3. DX3 breaks with DX, not just in gameplay (which isn't the worst that can happen) but in "story" too; in how much the DX3 world differs from what we have now and what we had in DX. There weren't many differences between now and DX in infrastructure, which makes sense because it doesn't change very fast. But in DX3 everything in this world (based on what we have seen so far) has been destroyed and replaced, just to be destroyed again and replaced with buildings similar to what we have now in DX. It's impossible. It breaks with DX. Instead of a universe, going from around 500 BC to 2072, we have 3 seperate games referring to each other. That makes Deus Ex less good. A game in which everything is though out well is way more immersive than a game with only a flimsy decor which we see so many times.

About the arguments: you should read better. I call things stupid with a reason. My reasons are not always elaborate, but everytime I post here I have hope people will understand what I'm on about. And every time people read only half of what I say or they just don't understand (I don't know what's worse) and I have to keep on saying the same thing over and over again until some finally understand.


ahhh... so what you're saying is that it's merely the storyline aspects that are bugging you? that you need 100% continuity or the game DEVALUES DX1? You can't be 100% continuous to a game that was made to maximize the limiations of the technology at the time... a game that had it's own story and universe holes. if that is the perpective in which you are now HATING this "unborn" game, then there is no hope for you.


I do not think there were many areas in which the engine limits where a reason to change things. Yes, Liberty Island is a biut smaller, but that's it. There are no skyscrapers, which indeed would probably be impossible, but it never felt like anything was lacking. We didn't have to visit them.
Of course, having skyscrapers in DX3 is no problem. I like them. I even like most of what we have seen of the DX3 skyscrapers, except for Shanghai because it once more had the "rich live above, poor below" which won't ever happen. The best houses are the most expensive, so that's where the rich people live. But there won't be a clear line between rich and poor. For many people a small house with a garden is way better than an appartment, and only the lowest appartments could be less attractive because of noise and because it is dark. For the rest they will be all quite expensie because of view etc. The poor will live in slums in the outskirts of the city.

A game doesn't have to be a 100% continuous. But DX3 should, because there are so many different possibilities within the timeline. We don't know that much. But even that's not enough for EM, they want more, more more! More oversized weapons, more darks areas, more light areas, more steel, more contrast between rich and poor...



there are some people refferenceing the most recent star wars movies and how dumb it was that the technology there was superior to the tech in the old movies, despite the timeline.

you really think the public was gonna accept a new star wars with 1977 technology? it's crazy. to try and recapture a LACK of technology... it's totally unreasonable.


There is a difference between tecknology in a movie and special effects technology. I mean, in 4, 5 and 6 the light saber fights were a bit... dull. In a new movie they can be way faster and more spectacular. But it's not possible to have certain types of planes in 1,2 and 3 which don't even exist in 4, 5 and/or 6! I'm no fan of Star Wars, I only watched them once. This is what I have heard, and if it is true, I agree.
Planes can look better because you can make them more "high res", you can make the lasers look more like real lasers, as long as they don't suddenly change from a huge gun to a very small one, or the other way around. Or from steel to plastic etc.



like i said before. the only way to enjoy DX is to just accept THAT universe for what the makers say it is. much like DX3, you have to just accept the premise on which it's based or else the hwole thing falls apart... because it's a fantasy.


And THAT'S the problem. I HAVE to accept what the DX3 devs tell me, even if it conflicts so badly with Deus Ex. I have to accept it and therefore it destroys the DX franchise. It can't be ignored. It's part of it, and we now have a storyline/universe that conflicts with itself all the time instead of one continuous universe in which every detail adds to the rest because it is one. In such a case the games are even more immersive, because everything is right. How can you believe in something that's impossible?



it's like deciding that since the FED prints money and makes money out of thin air that it's not worth anything, then going to a store and trying to buy something with a pound of gold because it has ACTUAL value.... no siur, you have to play by the rules set up for you. you have to use the worthless money to buyy things despite it being made from nothing.


What exactly are you trying to say? I guess you try to prove that I have to accept DX3. I know, as stated above, that's the problem. Read my posts, then you'll see. If I could've ignored DX3, would I have been posting here? No, of course not. I would've started my 17th DX runthrough and happily live on.



much like you have to accept that the story premiuse that they give you before you can really play DX3. didn't you have to accept that all the implausible things that go on in DX, the inconsistencies.

There weren't many, which was so great about DX. There are things about we don't know much and therefore raise questions, but plain contradictions? Please tell them.


I'm sorry to break down your posts so much, gamer 0004- but they are rather long.


I know, np ;)



It is important to remember that we really know so little about the game!
By all means you are entitled to your own opinion (<< everyone is saying that). But it even rings true in your post-- look at everything I have put in bold.

I fail to understand how you can hate something when there are so many things central to the game that we are completely unaware of.


I understand what you are trying to tell me. The point is, that nearly everythig of which we do know, and that's pretty much in fact, is not like DX. It doesn't contribute to it, it doesn't stay true to the gameplay...
The point is, continuity are very important for a franchise like DX. Immersion is everything in DX.
Why is everybody hooked to DX once they play it? Because of the immersion.
The gameplay in itself isn't that good actually. Shooting doesn't work really well, nor does sneaking, nor does hacking, nor does using multitools or lockpicks. But they do add to the immersion. I can be whatever I would want to be in such a case.
The storyline is intresting and realistic at the same time. Intresting so you keep playing, without ruining the immersion.
The game world feels almost like the real world. It doesn't feel artificial. It adds to the immersion that everything around you seems to be going on, having it's own problems, but everything is interwoven, which is the same as real life.
Immersion is, for me impossible, if something is unrealistic. How can I truly feel like being Adam, saving our world, if our world looks nothing like the world of today and an't exist?



I'm no modder, but I got the game when I was 12 and now I am 20. And from what I have read, a lot of people who like what they have seen of DX3 share the same story and faithfully call DX their favourite game

I'm not saying modders have the monopoly on being DX hardcore fan lol. I do think they know better than most people what DX was about, because they have bene thinking a lot about it. Many people thought what IW was doing was right, until they started playing. Yes, those weapons look cool, but something is not quite right... It can't really exist... So people don't get really immersed.


I don't know if I agree with anything gamer0004 says. I find it impossible to objectively evaluate his posts because the tone he takes renders anything he says irritating.

You know how some people just have one of those faces you want to punch? Same goes for his posting style. He is like an especially whiny goth teenager's livejournal.

Everything he types I imagine being read out in this slightly squeakier version of comic book guy from the Simpson's voice.


If you think I am like this, sure, np. I like the simpsons and I can say my voice is not like his :P
I haven't ever heard anyone say they wanted to punch me in the face, nor have I ever been... :D



I just know if I do some internet detectiveing on his username I'm going to find a) Sonic the hedgehog fanfic or b) Youtube videos complaining about self diagnosed ass burgers. It's possible he has some good points I'd recognise if I didn't find him so massively dislikeable.

I do not have a youtube account, I do not like sonic the hedgehog. I do not ever write fanfic, because it's not "real", like everything what the devs create. The only thing I do on the internet is posting DX related things and things related to WWII, invasion of Holland in May (10th to 14th) 1940. I have never been accused of trolling before :)


Stop feeding the troll. Simple as that. Gamer or whatever you are are too passionate about the game to a degree of not being healthy. Just enjoy the game for what it is. I got all hyped up for Invisible War and set my expectations to high, won't do that this time.

Sure I'm excited and I will purchase the game no matter what, however this time I won't be blindsided by passion.

I think it is strange that people are allowed to say they love everything, but not that they dislike most (while they are supported by DX :P) :scratch:



But sure, think what you want. If you like it, you like it. I don't. Let me. If you think the way I think or the way I am arguing is wrong then show me what is wrong with them. Some people actually do, and I don't (often) agree. But I do not think it is useful to say that I am trolling or that I'm not constructive or whatever. How can I be constructive, if I can't construct anything or in fact slightly influence the construction? When all fans say they want localised damage and health management and we don't get even that in DX3, how could I change the complete look of DX3 and nearly everyting they have come up with so far while there people who think they like it as well?

Jerion
6th Dec 2008, 16:00
^^

The answer: Stop *****ing and start thinking about what else could be good that you like. That's what most of us have done.

Mindmute
6th Dec 2008, 17:20
Okay, mindmute, we've been through this before... If you complain, do it in a constructive way. Read my post before you respond. I'm not saying everything is bad. I liked the first concept art. I like the idea of a prequel. I like mech augs. Of course I love shooting, sneaking... What I'm saying is that despite these elements they're screwing up (IM"H"O). They're removing things that were so great about Deus Ex. They're making a prequel, which I like, but they're doing the opposite of why I wanted a prequel. You see, I didn't want a sequel because not even the devs of DX were able to create a world that was as believable and intresting as DX. If they opted for a prequel, I reasoned, they would have to stick to the path chosen in Deus Ex. And they didn't. They apparently just decided that Deus Ex wasn't worth paying attention to because their renaissance style was waaaaaayyy cooler. They thought that conflicting with DX was no problem because what they are doing is so much better. For me, that is both stupid and offensive.

Good Lord... I do read your posts, there aren't constructive comments, it's mostly just "this is wrong, that is wrong and that over there goes into the same bag".
The thing you keep going on about, how DX3 supposedly ruins DX and changes everything in it is pure BS. Like all the others have said, you seem to want DX3 to be exactly like DX (and it's hardly me understanding you wrong if EVERYONE who has read your posts is reaching that same conclusion).

Here's two big reasons why it won't and shouldn't even happen ( I could list more, but I doubt you'd even read half of them before going off on your tangents about how no one here can read ):

1-DX is an old game, that despite all it's plus points is by today's standards a game with several outdated gameplay mechanics, I loved DX, and despite the way you talk out of your arse about people here not being true DX fans, I played when it first came out and have replayed it more times than I even feel like counting. Despite my love for DX, not even I want DX3 to be an updated version of DX, I want a new game in the DX world, following the same ideas of choice, consequence and immersiveness of DX..

2-It's EM's game, they have the right and almost the obligation to change DX3's art style, this game is their vision, their project, their baby.
It is not DX1. It is not a plague-ridden, economically depressed world, it's the world that was around just before the proverbial poopie hit the fan.
It actually needs to showcase that very idea in order to keep in with the DX timeline. That's what you can't seem to grasp.



