Page 8 of 10 First First ... 45678910 Last

Thread: Deus Ex was "overly complicated and deeply flawed"?

Deus Ex was "overly complicated and deeply flawed"?

  1. #176
    Originally Posted by remmus
    1. the rpg aspect was greatly imbalanced and simply created plot holes, here you where Mister JC Denton, a augmented, geneticly made super agent right out of a special forces training....and you couldn´t hit the broadside of a barn with your starting skills, heck you had to exploit the extra skill points glitch to come close to being the skill level you expect of a secret agent.
    That's an RPG convention. All true RPGs function like that. It's a hell of a difference between firing a gun at a target at a shooting range, and doing it while being shot at by people who are trying to kill you or, simply, actually firing a gun at a living person... This is simply the way that an RPG tries to capture that experience.

    Originally Posted by remmus
    2. stealth system was shallow and just plain frustrating to use, the only saving graces was quick save/load and the fact the enemies were stupid and half blind.
    The stealth system itself is actually (fairly) realistic, considering the technology at the time. You hide behind things, in things or in the shadows. You have to rely on quick glimpses and sound to determine the location of enemies, and you don't have anything to tell you how well you are hidden. You know... like in real life.

    Originally Posted by remmus
    3. None lethal was simply worthless, yeah it´s possible, but horrendously draining on your patience, all the none lethal means where ineffective and stealth attacks where finicky at some times.
    There's your problem. It's not a problem with the game...

    The Riot Prod is one of the most effective, non-lethal, ways of dealing with someone I have ever seen in a computer game. Sneak up behind them (crouching), and jam it in their lower back. They go down in one second flat.

    Originally Posted by remmus
    4. the game promotes multi tactics but in the end stealth shooting/stabing ends up being the only way not getting yourself killed 2 minutes flat.
    Do you mean "in the end" as "towards the end of the game" or as "ultimately"?
    If it's the first, I'd say you were dead wrong.
    If it's the latter, I'd remind you that in the beginning you're playing a fresh agent just out of the academy (it's your first mission ever), and you're up against, at first, a huge militia, then military and para-military troops. And you're alone. You need an edge to be able to run'n'gun. You get it in Augmentations, and increasing skill with weapons. With Ballistic Protection, Aggressive Defense System and Speed Enhancement running, I find that I hardly ever take any major damage. If I do, it gets taken care of with Regeneration.

    If you're unhappy with it because you can't act like a run-of-the-mill shooter, and just blast everything in sight with impunity from the get-go: Tough! JC may be grown in a vat and be augmented, but he still has a lot of the basic frailties of a regular human - such as an allergy to bullets. He also has a lack of experience in the field (he has none), in the beginning.

    What I'm trying to tell you here, is that none of those things are a problem with the game. They all stem from your perception of how games should work.
    "Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." G'Kar, Babylon 5.

  2. #177
    Originally Posted by pringlepower
    2. Smart AI makes for frustrating gameplay? Wtf?

    4. He means that shooting was the only way to go late game, and that the levels were far more linear. Personally, with ballistic shielding augs, health regen and a lightsaber I did just fine on my second go, but the first time with a silenced assault rifle was easier, and more satisfying.
    2. Yes, in games you are usually up against superrior numbers with better gear, too smart AI can make it frustrating, or even impossible to get through the game (wich is not to say that most game AI could not be made smarter, but there is an upper limit at wich point it becomes just too much.).

    4. No, he complains that stealth is the only way, as straight up blasting gets you killed, wich is not true, just suboptimal. You could shoot everyone, you could pummel them unconscious, you could just avoid them in lot of cases, multiple tactics and multiple paths.
    Well, he might be complaining that you can't just stealth past them without shooting or stabbing, wich is even less true, as you still have the straight up shooting, or just walking past them (works in almost all cases with some care and right augs/gear), or hit over the head with the baton, wich is neither shooting or stabbing.
    And while maps became more linear towards the end (area 51 was the worst map of the game as far as most people areconcerned i believe), there were still more than one way to go forward until the very last part, and your tactics would still depend on your gear/skill/aug selection.

    Originally Posted by Shinrei
    How true....playing through DX every two years or so and it's still insanely fun and atmospheric as in the good old days (about 10years ago...huh).

    I'm running it on Vista Ultimate and Home Premium (Notebook) and it works all fine for me... i use Kentie's fixes, they should work on both systems (Vista and Win7). Just give it a try...altough the font ingame is a little bit too small sometimes on wide screen. But it's definitely worth it to play DX on newer machines as it was back in the days...
    I got a spare HD lyin around, i'll just put an old XP on it, need to do so anyway as Overlord 2 refuses to work in win7 (i have ATI graphics card and the nvidia physx (wich you need to run the game) does not work except with nvidia cards, except with older drivers that i can use with xp).