I liked IW (just like I just posted, but apparently reading is very hard for you) despite it's many flaws. It was at least acceptable, unlike DX3. DX3 breaks with DX, not just in gameplay (which isn't the worst that can happen) but in "story" too; in how much the DX3 world differs from what we have now and what we had in DX. There weren't many differences between now and DX in infrastructure, which makes sense because it doesn't change very fast. But in DX3 everything in this world (based on what we have seen so far) has been destroyed and replaced, just to be destroyed again and replaced with buildings similar to what we have now in DX. It's impossible. It breaks with DX. Instead of a universe, going from around 500 BC to 2072, we have 3 seperate games referring to each other. That makes Deus Ex less good. A game in which everything is though out well is way more immersive than a game with only a flimsy decor which we see so many times.


Firstly, I can read just fine, I know you liked IW and I commented on that by calling it ironic, maybe you are the one needing some classes on reading.
While you're at that, get some on writing aswell, English is my 3rd language and even I manage to express my points clearer than you (by the way, you're looking for the word worse, not "less good" :rasp: ).

As for all the buildings supposedly having been replaced, I'm sorry to break this to you, but DX IS NOT A BLOODY DOCUMENTARY. The parts of the world that we saw on DX also differed greatly from the their RL counterparts, why must DX3 be an accurate, architecturally exact portrayal of the world if DX wasn't?



About the arguments: you should read better. I call things stupid with a reason. My reasons are not always elaborate, but everytime I post here I have hope people will understand what I'm on about. And every time people read only half of what I say or they just don't understand (I don't know what's worse) and I have to keep on saying the same thing over and over again until some finally understand.

That's just it, you don't.
It's not just me, no one on this forum has been able to reach a clear conclusion about what the bloody hell you're trying to say.
Stupid is the least descriptive adjective you could probably use, and coincidentally it's the one you keep abusing on every single post you make.

The problem here isn't me not understanding you, since mostly everyone else seems to be on the same boat as me there.
The problem is that you don't know how to hold a decent conversation, calling things stupid and then saying it's everyone else's problem when people don't understand you is quite honestly ridiculous.



It's people like you that make me extremely glad that most forums have an "Ignore" option, I'm actually left wondering why I haven't ticked that option yet.

Icarus AI
6th Dec 2008, 17:34
^^

The answer: Stop *****ing and start thinking about what else could be good that you like. That's what most of us have done.

I think it is extremely important to have "haters" in these forums because they might have a positive effect on the development. If everybody just stayed silent or said "you don't know how it is going to work" many bad decisions could easily be overlooked by the developers. I think it is far more important that people in the forum tell what sucks then tell what is great, because even a good concept can suck, but a bad concept always sucks.

SageSavage
6th Dec 2008, 18:02
Note that quite a number of people around here already expressed and discussed a lot of specific concerns - it's not just yesmen, you know. You don't need "haters" for it, nor do you need "lovers" but if someone can't help to feel that strong about a game, then this person still shouldn't try to crusade against the way other people see it.

jordan_a
6th Dec 2008, 18:03
Do I really have to read the last two pages? :scratch:

Jerion
6th Dec 2008, 18:24
Not really. nothing of substance was really said other than that somebody thought the screenshots would look better darker and bluer.

gamer0004
6th Dec 2008, 19:39
Good Lord... I do read your posts, there aren't constructive comments, it's mostly just "this is wrong, that is wrong and that over there goes into the same bag".
The thing you keep going on about, how DX3 supposedly ruins DX and changes everything in it is pure BS. Like all the others have said, you seem to want DX3 to be exactly like DX (and it's hardly me understanding you wrong if EVERYONE who has read your posts is reaching that same conclusion).


First of all, you read something and then respond, but you miss the small details that show that it's meaning is different.
Anyway, like I just said, I don't want DX3 to be DX. It should have a different storyline, new music, a "new" world (the world won't look the same in 2027 as in 2052, but they should be quite similar), it should improve gameplay where necesarry, better graphics... I don't want a game that's supposed to be a prequel but which I can't recognise as a DX game.



Here's two big reasons why it won't and shouldn't even happen ( I could list more, but I doubt you'd even read half of them before going off on your tangents about how no one here can read ):

1-DX is an old game, that despite all it's plus points is by today's standards a game with several outdated gameplay mechanics, I loved DX, and despite the way you talk out of your arse about people here not being true DX fans, I played when it first came out and have replayed it more times than I even feel like counting. Despite my love for DX, not even I want DX3 to be an updated version of DX, I want a new game in the DX world, following the same ideas of choice, consequence and immersiveness of DX..


Once again, read. I just said DX gameplay wasn't always perfect, and it should be improved. But "improved" is different from made "worse", which is what they're doing. Unless you like over the top action. In which case I recommend you go and see a Schwarzenegger movie.



2-It's EM's game, they have the right and almost the obligation to change DX3's art style, this game is their vision, their project, their baby.
It is not DX1. It is not a plague-ridden, economically depressed world, it's the world that was around just before the proverbial poopie hit the fan.
It actually needs to showcase that very idea in order to keep in with the DX timeline. That's what you can't seem to grasp.


True, true. I would've sued them if it was otherwise, but it's not :nut:
The point is, I was saying (but, hehe, you don't read my posts before responding -_-') that DX3 looks light and modern where it shouldn't and dark and depressing where it shouldn't. People don't build homes to look depressing. But I do want a society in which a lot of things aren't very well... Because of economical problems, for instance. There is no reason why it couldn't happen in 2027. We only know that in 2052 the grey death and an economic crisis had manifested.



Firstly, I can read just fine,


Apparently not, because you keep misintrepreting and saying things that I just said while trying to prove a point.



I know you liked IW and I commented on that by calling it ironic, maybe you are the one needing some classes on reading.
While you're at that, get some on writing aswell, English is my 3rd language and even I manage to express my points clearer than you (by the way, you're looking for the word worse, not "less good" :rasp: ).


English is my second language... What does it matter?
Less good yeah "worse" sounds like DX wasn't a good game, you know :P



As for all the buildings supposedly having been replaced, I'm sorry to break this to you, but DX IS NOT A BLOODY DOCUMENTARY. The parts of the world that we saw on DX also differed greatly from the their RL counterparts, why must DX3 be an accurate, architecturally exact portrayal of the world if DX wasn't?


No, but it has to be believable, because immersion is important. DX did not differ that much. Please buy the game and play it before posting on a DX forum.



That's just it, you don't.
It's not just me, no one on this forum has been able to reach a clear conclusion about what the bloody hell you're trying to say.
Stupid is the least descriptive adjective you could probably use, and coincidentally it's the one you keep abusing on every single post you make.


No, you don't agree. Other people have been able to reach a clear conclusion, on other forums, because they agree. That's different.



The problem here isn't me not understanding you, since mostly everyone else seems to be on the same boat as me there.
The problem is that you don't know how to hold a decent conversation, calling things stupid and then saying it's everyone else's problem when people don't understand you is quite honestly ridiculous.


Yes, everybody here seems to like it, because all people who don't have already left (I actually got a private message today from a guy who said exactly that).



It's people like you that make me extremely glad that most forums have an "Ignore" option, I'm actually left wondering why I haven't ticked that option yet.

Please do so right now.


Not really. nothing of substance was really said other than that somebody thought the screenshots would look better darker and bluer.

Lol that about sums it up, yes :rasp:

Laokin
6th Dec 2008, 20:24
Gamer0004 just hope that I don't find the time to make an intelligent post because your argument is three things:

A.) Illogical
B.) Naive
C.) Arrogant

The only thing I'm going to say right now.... Concept art vs a screenshot? Like really?

And that office pic is a wooden desk with a lamp with a cloth lampshade and a leather chair with a bookshelf in the back. OMG! How over futuristic.

P.S.

Citing your opinion as fact and blatantly calling people wrong is akin to trolling. You should read the rules and if you continue posting here one should probably pay more respect, especially to the staff. After all, you are their guest.

Mindmute
6th Dec 2008, 20:36
Gamer0004 just hope that I don't find the time to make an intelligent post because your argument is three things:

A.) Illogical
B.) Naive
C.) Arrogant

The only thing I'm going to say right now.... Concept art vs a screenshot? Like really?

And that office pic is a wooden desk with a lamp with a cloth lampshade and a leather chair with a bookshelf in the back. OMG! How over futuristic.

P.S.

Citing your opinion as fact and blatantly calling people wrong is akin to trolling. You should read the rules and if you continue posting here one should probably pay more respect, especially to the staff. After all, you are their guest.

No, no, you're just reading it wrong, you see...


And @gamer004:
Not going to bother quoting you:

The only aspects of the gameplay we are sure they have changed so far are:
3rd person view on certain situations;
Auto-health;
Different stealth system;

The ones that we are sure they haven't changed so far:
Choice and consequence;
Open-Endedness;
Big levels;
Immersiveness;
General customisation and roleplay;
Conspiracies;
Cyberpunk setting.

Which of the above do you think reflect more what DX was about? What has changed or what we're being told is still there?

To me, it would be the ones we know are still there, when I played DX I didn't marvel at the healthpacks, way I could hide 3 feet away from a guard and just because it was sorta dark he couldn't see me nor the fact I could only see myself while in a dialogue.
I marvelled at the way the storyline spun around me, at how I could never be sure who to trust, I was struck in awe at the different ideologies, at how fleshed out they were, how very human their motives seemed, I absolutely adored playing it in different ways and discovering something new every time, etc.

If you really dislike DX3's gameplay so much, then maybe we played DX for different reasons, or maybe the ones who have changed and never really defined DX for me keep blindsiding you.


And please, for the sake of keeping this civil and to avoid passing yourself as a fool, don't tell me to buy the game because I mentioned the locations there were very different than their RL counterparts, they are.

I am almost willing to bet my hat that I played DX before you did and as a matter of fact I have travelled to some of the locations in the game and yes, they are very different. Not unrecognisable, but incredibly different nonetheless.
Please, don't insult people by telling them to buy the game, when obviously you're the one at fault there.

Laokin
6th Dec 2008, 21:14
No, no, you're just reading it wrong, you see...


And @gamer004:
Not going to bother quoting you:

The only aspects of the gameplay we are sure they have changed so far are:
3rd person view on certain situations;
Auto-health;
Different stealth system;

The ones that we are sure they haven't changed so far:
Choice and consequence;
Open-Endedness;
Big levels;
Immersiveness;
General customisation and roleplay;
Conspiracies;
Cyberpunk setting.

Which of the above do you think reflect more what DX was about? What has changed or what we're being told is still there?

To me, it would be the ones we know are still there, when I played DX I didn't marvel at the healthpacks, way I could hide 3 feet away from a guard and just because it was sorta dark he couldn't see me nor the fact I could only see myself while in a dialogue.
I marvelled at the way the storyline spun around me, at how I could never be sure who to trust, I was struck in awe at the different ideologies, at how fleshed out they were, how very human their motives seemed, I absolutely adored playing it in different ways and discovering something new every time, etc.

If you really dislike DX3's gameplay so much, then maybe we played DX for different reasons, or maybe the ones who have changed and never really defined DX for me keep blindsiding you.


And please, for the sake of keeping this civil and to avoid passing yourself as a fool, don't tell me to buy the game because I mentioned the locations there were very different than their RL counterparts, they are.

I am almost willing to bet my hat that I played DX before you did and as a matter of fact I have travelled to some of the locations in the game and yes, they are very different. Not unrecognisable, but incredibly different nonetheless.
Please, don't insult people by telling them to buy the game, when obviously you're the one at fault there.


Lol. I kicked and screamed at certain features and remain on the fence. My stance is "cautiously optimistic" even though I'm almost certain I'll enjoy the game. I enjoyed DX2, even though there were things I hated.

With that said, I think it's more obvious than ever that if he replies he's just trolling.

You can't damn a game that we don't even have an official full res screenshot showing the hud holding a weapon. Saying you know how the whole game is is ridiculous.

I'm just glad there are people here that in my absence take the words right out of my mouth. GJ Mind.

gamer0004
6th Dec 2008, 22:00
Gamer0004 just hope that I don't find the time to make an intelligent post because your argument is three things:

A.) Illogical
B.) Naive
C.) Arrogant

The only thing I'm going to say right now.... Concept art vs a screenshot? Like really?


Some of the pictures so far released are screenshots. And nowadays concept art is a very important factor in game design.



And that office pic is a wooden desk with a lamp with a cloth lampshade and a leather chair with a bookshelf in the back. OMG! How over futuristic.


That was a reaction to Rene's question: "Can you please provide links to some screenshots that scream renaissance over a near future Cyberpunk setting?"

I thought it was pretty oldfashioned, and that seems to be a part of renaissance style (because they called it that). Nothing important, so why do you bring this up?



P.S.

Citing your opinion as fact and blatantly calling people wrong is akin to trolling. You should read the rules and if you continue posting here one should probably pay more respect, especially to the staff. After all, you are their guest.

Opinions can't be facts. So if I say "that's awful" it means "that looks awful". How hard is that?


No, no, you're just reading it wrong, you see...

And @gamer004:
Not going to bother quoting you:

The only aspects of the gameplay we are sure they have changed so far are:
3rd person view on certain situations;
Auto-health;
Different stealth system;



You forgot that skillaiming has been removed as well, which I liked. Anyway, I already said that gameplay isn't as important for the franchise as a whole for me, it's not why I dislike DX3. Besides, how much can you change in DX? Removing skillpoints? Check. Auto-heal? Check. No more shadow stealth? Check. Besides, shadow stealth isn't real stealth. Nearly every FPS ever created is a stealth/FPS hybrid if you call line-of-sight "sneaking" stealth.



The ones that we are sure they haven't changed so far:
Choice and consequence;

They say so, we don't know about it, the devs of IW said nearly exactly the same...


Open-Endedness;

We don't know...


Big levels;

It is supposed to have that, IW was just exceptionally bad at this.


Immersiveness;

Apparently not, because the world isn't believable. Being immersed in DX3 is for me the same as being immersed in a first person ice-cream game.


General customisation and roleplay;

They say so, but we don't know. What we do know is that skill aiming has been removed, and skills have been replaced with mechanical augs which offer "clear and cool" advantages, i.e. they're doing partially the same as IW (which removed skills but still called it an RPG because their augs were the skills).


Conspiracies;

We don't know yet.


Cyberpunk setting.

Apparently not, because cyberpunk isn't about oversized weapons and depression because we like it.
To illustrate this, I'd like to quote somebody from the OTP forums:


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".

Of course, this is personal. But for me, this is very true.



Which of the above do you think reflect more what DX was about? What has changed or what we're being told is still there?

To me, it would be the ones we know are still there, when I played DX I didn't marvel at the healthpacks, way I could hide 3 feet away from a guard and just because it was sorta dark he couldn't see me nor the fact I could only see myself while in a dialogue.
I marvelled at the way the storyline spun around me, at how I could never be sure who to trust, I was struck in awe at the different ideologies, at how fleshed out they were, how very human their motives seemed, I absolutely adored playing it in different ways and discovering something new every time, etc.


In other words, you were immersed. Immersed becaus the world around you was so believable; because the characters were so "fleshed out", "how very human their motives were". Making everything as dark and depressing as possible is not really a humane motive. Nor is rebuilding a complete city from the ground up within 20 years so it can be... dark and depressing.



If you really dislike DX3's gameplay so much, then maybe we played DX for different reasons, or maybe the ones who have changed and never really defined DX for me keep blindsiding you.


I didn't say I don't like the DX3 gameplay, since I haven't played it. But I do know that the changes they made are no improvements.



And please, for the sake of keeping this civil and to avoid passing yourself as a fool, don't tell me to buy the game because I mentioned the locations there were very different than their RL counterparts, they are.


Liberty Island is quite the same, and Paris and Hong Kong feel like the real thing, but apparently the DX team did not have the budget to actually go there.



I am almost willing to bet my hat that I played DX before you did and as a matter of fact I have travelled to some of the locations in the game and yes, they are very different. Not unrecognisable, but incredibly different nonetheless.
Please, don't insult people by telling them to buy the game, when obviously you're the one at fault there.

I'm not "at fault". The point is that it's not obvious they are different. The devs tried to create maps that looked like the real thing, even though they did not succeed because they did not have the budget to go there (which has been said by HS or WS I believe, back at the good old days at PDX forums). The DX3 devs are trying to create maps that look cool, even though they look very different from the real thing.

K^2
6th Dec 2008, 23:13
Liberty Island is quite the same
No, it's not. The two are barely alike. DX version of Liberty Island is much smaller, is missing a whole bunch of buildings, several plazas, etc. Have you ever seen the real deal? Doesn't sound like you have. Here, take a look, maybe it will help:

Real Liberty Island (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.689661,-74.044633&spn=0.00338,0.008261&t=h&z=18)

If you think that looks like DX Liberty Island, maybe you should buy the game.

Other DX locations diverge even more from their real counterparts.

P.S. For reference: DX Liberty Island (http://www.visualwalkthroughs.com/deusex/liberty1/7.jpg)

Jerion
7th Dec 2008, 00:17
People, just ignore this fool. He hasn't even played the game and he's already convinced it goes against everything DX. :lmao: :tongue2:

Yargo
7th Dec 2008, 02:16
(heroicly) HA.... HA..... I made it....... :D
See what happens when I leave you guys for a DAY!!!!


The last couple of pages, 3,4,&5 I believe

I would first like to remind everyone that everything and I mean everything that you guys have interpreted, from various articles and what not to what details Rene has provided us, was first interpreted and filtered by someone else. :thumb:
YAY cool new smiley
Anyways, I would like to quote some unknown individual who said:

Opinions are like butt holes, everyones got one and they all stink!

@ Gamer004 :wave: YAY cool new smiley
I'm glad you share your opinion. I agree with you that:
- Tentacles Augs would be terrible!
- Some things in the IDEA(because DX3 is not yet a game) of DX3 are not currently possible. (But to believe it to never be possible would be ignorant on my part)
- DX3 is not what you/I imagined it to be. (no, we did not have the same ideas of what it would be)

That said here is where I believe our opinions diverge:
-I don't agree with making monolithic posts! :D
- DX3 is not going to be this huge break in the Deus Ex space time continuum.
- The art is not horrible. (they draw better than I ever could :D ) I think the renaissance theme is unique and interesting.

Please limit your response, because I don't know how many more pages I can bare through :hmm:
YAY cool new smiley

El_Bel
7th Dec 2008, 02:48
People, just ignore this fool. He hasn't even played the game and he's already convinced it goes against everything DX. :lmao: :tongue2:

I agree with lots of stuff he said. Are you calling me a fool too?

GmanPro
7th Dec 2008, 03:19
Who is more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him? :rasp:

MaxxQ1
7th Dec 2008, 06:02
I agree with lots of stuff he said. Are you calling me a fool too?

That depends. Can you post your thoughts on the game (as we know it so far) without coming across as an arrogant (fill in the blank) who writes about the game as if you've already played it?

Necros
7th Dec 2008, 07:14
- Tentacles Augs would be terrible!
We don't know how that is going to work/look like. I think it's simply going to be like rappelling down, like in the new R6 games.

GmanPro
7th Dec 2008, 07:40
I don't think there are even going to be tentacles of any kind in DX3. Not after the massive wave of nerd rage over that one pic. :D

K^2
7th Dec 2008, 08:18
Tentacles worked Ok in Darkness.

Hey, I'm just saying...

gamer0004
7th Dec 2008, 10:14
No, it's not. The two are barely alike. DX version of Liberty Island is much smaller, is missing a whole bunch of buildings, several plazas, etc. Have you ever seen the real deal? Doesn't sound like you have. Here, take a look, maybe it will help:

Real Liberty Island (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.689661,-74.044633&spn=0.00338,0.008261&t=h&z=18)

If you think that looks like DX Liberty Island, maybe you should buy the game.

Other DX locations diverge even more from their real counterparts.

P.S. For reference: DX Liberty Island (http://www.visualwalkthroughs.com/deusex/liberty1/7.jpg)

Yeah, I said it was smaller... I actually have ever seen a complete
"Liberty Island compared to DX Liberty Island tour". They removed some buildings, but it would makes sense... I mean, a new HQ was built there, I don't think they would've wanted the island to be cluttered with other buildings. Besides, tourism wasn't what it used to be :) Look at Harley Filben, he was the main tour guy :S
Ion storm hadn't suddenly removed the Statue of Liberty to replace it with something that's dark and depressing :rasp:

Necros
7th Dec 2008, 10:29
to replace it with something that's dark and depressing :rasp:
*sigh* :rolleyes: You don't give up, do you? What is so dark and depressing in the screenshots/concept arts? :hmm: And an other thing, we've only seen a tiny bit of the whole game world, don't jump to conclusions...

imported_van_HellSing
7th Dec 2008, 10:33
I don't know, he brings up the fireplace pic as an example of dark and depressing, while it looks rather cosy to me. I've also seen more people complaining DX3 looks more upbeat and generally pleasant than it should. From what I've seen, imo it strikes a good balance for a world that's at the peak of a boom and bound downward within the next few years.