  3. #178
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    7,374
    Question!

    At what point did RPG stop meaning "Playing a Role" and start meaning "Roll some invisible dice?" Seems to me that the actual meaning of the acronym gets lost on some people.

  4. #179
    Originally Posted by Mr. K
    Question!

    At what point did RPG stop meaning "Playing a Role" and start meaning "Roll some invisible dice?" Seems to me that the actual meaning of the acronym gets lost on some people.
    Not sure where this is coming from, nobody has claimed you can't play a role without dice (i might make a claim that almost all human interactions consist of people takin, and playing a role of some sort).
    However, RPG = Role Playing Game.
    The dice is in the game part.
    You can play a role without dice (you do so in games like DOOM, Halo, Tekken, Starcraft 1 & 2, etc...), but RPGs tend to have rules about the role you play, and most rpg's, traditionally, have some form of randomizing mechanics (almost always dice) and character growth as part of their rule sets.
    So while one can complain about the unrealisticness of JC not being a supersoldier straight out of the academic (altough i disagree on that), the skill system is pretty conventional one for computer rpg, in HR they decided to do away with it, wich, while i disagree with (not all security experts need be master marksmen), is not the end of the world and proclaiming the game bad because of it would be kinda silly.

  5. #180
    Originally Posted by Mr. K
    Question!

    At what point did RPG stop meaning "Playing a Role" and start meaning "Roll some invisible dice?" Seems to me that the actual meaning of the acronym gets lost on some people.
    If that is in reference to what I wrote about RPG conventions, I'll refer you to what Nyysjan wrote. It's pretty much spot-on.

    I'd just like to add that a basic aspect of RPG:s is that you build your character from the ground up, like in DX (though JC is more competent in all the skills than an average RPG character). While this can be done in one go, and then just send the character out to butcher everything in sight, it is usually considered preferable to actually get to see your character advance and improve.

    IMO, it's a hell of a lot more rewarding to see the improvements first-hand, instead of just being awesome right from the start.
    "Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." G'Kar, Babylon 5.

  6. #181
    Originally Posted by Fluffis
    I can't really see an easier way to present something, than a window that takes up half of the screen at the start of a new game.

    Could have added some neon arrows and a sign that says "Here Be Skills!!!", I suppose.
    I personally like complexity and having to figure stuff out for myself... then again thats probably why I've never been much for "hand holding".

  7. #182
    Originally Posted by Fluffis
    If that is in reference to what I wrote about RPG conventions, I'll refer you to what Nyysjan wrote. It's pretty much spot-on.

    I'd just like to add that a basic aspect of RPG:s is that you build your character from the ground up, like in DX (though JC is more competent in all the skills than an average RPG character). While this can be done in one go, and then just send the character out to butcher everything in sight, it is usually considered preferable to actually get to see your character advance and improve.

    IMO, it's a hell of a lot more rewarding to see the improvements first-hand, instead of just being awesome right from the start.
    kinda why I wish most games would just get rid of level caps... I hate it when there is no more room for improvement. Finite awsomeness is allways so limited.

  8. #183
    Originally Posted by Nyysjan
    Not sure where this is coming from, nobody has claimed you can't play a role without dice (i might make a claim that almost all human interactions consist of people takin, and playing a role of some sort).
    However, RPG = Role Playing Game.
    The dice is in the game part.
    You can play a role without dice (you do so in games like DOOM, Halo, Tekken, Starcraft 1 & 2, etc...), but RPGs tend to have rules about the role you play, and most rpg's, traditionally, have some form of randomizing mechanics (almost always dice) and character growth as part of their rule sets.
    So while one can complain about the unrealisticness of JC not being a supersoldier straight out of the academic (altough i disagree on that), the skill system is pretty conventional one for computer rpg, in HR they decided to do away with it, wich, while i disagree with (not all security experts need be master marksmen), is not the end of the world and proclaiming the game bad because of it would be kinda silly.
    Dice are a direct representation of the term "easier said than done" but that percent probability of failure verses out of the park home run should be left at the D&D mat in a felt bag sitting attop the DMG and left out of video games where the players ability to negotiate the controls should be the bottom line.

  9. #184
    Originally Posted by GhostofaMessiah
    Dice are a direct representation of the term "easier said than done" but that percent probability of failure verses out of the park home run should be left at the D&D mat in a felt bag sitting attop the DMG and left out of video games where the players ability to negotiate the controls should be the bottom line.
    Just because you think RPGs should become like FPSes, doesn't mean that *everyone* does.