Mindmute
7th Dec 2008, 11:09
Opinions can't be facts. So if I say "that's awful" it means "that looks awful". How hard is that?
Erm no. When you say "that's awful", you mean "that looks awful for me".
The "for me" part is an important one.
And you do act a lot as if your opinion is the sole fact around these boards.




Besides, how much can you change in DX?

They could remove the strong storyline factor, change the setting, make it a dice-based game, make Adam into a pink panda, remove the conspiracies, the moral elements, the philosophy, etc.
DX is not about the gameplay elements they removed, DX's gameplay was actually rather average (even for it's age) where it shined was elsewhere.


We don't know...
Right... Take a look at how many times you've said that.
That's exactly what I've been saying for weeks now: we don't know nearly enough to judge accurately yet.



Apparently not, because the world isn't believable. Being immersed in DX3 is for me the same as being immersed in a first person ice-cream game.
The world isn't believable?
I keep forgetting about your inside-inkling about the game. You already know the world isn't believable while the lot of us still have to tug around a few drawings and scenery.

My answer is to steal your words and tell you right now that WE DON'T KNOW.




Apparently not, because cyberpunk isn't about oversized weapons and depression because we like it.
To illustrate this, I'd like to quote somebody from the OTP forums:

I don't need someone to tell me what is cyberpunk or not, I've been a fan of the genre since the first time I've read "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?" and that was a LONG time ago.




In other words, you were immersed. Immersed becaus the world around you was so believable; because the characters were so "fleshed out", "how very human their motives were". Making everything as dark and depressing as possible is not really a humane motive.



That's your only arguement, the dark and depressing bit and quite frankly I don't see it. I haven't seen anything that dark and depressing.
Even worse, sometimes you call it too dark, other times you call it not dark enough because of the Renaissance theme.. Which one is it? Too much or too little?

And why are you putting my comments about the characters of DX in the same boat as the buildings in DX3? The city does not directly affect how well-done the characters or the storyline will be, I fail to see the logic in this relation.



Nor is rebuilding a complete city from the ground up within 20 years so it can be... dark and depressing.

And FYI, since someone in this thread was kind enough to show you Liberty Island, also be sure that in 50 years, Liberty Island won't change that much.

You seem to think that things have to be an accurate architectural description of RL in DX3, even though they weren't in DX anyway.
Please, remember this is a work of fiction and heavilly relliant on the designer's vision. DX was one such thing too.



I didn't say I don't like the DX3 gameplay, since I haven't played it. But I do know that the changes they made are no improvements.


Matter of fact, you did say it a few posts ago, go check.

Laokin
7th Dec 2008, 12:40
Originally Posted by gamer0004 View Post
I didn't say I don't like the DX3 gameplay, since I haven't played it. But I do know that the changes they made are no improvements.

Well, If it was changed, and you like the changes, how could they not be improvements?

Furthermore, we know NOTHING of the gameplay other than regen health/stealth/3rd person actions. That's it. Also, we were told one of these was changed, either it's the health or the 3rd person... unless they just added light based stealth ontop of the stealth that's already there.

For you to go on page after page about how the game sucks because you seen concept art (which while it is the basis, you don't know if those rooms are even going to be in the game, and if they are... will they be so "dark" and "depressing.")

We saw maybe 3 screenshots. 1 was in a hallway. The other was a dr walking. The last was the office? Oh and Barret. Personally I don't think his weapon is to huge at all.

Also, F.Y.I. the MJ12 troops that were pointed out to you before are augmented. The concept art for them even says Augmented. The word "augmented" means enhanced. If you don't think wearing an exosuit with huge shields and guns is augmented.... then you need a dictionary.

You can't hate a game you know nothing about. Also, you keep citing they have to tear down a city to build these future buildings. Did we tear down a whole city to put up the twin towers? What about the sears tower or those new twisted buildings being made?

They never showed what Shanghai looked like in any Deus Ex. Who are you to say it doesn't have those skyscrapers already? Look at japan and notice the vast difference in comparison to USA. Why is it illegal for the writers to say Shanghai turned into a massive city?

The rich would live up on the top. They do now. How many Super rich people live in Nebraska? Most of them live in big city's, in penthouses and such. Others have vacation homes, Mansions in other rural areas. And your right they do sort of flock to expensive houses.... but I ask you, what would be more expensive then living above everybody else and living in a rich person sanctuary.

You know btw, they already have those.... they are called gated communities. There are gated communities with nothing but $5 million houses.

Every point you can make can be down right broken in half. Your even making up half of your "view" on DX 3. You have zero foundation to stake your claims on.

Too bright, too dark, tear down the city to build a new one to tear it down again to build a new one that has a new race of people who are deemed for destruction.

^ All made up. You don't know if that's what happened. How about it's just how those cities were built from jump street. After all, it is cyberpunk. Cyberpunk likes to BASE things off reality, then twist it till it's distorted and dysfunctional. Not to mention, the tech in DX 1 was too advanced for it's time DX 2, again... too advanced for it's time. Now DX 3, OH MY GOD, hit the breaks this one should be backwards, which would imply that the difference between 2027-2050 seen a MUCH larger technological boost then 2000 till 2027. If it was okay the first time... it's okay now period. It just doesn't make sense your way.

Your saying, basically.... DX3 is too advanced for it's time, but you fail to see that the technological increase between 2050 and 2070 is also unrealistic. Not to mention if you think we are really going to have technology of the DX universe in 2050. We are just tapping it now.... we have a long way before it's built into the cells of our bodies champ.

Quit your lackluster argument. You failed already, numerous times. It's like 5 vs 1 now. Yet, you still argue like your making progress. In fact, you don't even really refute other people, you just repeat your opinion over and over and over again.

If I were you, I'd just let it go... before people start thinking you have a complex or something.

I.E. The point is DX was always futuristic and unfeasible in terms of time frame when paired against real world events. Even if NY looked down right ugly.... maybe it was blown up by a terrorist attack in 1990's. Just because things weren't mentioned in DX 1 or 2 doesn't mean that they "couldn't" have happened. They are in the process of writing the past. As in, nobody ever did before. So, I challenge you, how could they be "wrong."

Just think about that for a minute or two.

Yargo
7th Dec 2008, 16:49
We don't know how that is going to work/look like. I think it's simply going to be like rappelling down, like in the new R6 games.

I said "would be" because I don't think there will be tentacles in DX3.


I don't think there are even going to be tentacles of any kind in DX3. Not after the massive wave of nerd rage over that one pic. :D

Agreed.....:poke: (never seen this one before)


Tentacles worked Ok in Darkness.

Hey, I'm just saying...

Okay thats cool let Darkness keep them :D

gamer0004
7th Dec 2008, 20:02
Erm no. When you say "that's awful", you mean "that looks awful for me".
The "for me" part is an important one.
And you do act a lot as if your opinion is the sole fact around these boards.


Lol I wanted to write that. I forgot that. I'm sorry ;)



They could remove the strong storyline factor, change the setting, make it a dice-based game, make Adam into a pink panda, remove the conspiracies, the moral elements, the philosophy, etc.
DX is not about the gameplay elements they removed, DX's gameplay was actually rather average (even for it's age) where it shined was elsewhere.


Yeah, so instead of making things even worse, they should improve what didn't work :)



Right... Take a look at how many times you've said that.
That's exactly what I've been saying for weeks now: we don't know nearly enough to judge accurately yet.


No, we don't know much about some elements. What I do know, is that DX3 will be near implayable for me just because of the art. That world can't exist, so I can't be immersed, so I won't like it because I only like games in which I get immersed. Clear?



The world isn't believable?
I keep forgetting about your inside-inkling about the game. You already know the world isn't believable while the lot of us still have to tug around a few drawings and scenery.

My answer is to steal your words and tell you right now that WE DON'T KNOW.


We've seen artwork and we know it will feature a renaissance-cyberpunk theme. I don't know hom much different from the artwork they can work that out... But I agree. If they remove all the new ideas, especially the whole concept of renaissance art, DX3 could become a good game :thumb:



I don't need someone to tell me what is cyberpunk or not, I've been a fan of the genre since the first time I've read "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?" and that was a LONG time ago.


That's your opinion. But may I show you why I don't like the style and don't think it has a DX feel to it? Like I said "this is personal. But for me, this is very true.".



That's your only arguement, the dark and depressing bit and quite frankly I don't see it. I haven't seen anything that dark and depressing.
Even worse, sometimes you call it too dark, other times you call it not dark enough because of the Renaissance theme.. Which one is it? Too much or too little?



http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/office2.jpg
Too dark. Not just in lighting, but in colours, materials...



And why are you putting my comments about the characters of DX in the same boat as the buildings in DX3? The city does not directly affect how well-done the characters or the storyline will be, I fail to see the logic in this relation.


Did I say that? No, I didn't. I said that having "fleshed out characters" only added to the immersion. But what used are they if the immersion is destroyed by cool looking renaissance... style anyway? Because of that I can't be immersed anyway, so having intresting characters doesn't make the game any better anymore.



And FYI, since someone in this thread was kind enough to show you Liberty Island, also be sure that in 50 years, Liberty Island won't change that much.


No, nor did it in DX. If DX was made by EM, Liberty Island suddenly wouldn't have a statue anymore, it would be replaced by a state of the art building guarded by badass looking guys with huge weapons. That building would be a nursery.
Indeed, it doesn't make sense, but hey, it looks cool!



You seem to think that things have to be an accurate architectural description of RL in DX3, even though they weren't in DX anyway.
Please, remember this is a work of fiction and heavilly relliant on the designer's vision. DX was one such thing too.


No, the devs of DX3 did not suddenly change the look of the whole world, even though they weren't able to completely recreate the ares themselves.




Matter of fact, you did say it a few posts ago, go check.

I still can't find it. If you think so, then show me where.


Well, If it was changed, and you like the changes, how could they not be improvements?


What can I say? You are so true!

But I don't like the changes...



Furthermore, we know NOTHING of the gameplay other than regen health/stealth/3rd person actions. That's it. Also, we were told one of these was changed, either it's the health or the 3rd person... unless they just added light based stealth ontop of the stealth that's already there.


I just posted the other differences... And the change was NOT auto regen health. Rene said so.



For you to go on page after page about how the game sucks because you seen concept art (which while it is the basis, you don't know if those rooms are even going to be in the game, and if they are... will they be so "dark" and "depressing.")


What does it matter if exactly those rooms will make it to the game or not? The whole style is ridiculous and ugly, so I won't like the final result unless they completely change it, which is ver unlikely.



We saw maybe 3 screenshots. 1 was in a hallway. The other was a dr walking. The last was the office? Oh and Barret. Personally I don't think his weapon is to huge at all.


He has a mingun for god's sake! (FYI: "mini" does not imply "small" here)



Also, F.Y.I. the MJ12 troops that were pointed out to you before are augmented. The concept art for them even says Augmented. The word "augmented" means enhanced. If you don't think wearing an exosuit with huge shields and guns is augmented.... then you need a dictionary.


An exosuit has been built by some guy in a shed. He can wear it or leave it at home. It isn't very good, but it does work. No, an exosuit isn't an augmentation. How could it be, in IW the Templars wore them and they hated augs.
Anyway, the concept art does indeed say so... But in DX the concept art (thank god for that...) was very different from the end result, so that's not a reliable source. Anna wasn't even augmented in the concept art... And were those MJ-12 commandos riot cops? No, because they were commandos -_-'



You can't hate a game you know nothing about. Also, you keep citing they have to tear down a city to build these future buildings. Did we tear down a whole city to put up the twin towers? What about the sears tower or those new twisted buildings being made?


No, in those cases a few buildings were destroyed. But if the whole city as changed, the whole city must've been destroyed. It's quite simple :)



They never showed what Shanghai looked like in any Deus Ex. Who are you to say it doesn't have those skyscrapers already? Look at japan and notice the vast difference in comparison to USA. Why is it illegal for the writers to say Shanghai turned into a massive city?


It already is :scratch: And I didn't say they can't. But it's a bit strange that the whole city has changed within 20 years, isn't it?



The rich would live up on the top. They do now. How many Super rich people live in Nebraska? Most of them live in big city's, in penthouses and such. Others have vacation homes, Mansions in other rural areas. And your right they do sort of flock to expensive houses.... but I ask you, what would be more expensive then living above everybody else and living in a rich person sanctuary.


Only the lowest homes would be cheaper, because they are not as good as the ones above them. But there is no clear line, which is implied by EM.



You know btw, they already have those.... they are called gated communities. There are gated communities with nothing but $5 million houses.


I'm not against "rich and poor divided". It makes sense, or at least it can happen. But not in this way. Not with "rich live above, the poor below" with such a clear border.



Every point you can make can be down right broken in half. Your even making up half of your "view" on DX 3. You have zero foundation to stake your claims on.


I just "broke eveyr point you can make right in half". You're making things up, trying to come up with ways in which the whole DX3 art and style could possibly in a way make sense.



Too bright, too dark, tear down the city to build a new one to tear it down again to build a new one that has a new race of people who are deemed for destruction.

^ All made up. You don't know if that's what happened. How about it's just how those cities were built from jump street. After all, it is cyberpunk. Cyberpunk likes to BASE things off reality, then twist it till it's distorted and dysfunctional. Not to mention, the tech in DX 1 was too advanced for it's time DX 2, again... too advanced for it's time. Now DX 3, OH MY GOD, hit the breaks this one should be backwards, which would imply that the difference between 2027-2050 seen a MUCH larger technological boost then 2000 till 2027. If it was okay the first time... it's okay now period. It just doesn't make sense your way.


Since there's already a city there, we can be pretty sure that didn't happen.

About the advanced thingy: the problem is that DX3 is even more advanced than DX. Besides that are many things in DX3 plain impossible, while some things in DX at least sound probable. Mechanical tentacle augs are impossible! They cannot be made. They would be too weak. Too expensive. And there's a way better alternative at hands: reinforced mechanical legs which can handle the blow. Already possible, relatively cheap and very up to the job.



Your saying, basically.... DX3 is too advanced for it's time, but you fail to see that the technological increase between 2050 and 2070 is also unrealistic. Not to mention if you think we are really going to have technology of the DX universe in 2050. We are just tapping it now.... we have a long way before it's built into the cells of our bodies champ.


Yes, that was one of the main reasons why I didn't like IW (besides useless gameplay changes and the very weak storyline).
I don't know, but many things like invisibility are already possible, but our technology isn't advanced enough. It all sounds credible (except for the spy drone ofc :nut: ). DX3 doesn't. Even when you know nothing about science, you still know that DX3 's augs are impossible because of the reasons stated above.



Quit your lackluster argument. You failed already, numerous times. It's like 5 vs 1 now. Yet, you still argue like your making progress. In fact, you don't even really refute other people, you just repeat your opinion over and over and over again.


Because your "arguments" are flawed; they're based on a wrong understanding of my reasons. If you keep saying things that match exactly what I said, which is a reason why I don't like DX3 I'll have to repeat myself...



If I were you, I'd just let it go... before people start thinking you have a complex or something.


I am thinking of giving up... because this is taking too much time. But as long as you keep on spamming arguments that can be easily disproved (of course, you may in turn disprove my arguments) I'll have to keep doing that.



I.E. The point is DX was always futuristic and unfeasible in terms of time frame when paired against real world events. Even if NY looked down right ugly.... maybe it was blown up by a terrorist attack in 1990's. Just because things weren't mentioned in DX 1 or 2 doesn't mean that they "couldn't" have happened. They are in the process of writing the past. As in, nobody ever did before. So, I challenge you, how could they be "wrong."

Just think about that for a minute or two.

"The point is DX was always futuristic and unfeasible in terms of time frame when paired against real world events." Oh? Please explain...

"Just because things weren't mentioned in DX 1 or 2 doesn't mean that they "couldn't" have happened. They are in the process of writing the past."

True, but things can be conflicting with DX. It is impossible that the technology of DX3 is more advanced than that of DX. Even if the world was in an economic crisis, the knowledge still wouldn't have been lost. At best the technology of 2052 would be still at the same point as it was in 2027, but not worse.

Yargo
7th Dec 2008, 21:01
An exosuit has been built by some guy in a shed. He can wear it or leave it at home. It isn't very good, but it does work. No, an exosuit isn't an augmentation. How could it be, in IW the Templars wore them and they hated augs.
Anyway, the concept art does indeed say so... But in DX the concept art (thank god for that...) was very different from the end result, so that's not a reliable source. Anna wasn't even augmented in the concept art... And were those MJ-12 commandos riot cops? No, because they were commandos -_-'

They only show one riot cop who happens to have been augmented. Doesn't mean all riot cops are Aug'd. Personally I like the riot cop. I think its the best thing they have shown so far.


About the advanced thingy: the problem is that DX3 is even more advanced than DX. Besides that are many things in DX3 plain impossible, while some things in DX at least sound probable. Mechanical tentacle augs are impossible! They cannot be made. They would be too weak. Too expensive. And there's a way better alternative at hands: reinforced mechanical legs which can handle the blow. Already possible, relatively cheap and very up to the job.

Impossible is a very "strong" word other than that I agree, but I think tentacle Augmentation has been skewed in interpretation. At least I optimistically hope thats the case. Either way only time can tell.

Jerion
7th Dec 2008, 21:38
But I don't like the changes...


NO, REALLY? :lol:



He has a mingun for god's sake! (FYI: "mini" does not imply "small" here)


And Maggie Chow had a lightsaber. Not seeing the problem here. :scratch:



Only the lowest homes would be cheaper, because they are not as good as the ones above them. But there is no clear line, which is implied by EM.




I'm not against "rich and poor divided". It makes sense, or at least it can happen. But not in this way. Not with "rich live above, the poor below" with such a clear border.


Contradiction much? :p



What does it matter if exactly those rooms will make it to the game or not? The whole style is ridiculous and ugly, so I won't like the final result unless they completely change it, which is very unlikely.


Ugly or not, that's not going to happen. Maybe you should have shot the artists an email back when you first saw the art. Unless, of course, your intention was just to complain about it and whine that you won't like the final result every chance you get. In which case great job. You have succeeded in becoming a troll.

Beefloafian
7th Dec 2008, 21:49
No, we don't know much about some elements. What I do know, is that DX3 will be near implayable for me just because of the art. That world can't exist, so I can't be immersed, so I won't like it because I only like games in which I get immersed. Clear?




*ahem*...You know, I really would like to know what games you can get immersed in. Since a world has to be able to exist for you to play in it, what can you play?
I'm having a hard time coming up with any at all.....besides wii bowling...
So please, if you can't contribute anything besides telling us that the game will suck because you looked at the same concept art everyone else did, then just go :wave: to another forum and let them read your 20+ quote replies.

p.s. I really do feel sorry for you, not being able to immerse yourself in games, I don't know what I'd do without Deus Ex and Halo.......probably go crazy[er] :nut:

El_Bel
7th Dec 2008, 23:12
Contradiction much? :p


Not at all. Take a walk. See the world around you. The poor and the rich are divided in our world. But we dont see cities being build with the rich living above and the poor below. Maybe in another world, we could see it as a metaphor. But not in Deus Ex nor in the real one.


Unless, of course, your intention was just to complain about it and whine that you won't like the final result every chance you get. In which case great job. You have succeeded in becoming a troll.

And our job as a community is.. what? To prise DX3 and advertise it? Not to criticize it even if we see our favorite game butchered. Well i dont think so. If Eidos doesn't want criticism, why do they keep the forums up? Why dont they ban all those who dont agree with every single thing they do to the game? Gamer has not offended anyone by the way, and you call him a troll. I expect from a moderator to write better than this.

Jerion
7th Dec 2008, 23:32
Exactly. a metaphor. And the art style is illustrative, yes?



And our job as a community is.. what? To prise DX3 and advertise it? Not to criticize it even if we see our favorite game butchered. Well i dont think so. If Eidos doesn't want criticism, why do they keep the forums up? Why dont they ban all those who dont agree with every single thing they do to the game? Gamer has not offended anyone by the way, and you call him a troll. I expect from a moderator to write better than this.

:hmm:

I don't take issue with gamer0004's dislike of the game. I take issue with the way that he advertises that dislike. If somebody wants to slam DX 3 and the Eidos Montreal team, feel free. However doing it with virtually every single post is not acceptable in my view, especially when what he primarily takes issue with is a decision that was made months ago. Get over it!

SageSavage
7th Dec 2008, 23:44
Not at all. Take a walk. See the world around you. The poor and the rich are divided in our world. But we dont see cities being build with the rich living above and the poor below. Maybe in another world, we could see it as a metaphor. But not in Deus Ex nor in the real one.

No, most castles and manors where build on hills for example - not only because of strategic reasons. Or look what happened in New Orleans. Most of the poor people lived in areas below sea level and got their homes destroyed because of Kathrina while the richer areas where above sea level and remained relatively intact. There is also reason why penthouse apartments are normally the most exclusive ones.

Sure, there's no city yet, that has been build like that DX3-Shanghai but in times of merciless and radical turbo capitalism this would be quite logical. Many rich quarters of real cities are located on hills as well, btw.. I know it for sure, because I live in such a city.