    I suppose you supported the, ahem, improvements of Oblivion over Morrowind?
    signature image

  10. #185
    Originally Posted by GhostofaMessiah
    Dice are a direct representation of the term "easier said than done" but that percent probability of failure verses out of the park home run should be left at the D&D mat in a felt bag sitting attop the DMG and left out of video games where the players ability to negotiate the controls should be the bottom line.
    That's highly subjective, some people prefer to use their own skill, others prefer to be more reliant on character skills.

  11. #186
    Originally Posted by Pretentious Old Man.
    I suppose you supported the, ahem, improvements of Oblivion over Morrowind?
    You mean getting rid of the hideously incompetent player charachter who can't seem to hit the ninth effing cliff racer that is like 30cm off his face?
    Edit: I did like Morrowind but the guaranteed hits in Oblivion was a much better way to do it.

    Originally Posted by Nyysjan
    That's highly subjective, some people prefer to use their own skill, others prefer to be more reliant on character skills.
    I suppose so but certain things like hitting something from a first person perspective really should be left for the player.
    Deus Ex: Health Regeneration

  12. #187
    Originally Posted by Hertzila
    You mean getting rid of the hideously incompetent player charachter who can't seem to hit the ninth effing cliff racer that is like 30cm off his face?
    Edit: I did like Morrowind but the guaranteed hits in Oblivion was a much better way to do it.

    You forgot about the guaranteed magic system, too. Everything was always guaranteed. And that was exactly Oblivion's problem: It's basically a first person slasher in an open world with quests. That does not an RPG make in my book.

    And don't get me started on the auto-leveller....
    signature image

  13. #188
    Originally Posted by Pretentious Old Man.
    You forgot about the guaranteed magic system, too. Everything was always guaranteed. And that was exactly Oblivion's problem: It's basically a first person slasher in an open world with quests. That does not an RPG make in my book.

    And don't get me started on the auto-leveller....
    I admit that quaranteed magic was a bit overdoing it, even if they got it right (IMO naturally) that you could access magic with a weapon in hand. I just think that hitting when the graphics showed I hitted and instead skills affecting damage was a good step forward from the initial hell in Morrowind where my guy is practically armless in the start.

    Auto-leveller? It might be because I have not played either of those in a long time but what auto-leveller?
    Deus Ex: Health Regeneration

  14. #189
    Originally Posted by Nyysjan
    That's highly subjective, some people prefer to use their own skill, others prefer to be more reliant on character skills.
    That is a very simplified comment (no offence). The people who "prefer to be more reliant on character skills" (usually) also rely on their own skill. In some games, like Deus Ex, even more so than the people who "prefer to use their own skill", because the "character skills crowd" actually have to use their own skill to try to overcome the lack of skill in the character.

    I mean, just look at DX; even when you're at "Master", you don't automatically hit. You still have to aim. Conversely, you can become pretty good at hitting things while still at "Untrained" (depending on situation, of course - some feats are more or less impossible). It all depends on whether or not you're up to the challenge.

    It's not like we who want a skill system for shooting want it to be like, say, WoW where you (basically) just have to be turned the right way to hit; we (most of us, I think) want the game to be more challenging than what a regular shooter can offer.
    "Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." G'Kar, Babylon 5.

  15. #190
    Originally Posted by Hertzila
    I admit that quaranteed magic was a bit overdoing it, even if they got it right (IMO naturally) that you could access magic with a weapon in hand. I just think that hitting when the graphics showed I hitted and instead skills affecting damage was a good step forward from the initial hell in Morrowind where my guy is practically armless in the start.

    Auto-leveller? It might be because I have not played either of those in a long time but what auto-leveller?
    My apologies: an auto-leveller is a mechanism whereby enemies scale to your level. That is to say, if you see a goblin at level one, you will have a moderately hard fight to beat him. If you then come back at level twenty, you will STILL have a moderately hard fight to beat the exact same Goblin, because Oblivion scales all enemies to be just slightly more powerful than you are. That's why, unmodded, it's actually a lot easier to beat Oblivion's main quest at level 1 than it is at level 20. In Morrowind, sure the beginning was really tough, but as you got more powerful, everything got more easy to beat, until eventually the expansion packs introduced even more powerful enemies, and so forth.

    In other words, the exp side of Oblivion (as well as being considerably simpli...sorry "streamlined", is also largely irrelevant.
    signature image

  16. #191
    Originally Posted by Hertzila
    You mean getting rid of the hideously incompetent player charachter who can't seem to hit the ninth effing cliff racer that is like 30cm off his face?
    Edit: I did like Morrowind but the guaranteed hits in Oblivion was a much better way to do it.
    one extreme, too hard, other extreme, too easy.
    And again, it's subjective, i preferred Morrowind.