MaxxQ1
7th Dec 2008, 23:51
No, we don't know much about some elements. What I do know, is that DX3 will be near implayable for me just because of the art. That world can't exist, so I can't be immersed, so I won't like it because I only like games in which I get immersed. Clear?

You must not play very many games, then, since 90+% of them take place in worlds that CAN'T exist.


No, nor did it in DX. If DX was made by EM, Liberty Island suddenly wouldn't have a statue anymore, it would be replaced by a state of the art building guarded by badass looking guys with huge weapons. That building would be a nursery.
Indeed, it doesn't make sense, but hey, it looks cool!

Oh, I'm sorry. I must have missed your post where you told us how you know exactly what the EM team are/might be thinking. Gosh...what we have here is a true precognitive telepath.


No, in those cases a few buildings were destroyed. But if the whole city as changed, the whole city must've been destroyed. It's quite simple

Did you miss the pic a few posts up? Or was that in the DX3 looks TOO futuristic thread? Anyway, there's a pic here somewhere that shows an older building with new construction added onto it. For that matter, there's a building (COSI - The Center of Science and Industry, here in Columbus, Ohio) not more than 2 miles from where I live that added new (1999) construction to Central High School, a building built over 100 years ago.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3154/3090077501_f8ba123e71_o.jpg

(I hope I linked the pic right)

The high school is the smaller rectangular section at the top center of the building. Do this sort of thing enough, and cities CAN look more modernistic and futuristic, WITHOUT having to tear down old construction.

For that matter, this is the second location of COSI. The first was done the same way - they added (1960's) modern design features to the outside of a century-plus old office building. When COSI moved to their new location, the NEW construction was torn down and the OLD building style was rennovated and repaired. Ironic, eh?

Your problem is that, regarding what you think future cities might look like, you're so narrow-minded, that I'll bet your scratch-pads are only an inch wide (with apologies to David Weber).


It already is And I didn't say they can't. But it's a bit strange that the whole city has changed within 20 years, isn't it?

Not really. Most of the current new construction in Shaghai is less than 20 years old, and if you want a good look at how "futuristic" it is, simply watch the movie Ultraviolet, since that's where it was filmed, and very few of the buildings shown in that movie were CGI.


Only the lowest homes would be cheaper, because they are not as good as the ones above them. But there is no clear line, which is implied by EM.

You obviously have never been to Bexley, Ohio. There is most definitely a clear line between the multimillion dollar homes north of Livingston Avenue, and the sub-$100K homes on the south side of the same street. The same can be said of New Albany, Gahanna, Upper Arlington, Dublin (the one in Ohio), and several other places within 25 miles of where I live. These are just suburbs of a smallish city in a somewhat minor state.

What do you think would happen in larger, more important cities? Especially with the economy going as it is and people start moving back to the city to be closer to their jobs. This is already happening here in Columbus.


About the advanced thingy: the problem is that DX3 is even more advanced than DX. Besides that are many things in DX3 plain impossible, while some things in DX at least sound probable. Mechanical tentacle augs are impossible! They cannot be made. They would be too weak. Too expensive. And there's a way better alternative at hands: reinforced mechanical legs which can handle the blow. Already possible, relatively cheap and very up to the job.

DX3 only looks more advanced than DX because it's 20-odd years NEWER than in DX. And if you think it's impossible to go from a bright and shiny city to the slum-like stuff we see in DX, I suggest you check out some of the steel cities here in the States before and after they became known as rust-belt cities. Most of that occurred in about a decade.

As for mech-augs being impossible - how the hell do YOU know they are impossible? Many things people thought would be impossible are now an everyday reality: Star Trek communicators = cell phones (and in fact, our equivalent has SURPASSED the Trek version in capabilities). Trek-style automatic doors that open at your approach have been around since the late sixties - granted, the earlier versions used pressure-sensitive doormats, but now they use motion-detectors that can be small enough to not be noticeable at all. Man went from the first heavier-than-air flight to landing on the moon in 66 years (unless you're one of those nutjobs that believe it was faked, in which case, I would have no time for you at all). Another Trek thing: transporters. Researchers have already transported single molecules across a few feet. A higher budget and more research MAY have something workable (at least for inanimate objects) in a couple/few decades. What about an elevator to space? There are designs currently being decided on, once the carbon nanotube manufacturing bottleneck is cracked.

Speaking of carbon nanotubes, since they're so close to being mass-produced, they would be perfect for a tentacle aug, since they are far thinner, stronger, and lighter than the equivalent-strength in steel, titanium, tungsten, or whatever other material you can think of.


Yes, that was one of the main reasons why I didn't like IW (besides useless gameplay changes and the very weak storyline).
I don't know, but many things like invisibility are already possible, but our technology isn't advanced enough. It all sounds credible (except for the spy drone ofc ). DX3 doesn't. Even when you know nothing about science, you still know that DX3 's augs are impossible because of the reasons stated above.

Spy drone not possible? Hehe...oh, ye of little faith. A few years ago, I read an article about small survelliance systems being developed. These "spy drones" were small enough to fit into the palm of your hand, weighed less than an ounce, and were not only powered, but had onboard camera and sound capability. By the time nanotech gets developed enough, which may not be all that far from now, it would be a simple matter to have dedicated construction nanites use available resources (perhaps carried in a storage area embedded in your body) to construct a "spy-drone" on the fly, as it were, and one could use it to scope out certain areas before proceeding. Advances in explosives could also allow them to "self destruct" in the event a hostile target is found. This sort of thing is not only plausible, but I'll even say it's PROBABLE in the next 25-30 years.


I am thinking of giving up...

This is the first thing you've said that even hints at thinking on your part.

Frankly, I don't understand why you're still here. You've stated repeatedly that you hate this game, that you won't buy or play it (or at least you've strongly implied it), so why bother? You're not going to convince me or anyone else who differs with your opinion (which you constantly state as fact, whether you intend to or not), and I can almost 100% guarantee you are most certainly NOT going to affect EM's design decisions.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Oh, that room you keep whining about? It would be perfect for me as I'm somewhat light-sensitive, to the point that were it legal, I would wear sunglasses while driving at night. Oncoming headlights are nearly painful for me, not to mention streetlights and traffic signals. It's gotten worse in the past few years with the newer, brighter headlights people are using now.

My computer room has a single light in it - a 40-watt flourescent - that is pointed at the ceiling, and the windows are blocked with cardboard. Oh, and that room also reminds me of the executive office style that's been around off and on for quite a few decades - dark wood panelling, fireplace, indirect lighting, dark leather-covered overstuffed chairs, and so on.

All of that being said, I have to admit that I DO understand the feelings you have about what little we know about the game. I get treated the same way as you when I mention that I hate Starship Troopers (the movie), and refuse to even allow my kids to watch it whenever it's on. It has little to NOTHING in common with the Heinlein book, looks like crap, and is acted worse. Hell, the director said he only read half the book.

Yet, whenever I bring it up, invariably, I get ganged up on by all the people who think the movie is the greatest thing since buttered popcorn.

The difference between me and thee, though, is that I at least SAW the movie before forming an opinion. I wish I hadn't, but there ya go... Yes, I read things about it before it came out, and was even looking forward to it. Not 30 minutes into it, I wanted to go to the manager and ask for my money back, but I make it a rule to never walk out on a movie, and I've seen some pretty bad ones over the years: Galaxina (Dorothy Stratten was the best thing about that movie, and had NOTHING to do with her "acting" abilities - being named Playmate of the Year has certain good points about it). Wolfen was another bad one. A friend and I couldn't stop laughing through the entire thing, despite the fact that it was NOT a comedy. I suppose in that respect, I did get SOME entertainment out of it.

The remake of Rollerball was another puker. They went from the elimination of war, but giving the public bread and circuses while corporate executives made all the world's decisions, to a ratings grab by a Russian cable TV entrepeneur. Huh?

Further, I have nothing but ill-will towards the soon-to-be-released remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still. What little I've heard, I hate, and have no hesitation in telling people that. That said, I will eventually see it, probably on DVD, and rented. I'm sorry, but I can't picture Keanu Reeves as Klaatu, and the environmental message they're changing it to (as opposed to the Earth people are too violent message of the original) feels too contrived, not to mention shoving their tree-hugging message down my throat. I'm all for cleaning up the environment, but I have issues with people who shove it at me, like religion.

Spielberg's remake of The War of the Worlds was okay (doesn't make my top 50, but it's watchable), but what I'd REALLY like to see is a movie made in the time period and location the original Wells novel takes place: turn of the century (19th to 20th), Elizabethan England (I think I got the correct Queen - maybe Victorian?).

All anyone's asking you here is to maintain an open mind and that all may not be as bad as you think. Most of us here seem to be in the cautiously optimistic camp about DX3, especially after that fiasco known as DX:IW. So far, I've seen or read nothing which gives me major pause, except your repetitive, one-track-mind rants about a game that's at least a year from release.

SageSavage
8th Dec 2008, 00:11
Stop watching remakes... 90% of them are pointless trash. I don't think I remember any direct remake that was really worth it's money. Maybe if you count movies like "For a Fistful of Dollars", which was basically a western remake of Kurosawa's "Yojimbo".

MaxxQ1
8th Dec 2008, 00:22
Gamer has not offended anyone by the way,

Ahem...<raises hand>

He's offended ME through his lack of constructive criticism. He uses words like "stupid" to refer to the devs and their decisions, without even suggesting an alternative.

He's offended me through his arrogance in assuming that unless you've spent years modding a game, you can't be a REAL fan. That's like those idiots at the Rush message board I post on who say that Rush fans aren't REAL Rush fans unless they hate everything they've released after 1981.

He's offended me through his assertion that the real world won't look like it does in the game(s). Well, of COURSE not...different people have different ideas about how they like to design things. This is JUST a game - it's all it's ever intended to be, and all it ever WILL be. It makes no claim to be an accurate representation of what the future will look like, yet HE acts like he knows EXACTLY what the future will look like, and since DX3 doesn't look like HIS idea of 20 years from now, it MUST be wrong. Look at all those people from the fifties who said we would have flying cars by now. They were SO sure. Heh...guess what? We DO have flying cars.

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/11/the-worlds-firs.html
http://www.terrafugia.com/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-527492/Is-car-Is-plane-Actually-certainly-beats-sitting-traffic-jams.html

Oddly enough, they look NOTHING like what was imagined in the fifties, or on The Jetsons.

The problem isn't one of technology, it's one of regulations and government agencies.

He's offensive in that he gives NONE of the objecting posters any consideration for their views. He just repeatedly spouts the same words, slightly rearranged, whereas most people at least try to do basic research to back up their assertions.

So, yes, he's offended at least one person.

MaxxQ1
8th Dec 2008, 00:36
Stop watching remakes... 90% of them are pointless trash. I don't think I remember any direct remake that was really worth it's money. Maybe if you count movies like "For a fistfull of dollars", which was basically a western remake of Kurosawa's "Yojimbo".

Well, if you want to get picky, most every story ever written for the past 2000+ years is a remake of a few basic plotlines. There is NOTHING original in storytelling anymore.

Forex: Young kid has a high-born heritage, but doesn't know it at first. Meets an old guy who teaches him the ways of the world, and reveals his past. Old guy gets killed, imprisoned, whatever, where he can't help the kid anymore. Kid grows up, saves the world, and lives happily ever after.

Now, was I talking about King Arthur, Frodo Baggins (admittedly, Gandalf came back to life, but then he wasn't there to help Frodo at the end, was he?), or Luke Skywalker?

Even Deus Ex has roots in this plotline - the "old guy" was a combination of Manderley, Gunther, Anna, Paul, and Alex Jacobson. I'm sure if you look hard enough (although you shouldn't have to) you can see other similarities between those stories and DX.

And only half the movies I mentioned were remakes - the rest were "originals".

Edit: Oh, and I think some people might consider Peter Jackson's LotR a remake of Ralph Bakshi's animated version. I also think most, if not all, of them would consider Jackson'r vision far superior to the "original".

In some ways, I think his remake of King Kong is superior to the 1930-something version.

SageSavage
8th Dec 2008, 00:55
Well, if you want to get picky, most every story ever written for the past 2000+ years is a remake of a few basic plotlines. There is NOTHING original in storytelling anymore.

Not that picky... ;) That's why I wrote direct remakes.


Even Deus Ex has roots in this plotline - the "old guy" was a combination of Manderley, Gunther, Anna, Paul, and Alex Jacobson. I'm sure if you look hard enough (although you shouldn't have to) you can see other similarities between those stories and DX.
Debatable but here's not the right place for it.


And only half the movies I mentioned were remakes - the rest were "originals".
Yeah but I didn't want to say "stop watching other movies as well." ;)


Edit: Oh, and I think some people might consider Peter Jackson's LotR a remake of Ralph Bakshi's animated version. I also think most, if not all, of them would consider Jackson'r vision far superior to the "original".
Deranged people I suppose?


In some ways, I think his remake of King Kong is superior to the 1930-something version.
Don't know, haven't seen it.

I apologize for further derailing this totally derailed thread! :p

MaxxQ1
8th Dec 2008, 01:00
I apologize for further derailing this totally derailed thread! :p

Stay away from derailing - you might fall and hurt yourself.:D

Okay, I'm done as well.:rasp:

El_Bel
8th Dec 2008, 01:11
Exactly. a metaphor. And the art style is illustrative, yes?

Yes, but the original DX, although it had its share of metaphors, they were much more subtle.

IW on the other hand had lots of metaphors that were a lot more, in our faces, like the Shanghai thingy.

The slow paced, methodological combat, were you had to think if your character (a thief) had the time to shoot 2 enemies with a rifle before they could kill him(based on skill-points) has been replaced by the action-gamer focused no-weapon-skills.

The list can go on.

I dunno, it seams like they are keeping the DX name and storyline just for marketing purposes. From what i saw the artistic direction and feeling is diefferent than Deus Ex. I think that they would be better with a new franchise, with a note on the backcover "The game most important aspects like multiple paths, choice and consequence was inspired by Deus Ex."

Shifter mod, a one man project, has fixed the broken things DX had. EM throws anything broken out of the window. The-industry-as-a-whole-has-grown-up my a$$.

SageSavage
8th Dec 2008, 01:22
Yes, but the original DX, although it had its share of metaphors, they were much more subtle.
As I wrote before, I don't think it's meant purely as a metaphor. I think it reflects what real world elitists tend to do.


I dunno, it seams like they are keeping the DX name and storyline just for marketing purposes. From what i saw the artistic direction and feeling is diefferent than Deus Ex. I think that they would be better with a new franchise, with a note on the backcover "The game most important aspects like multiple paths, choice and consequence was inspired by Deus Ex."
Maybe I'll join you there someday but, as we all know because it has been mentioned a million times before, there are currently only a handful of pictures and a few words from the lead out. Still not enough intel to jump to conclusions...

MaxxQ1
8th Dec 2008, 01:44
Yes, but the original DX, although it had its share of metaphors, they were much more subtle.

True. I'll give you that.

However, to stay in business, devs need to sell games. While the age of the average gamer has been steadily rising over the past few years, a lot of them are still youngsters (I'm 44, btw). In this short-attention-span, sound-bite world we live in now, a more blatant subtlety (oxymoron?) needs to be used. A lot of gamers DON'T want to have to think too much, hence the preponderance of actioners/shooters. I personally think they're idiots for that, but what can you do...?

We all here KNOW that DX is a great game, with much deeper "fun" than the typical game, but the times, they are a' changin', and if a gaming company doesn't change as well, it gets left behind. It's sad to see it go that way, but the market dictates the design - gameplay or visual - and right now, the market wants more simple-minded stuff.

Until a majority of gamers can give big bucks to a dev for a deep, intellectually stimulating game, things will continue as they are. It will be a LONG time before we see the likes of another DX, Baldur's Gate, or Planescape: Torment.

My biggest hope with DX3 is that EM can strike a good balance in older, story-driven type games, and newer action games. It COULD happen, but I'll reserve judgement until I play. The best I can hope for at this time, is that DX3 is better than IW.


The slow paced, methodological combat, were you had to think if your character (a thief) had the time to shoot 2 enemies with a rifle before they could kill him(based on skill-points) has been replaced by the action-gamer focused no-weapon-skills.

I'll give you that, as well. Now if a certain poster here could phrase his objections as you did, things might be a bit less...acrimonious, shall we say?


I dunno, it seams like they are keeping the DX name and storyline just for marketing purposes. From what i saw the artistic direction and feeling is diefferent than Deus Ex. I think that they would be better with a new franchise, with a note on the backcover "The game most important aspects like multiple paths, choice and consequence was inspired by Deus Ex."

Is "different" really all that bad? It's eight years later. I'm not saying the industry has grown up, but unfortunately, it's more of a big-business industry now than it used to be. Devs aren't able to make the games they may want. They depend on financing from others, who unfortunately insist on calling the shots, which means they shoot for the most profit possible. There's little room in today's gaming industry for nostalgia or originality.

The only way to get the moneylenders to listen is to speak with your wallet. Buy games that appeal to what you WANT to see in a game, and ignore the ones that don't. At some point, the publishers will get the message - just probably not in my lifetime, now.


Shifter mod, a one man project, has fixed the broken things DX had. EM throws anything broken out of the window. The-industry-as-a-whole-has-grown-up my a$$.

You praise a mod for "fixing" broken aspects of DX, yet condemn EM for not even USING the broken stuff? Does not compute, unless you're implying that EM should keep the broken stuff, but fix it?

As I've asked gamer, how do you know that what they've left out, or added, for that matter, will be a bad thing? Until I see late Beta gameplay footage, I'm not even going to begin to decide if a "feature" is good or bad. I'm just taking the info we've been given with a grain of salt, and hoping EM can pull off a minor miracle and rejuvenate a game we all profess to love.

Frankly, it's unfair to Eidos Montreal to ask for more than that.

Kaigypsy
8th Dec 2008, 02:57
:) I just want to say thank you vanhelsing(sp?) for translating that oh so interesting article! I will have to re-read it again and again to make up for not having the next Deus Ex came on my puter.

Of course because its due out in 2009 only gives me more time to build my next system so perhaps hurry up and wait is better?

:D

Laokin
8th Dec 2008, 07:13
Lol I wanted to write that. I forgot that. I'm sorry ;)



Yeah, so instead of making things even worse, they should improve what didn't work :)



No, we don't know much about some elements. What I do know, is that DX3 will be near implayable for me just because of the art. That world can't exist, so I can't be immersed, so I won't like it because I only like games in which I get immersed. Clear?



We've seen artwork and we know it will feature a renaissance-cyberpunk theme. I don't know hom much different from the artwork they can work that out... But I agree. If they remove all the new ideas, especially the whole concept of renaissance art, DX3 could become a good game :thumb:



That's your opinion. But may I show you why I don't like the style and don't think it has a DX feel to it? Like I said "this is personal. But for me, this is very true.".




http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/eternaltreasure/office2.jpg
Too dark. Not just in lighting, but in colours, materials...



Did I say that? No, I didn't. I said that having "fleshed out characters" only added to the immersion. But what used are they if the immersion is destroyed by cool looking renaissance... style anyway? Because of that I can't be immersed anyway, so having intresting characters doesn't make the game any better anymore.



No, nor did it in DX. If DX was made by EM, Liberty Island suddenly wouldn't have a statue anymore, it would be replaced by a state of the art building guarded by badass looking guys with huge weapons. That building would be a nursery.
Indeed, it doesn't make sense, but hey, it looks cool!



No, the devs of DX3 did not suddenly change the look of the whole world, even though they weren't able to completely recreate the ares themselves.




I still can't find it. If you think so, then show me where.



What can I say? You are so true!

But I don't like the changes...



I just posted the other differences... And the change was NOT auto regen health. Rene said so.



What does it matter if exactly those rooms will make it to the game or not? The whole style is ridiculous and ugly, so I won't like the final result unless they completely change it, which is ver unlikely.



He has a mingun for god's sake! (FYI: "mini" does not imply "small" here)



An exosuit has been built by some guy in a shed. He can wear it or leave it at home. It isn't very good, but it does work. No, an exosuit isn't an augmentation. How could it be, in IW the Templars wore them and they hated augs.
Anyway, the concept art does indeed say so... But in DX the concept art (thank god for that...) was very different from the end result, so that's not a reliable source. Anna wasn't even augmented in the concept art... And were those MJ-12 commandos riot cops? No, because they were commandos -_-'



No, in those cases a few buildings were destroyed. But if the whole city as changed, the whole city must've been destroyed. It's quite simple :)



It already is :scratch: And I didn't say they can't. But it's a bit strange that the whole city has changed within 20 years, isn't it?



Only the lowest homes would be cheaper, because they are not as good as the ones above them. But there is no clear line, which is implied by EM.