    Originally Posted by Hertzila
    I suppose so but certain things like hitting something from a first person perspective really should be left for the player.
    subjective, i prefer the DX and ME1 approach for fire arms, guaranteed area where the bullet will hit wich becomes smaller as the skill goes up (making you more accurate), and more stable scope view as skill goes up (melee should bring up the change of your opponent dodging/blocking/parrying, wich, again, should be about your skill, opponents skill and rng/dice, but that's my personal preference, not a fact carved in stone).
    Mind you, ME2 is a game where lack of weapon skills does work, as you decide wich weapons you use while picking a class, wich pretty much defines your play style fom start (my only real issue with the ME2 is the limited ammo).

    Originally Posted by Fluffis
    That is a very simplified comment (no offence).
    True.
    Didn't feel like writing an essay, don't feel like writing one now.

  17. #192
    Originally Posted by Nyysjan
    True.
    Didn't feel like writing an essay, don't feel like writing one now.
    I got that. I took the liberty of doing it for you.
    "Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." G'Kar, Babylon 5.

  18. #193
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    7,374
    Originally Posted by Nyysjan
    Not sure where this is coming from, nobody has claimed you can't play a role without dice (i might make a claim that almost all human interactions consist of people takin, and playing a role of some sort).
    However, RPG = Role Playing Game.
    The dice is in the game part.
    You can play a role without dice (you do so in games like DOOM, Halo, Tekken, Starcraft 1 & 2, etc...), but RPGs tend to have rules about the role you play, and most rpg's, traditionally, have some form of randomizing mechanics (almost always dice) and character growth as part of their rule sets.
    So while one can complain about the unrealisticness of JC not being a supersoldier straight out of the academic (altough i disagree on that), the skill system is pretty conventional one for computer rpg, in HR they decided to do away with it, wich, while i disagree with (not all security experts need be master marksmen), is not the end of the world and proclaiming the game bad because of it would be kinda silly.
    Originally Posted by Fluffis
    If that is in reference to what I wrote about RPG conventions, I'll refer you to what Nyysjan wrote. It's pretty much spot-on.

    I'd just like to add that a basic aspect of RPG:s is that you build your character from the ground up, like in DX (though JC is more competent in all the skills than an average RPG character). While this can be done in one go, and then just send the character out to butcher everything in sight, it is usually considered preferable to actually get to see your character advance and improve.

    IMO, it's a hell of a lot more rewarding to see the improvements first-hand, instead of just being awesome right from the start.

    Actually the thought and consideration was brought to me from this old interview: http://pc.ign.com/articles/071/071578p1.html
    It seemed relevant, and it's a good read.

  19. #194
    Originally Posted by Mr. K
    Actually the thought and consideration was brought to me from this old interview: http://pc.ign.com/articles/071/071578p1.html
    It seemed relevant, and it's a good read.
    It's just that RPG:s have been around for quite a bit longer as PnP, than as CRPG. The conventions are just stronger, that's all. Even though there are PnP RPG:s where you don't randomise beginning stats (WoD), or even roll a die at all (free-form), the main idea, i.e. the most common one, of an RPG character is that it is delivered to you "as is", and it's up to you to make it better. We can't choose our genetics... yet.

    For me, the WoD version is about as far as I'll go when calling something a PnP RPG - no randomisation at the creation, and minimal randomisation other than combat during the game.
    Somewhere you just have to draw the line between PnP RPG and improvised theatre. Free-form RP steps over that line, imho - no randomisation at creation, and no randomisation in-game. That's theatre.

    This is also one of the reasons why I can't just think of any ol' computer game as an RPG. Somewhere along the line it stops being an RPG, and becomes just a... "G". The possibility to personalise the character - either at start-up or along the line - is the line for me (no, a new weapon, or a "forced" skill, does not qualify as personalisation)... Addition of other "conventions" (randomisation, de facto control over conversations etc.) brings it closer and closer to being a "true" RPG.

    DX falls on the "right" side of the line, imo, since you actually have no control over the absolute basic stats of JC. They're not randomised every time you start, but they may as well have been. He is delivered "as is". It's your job to make him better through skills and augs, and get through the story by selecting routes and conversation. There should also be a genuine feeling that it is the character's skills that define how well you will be doing, though your own skills do play a part (in PnP this is mainly social skills).

    One thing they did lie about, however:
    Randomisation does feature in, in DX. It's the aiming bit, early on, while in combat. It's not a straight die-roll, but let's be honest; it's not all that far off.