I'm not against "rich and poor divided". It makes sense, or at least it can happen. But not in this way. Not with "rich live above, the poor below" with such a clear border.



I just "broke eveyr point you can make right in half". You're making things up, trying to come up with ways in which the whole DX3 art and style could possibly in a way make sense.



Since there's already a city there, we can be pretty sure that didn't happen.

About the advanced thingy: the problem is that DX3 is even more advanced than DX. Besides that are many things in DX3 plain impossible, while some things in DX at least sound probable. Mechanical tentacle augs are impossible! They cannot be made. They would be too weak. Too expensive. And there's a way better alternative at hands: reinforced mechanical legs which can handle the blow. Already possible, relatively cheap and very up to the job.



Yes, that was one of the main reasons why I didn't like IW (besides useless gameplay changes and the very weak storyline).
I don't know, but many things like invisibility are already possible, but our technology isn't advanced enough. It all sounds credible (except for the spy drone ofc :nut: ). DX3 doesn't. Even when you know nothing about science, you still know that DX3 's augs are impossible because of the reasons stated above.



Because your "arguments" are flawed; they're based on a wrong understanding of my reasons. If you keep saying things that match exactly what I said, which is a reason why I don't like DX3 I'll have to repeat myself...



I am thinking of giving up... because this is taking too much time. But as long as you keep on spamming arguments that can be easily disproved (of course, you may in turn disprove my arguments) I'll have to keep doing that.



"The point is DX was always futuristic and unfeasible in terms of time frame when paired against real world events." Oh? Please explain...

"Just because things weren't mentioned in DX 1 or 2 doesn't mean that they "couldn't" have happened. They are in the process of writing the past."

True, but things can be conflicting with DX. It is impossible that the technology of DX3 is more advanced than that of DX. Even if the world was in an economic crisis, the knowledge still wouldn't have been lost. At best the technology of 2052 would be still at the same point as it was in 2027, but not worse.


It already is :scratch: And I didn't say they can't. But it's a bit strange that the whole city has changed within 20 years, isn't it?

Once again, how would you know it changed if you never saw it's original form. You didn't read what I said, that is clear. They never showed shanghai in DX ever, EVER. So you saying it changed in 20 years is made up, since nobody has seen the "original" base plan of the city in DX.


No, in those cases a few buildings were destroyed. But if the whole city as changed, the whole city must've been destroyed. It's quite simple :)

Once again, you never saw the city to make a point of reference to how it changed. I.E. It was originally built with those buildings.


What can I say? You are so true!

But I don't like the changes...

You blatantly said you "don't hate the changes." So, If you don't hate the changes, but the changes make you hate the game, you must not be honest. Explain to me how this isn't "nonsense."


I'm not against "rich and poor divided". It makes sense, or at least it can happen. But not in this way. Not with "rich live above, the poor below" with such a clear border.

Once again that clear border already exists. The area where the houses that are 5 million and above are for rich people only. I don't see how that is any less clear.


He has a mingun for god's sake! (FYI: "mini" does not imply "small" here)

His mini gun is much smaller than anything that exists in today's world. It actually is quite mini. There is no hand held minigun that can be held with 1 arm in existence. Also, they weigh over 100 pounds and are about half as long as a person. I.E. google image "Chaingun." Since that is what you were referring too. An example would be the Vulcan Canon. BTW note, his "mini gun" Is about the length of an M16 and only has 3 barrels. I fail to see how this is a "Huge Gun." There were plenty of enemies with bigger weapons than that in both of the DX games.

Also, your point about an exosuit? Exosuits are allowing paraplegic people to walk in real life. To say a paraplegic person who has an exosuit isn't superior to one with out one, your fooling yourself. Exosuits in DX gave them abilities people without the exosuit didn't have. I.E. Making them superior soldiers to those without the Exosuits. If they weren't SUPERIOR, then explain it to me professor, What was there purpose?? If you use a device that makes you better at something you have "Augmented your ability." Fact that wearing an exosuit is an Augmentation.

aug⋅ment
   /v. ɔgˈmɛnt; n. ˈɔgmɛnt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [v. awg-ment; n. awg-ment] Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object)
1. to make larger; enlarge in size, number, strength, or extent; increase: His salary is augmented by a small inheritance.

Augmentation
Aug`men*ta"tion\, n. [LL. augmentatio: cf. F. augmentation.]

1. The act or process of augmenting, or making larger, by addition, expansion, or dilation; increase.

Wearing an exosuit INCREASES your ability as a soldier. Thus making that soldier Augmented (whilst he is wearing the suit). The suit is what enables him to INCREASE his ability, thus becoming an "Augmentation."

No where in the definition of "Augment" or "Augmentation" does it say that one has to be Permanently installed. You are confusing the term Biological Modifications with the word Augmentation.

So I believe your have just been owned by a FACT. Maybe you should learn English, or just not debate things you have no knowledge of.


About the advanced thingy: the problem is that DX3 is even more advanced than DX. Besides that are many things in DX3 plain impossible, while some things in DX at least sound probable. Mechanical tentacle augs are impossible! They cannot be made. They would be too weak. Too expensive. And there's a way better alternative at hands: reinforced mechanical legs which can handle the blow. Already possible, relatively cheap and very up to the job.

This has been addressed a million times. Nano technology is actually INFERIOR to the performance of Mech Augmentations. They sacrifice power for concealment since there was such an outlash of hate towards modded people. They were indeed SECRET. Nano tech is more advanced because it's actually built into the cells of your body, as so.... it has more limits.

This was also confirmed by an interview with EM. Search around, like I said this topic has been laid to rest 1,000 times over.


"The point is DX was always futuristic and unfeasible in terms of time frame when paired against real world events." Oh? Please explain...

Mj-12 started in REAL LIFE in the 1940's. In DX they formed in the 2030's.

Nano tech to make your whole body and anything you touch will forever be IMPOSSIBLE. Nano tech invisibility does exist, but the nanites have to be built into each object that is going to become invisible. I.E. Finding a shotgun in locker won't become invisible, EVER by the use of nano tech. Also, our nanotech invisibilty that really exists, will only give the invisible effect when seen through a certain kind of lens. I.E. It doesn't work on regular cameras nor the naked eye... so in essence true invisibility is still a myth.

That's about all I'm going to address, since I've already eaten so much time in writing this. Every one of your arguments just is not thought out. You are implying that your opinion is indeed FACT and that I am doing the same. Incorrect, I am in fact stating the obvious that there are 1,000's of creative ways to explain why it is the way it is. You seem to be so narrow minded you can only come to ONE conclusion. The best part is, you base your arguments so poor, such as "they needed to destroy the city for it to be changed." When there is no Indication that the city EVER changed.

I.E. When the city was built in DX time line/universe, it was built with these "futuristic" buildings. Also, to build designs like that, they don't cost as much as you'd think. Are you a professional metal smith? So you can tell me by that concept art if that was Aluminum or a plastic molding coated in a layer of aluminum or steel for that effect?

All of a sudden you became an Interior Decorator on us. Another note worthy thing to mention, when a style is ingrained into a culture and placed from the beginning of the age... it's much more common, also they figure out ways to cut costs.

Stop trolling, it's clear... you just babble.

*edit*
OH! and dude... seriously they never showed people's "homes." Where are you pulling the idea that your average everyday person lives with metal plating in their houses?

The office didn't really show that "metal" look, and only 2 concept art shots did. My point here is, your over analyzing. Your saying those few pieces of concept art, (note there is nothing explaining the locations of these shots) represent the average level/map/home in the DX 3 game. This is absurd, since I know of at very least 3 locations with a "futuristic" metal/glass design off hand. If I were to fly to Africa and show a little Ethiopian a picture, is he really going to assume the whole country is reflective of those few pictures I handed him? He might, but he would be wrong... and as a child, NOT wrong to be wrong. It's expected... guess who the little Ethiopian is in my metaphor. Yea you, only your not a child.... so what does that make you?

P.S.
I raise my hand too. He has most definitely offended me. He has shown clearly that he isn't open to debate, yet his posts are meant to entice you into his little argument which no matter what you answer with, is always deemed as "stupid" or "wrong" and pointed out with a complete lack or regard for respect what so ever. He is by definition trolling now. I for one am wondering where the super moderators, who locked my topics that were much more relevant, open, and friendly, wandered off to.

This is to you Romeo :wave:




Only joking pal.

P.S.S.
Furthermore I'm going to go that extra step. I am in fact TELLING you that you don't hate the game. No this isn't an opinion, this is a fact. You don't hate the game, you just THINK you will. Your whole entire argument is under false pretenses, entirely based upon your OPINION of less than 1% of information about the game. You said the concept art was enough, then you said the concept art from DX1 changed so much. It didn't change SO much, it actually changed very little. That riot cop was identical to the MJ-12 Commando. For the sake of argument, say it changed vastly like you imply, this would only further prove my point how you can't hate a game based on concept art. How do you know there won't be a redesign? How do you know that it's not only a few buildings that sport this Metal-Deco phenomenon? How do you know it won't get cut? Point is, it's a FACT that much CAN change. So therefor impossible for you to be sure if you hate it. Thus, stating you only THINK your going to hate it. By not playing it your only spiting yourself as you could be pleasantly surprised to find out that they did a wonderful job.

Asking others to spite themselves as well is just down right ignorant. This is also why you, Gamer0004, has offended me. He indirectly insulted my intelligence and the many others who didn't even take part in this conversation by saying things like "if you didn't mod DX your not a DX fan." I preordered DX1, played it to the death, bought the second one despite the reviews and completed that game a fair amount of times itself. This guy has blatantly disrespected EM by saying the decisions they made.... Note, He can't be sure what decisions were made, are stupid and refuted them with an irrational perspective. I'd go out on a limb and say he was very offensive and more people than posted were probably offended by this mans rant. This was supposed to be a thread about the interview and turned into a derailed "Why DX 3 Sucks, and my opinion is FACT" argument. Seriously, where are the mods?

Spyhopping
8th Dec 2008, 08:58
This was a happy thread once :(

Gone are the days...

DXeXodus
8th Dec 2008, 11:11
He is by definition trolling now. I for one am wondering where the super moderators, who locked my topics that were much more relevant, open, and friendly, wandered off to.

This is to you Romeo :wave:


Only joking pal.


You should know that sometimes the best way to deal with a troll is to just ignore him. They thrive off conflict and long rebuttals such as the one that you typed up there.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
8th Dec 2008, 11:24
You should know that sometimes the best way to deal with a troll is to just ignore him. They thrive off conflict and long rebuttals such as the one that you typed up there.

Hehe, totally agree that it is best to ignore in such cases. :)