    So DX did follow a lot of the PnP RPG conventions, whether Messrs Smith and Spector intended it or not.

    I hope I didn't confuse matters.
    "Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." G'Kar, Babylon 5.

  20. #195
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    7,374
    I dunno, it just seems silly to me that no other ways of expressing character definition are widely considered (or even imagined!) in CompRPG. I mean, the point of RPG is to 'play a role'- surely there are other ways of defining that role that are better suited to the medium than an arbitrary array of invisible skills? DX Augs are a good example of this. They're an applicable alternative to skills tailored to the visualized 3D realm afforded by computers and consoles. Why isn't that kind of out-of-the-box thinking more prevalent in game designers and players alike?

  21. #196
    Thinking outside the box is nice, especially when you improve things, but one should always remember that the boxes exist for a reason, somethings work, some don't, wich is not a reason to stop thinking about new things, but if you change things just to be new and edgy, instead of trying to make things better, you will probably end up just making things worse.

    Also, the problem some of us have with the direction of DX:HR is not that the devs are thinking outside the box, largely because it seems they they aren't.
    We have not seen anything truly innovative, wich is not that bad because DX had nothing really innovative (it merely mixed different genres and used their respective conventions to build the best game ever), but it seems that not only are they making the box smaller (by removing skills), and stuffing us into a box we might not like that much (instant mastery of weapons, arm blade, 3rd person stealth, takedowns, regenerating health, console and pc version being identical), and wich is nothing like original DX box.

    I'm not one of the doomsayers who cry that anychange is a horrible crime against nature and that the game will suck because it's not 1 = 1 to the original game, but there are some rather worrying trends showing up.

  22. #197
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    7,374
    Originally Posted by Nyysjan
    Thinking outside the box is nice, especially when you improve things, but one should always remember that the boxes exist for a reason, somethings work, some don't, wich is not a reason to stop thinking about new things, but if you change things just to be new and edgy, instead of trying to make things better, you will probably end up just making things worse.

    Also, the problem some of us have with the direction of DX:HR is not that the devs are thinking outside the box, largely because it seems they they aren't.
    We have not seen anything truly innovative, wich is not that bad because DX had nothing really innovative (it merely mixed different genres and used their respective conventions to build the best game ever), but it seems that not only are they making the box smaller (by removing skills), and stuffing us into a box we might not like that much (instant mastery of weapons, arm blade, 3rd person stealth, takedowns, regenerating health, console and pc version being identical), and wich is nothing like original DX box.

    I'm not one of the doomsayers who cry that anychange is a horrible crime against nature and that the game will suck because it's not 1 = 1 to the original game, but there are some rather worrying trends showing up.
    Not terribly concerned about that. HR isn't first relevancy here for this discussion IMO. Although in regard to that, the only applicable thing to mention here is the hybridization of skills and augs. It removes some redundancy (bad) for a system more conceptually tailored to 3D gaming (good). When you get down to it, RH and all that jazz is irrelevant here.

    With gaming in general, the box seems to be there because it sold well hundreds of times and players never expected more innovation from the developers. In many ways HR is not innovating here either. However I suggest that the AugmenSkill mechanics are truly innovative here compared to other "Conventional" RPGs.

  23. #198
    Originally Posted by Mr. K
    However I suggest that the AugmenSkill mechanics are truly innovative here compared to other "Conventional" RPGs.
    Which would be great, if it were an innovative improvement rather than an innovative simplification.

    Though to be honest I'd argue that it's not that innovative anyway. It's essentially DXIW's system with XP instead of upgrade canisters.

  24. #199
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    7,374
    Originally Posted by Ashpolt
    Which would be great, if it were an innovative improvement rather than an innovative simplification.

    Though to be honest I'd argue that it's not that innovative anyway. It's essentially DXIW's system with XP instead of upgrade canisters.
    Conceptually it's both an improvement and a simplification. It's an improvement in a couple ways. First, it's better suited to the rendered 3D medium, as Augs are mechanical and thus visible. This means character development (from here on referred to as CD) has immediate "non-imagined" application. Second (and here is where it overlaps with simplification), the CD mechanics tree is altered. Instead of having two trunks with a lot of branch overlap, it's one trunk with longer branches. The result is less redundancy in CD but wider total range of options. The value of this is subjective, as will be whether the Role Playing experience is diminished by this.

    Evolution is easier to accept and create than revolution. That said...yes. It is. Though with significantly more variety and capability.

  25. #200

    Square Enix understands Deus Ex DNA

    Here is an article about the importance of fully understand the nature of the original Deus Ex.

Page 8 of 10 First First ... 45678910 Last