The picking/dragging.. oh.. the pain.

[Danjun]

Well, I saw the gameplay.. and what bothered me was.. picking/dragging items/bodies.

It's like DX2s. Well, I wouldn't say DX1 since it was old and it was the best solution back then, but DX2's picking was totally like DX1's.. you pick up items 'invisibly'.. and dragging bodies at DX2 was O_o.

So what I suggest for DX3 is... when we are dragging, it looked totally bizarre. I suggest that when dragging bodies, the view should turn to 3rd person. would be alot better. Ofcourse you could still shoot after that, just like when stealthing, and hiding behind or taking cover, you go into Third Person, when dragging bodies, you should be able to shoot too. Oh, and if I remember correctly, there's a third person/second person trigger right. So default; we go third person on dragging bodies, and if the player wants, he could do second-person by pressing a button.

WHO AGREES.

[Umodian]

I also dislike how objects seem to 'float' when you grab them, that said, I'd MUCH rather have them animate our hands so it actually shows you grab said object in first person.

It's a feature that a lot of first person games seem to do little of, and it really does a lot in terms of immersion, imo.

[Shralla]

What is second person? No, there is no "trigger" to switch views. It automatically does it for certain actions, and honestly it does it for too many of them already. There's no reason to have moving objects occur in third-person.

[[FGS]Shadowrunner]

In DX1 or DXMP if you pick up a large metal crate and start moving it towards the line of fire, you are still vulnerable to that fire until you drop the crate and stand behind it. I think this is a realistic approach. I think most of us DXMP players have no problem with picking up items, or dragging things around.

Since even in multiplayer, we need to search datacubes, boxes, open doors and traps to find things in order to power up items or initiate lockdowns, or to simply regenerate, I don't think it would work too well without. Hell's Kitchen is a great example, searching through all the dustbins and trashcans and looking behind trashbags to find lockpicks etc.

Since they are using a regeneration system, doesn't sound like this will be an issue, I am just intrigued to see if you can use a dead body as armour...

[Wilks]

Don't really care if they model hands. I just wish you could simply pick the effing body up like in DX and IW. If I'm trying to hide a guard, I need to do so quickly and efficiently. The process shown looks very cumbersome and slow.

[Blade_hunter]

If you guys remember how it is done you can see adam in first person holding his gun (with both hands) and dragging the body with nothing.
The only suggestion it's the fact that adam removes his second hand from the gun or even not be able to drag bodies while wielding a gun.

Anyway this game doesn't have body awareness, so that's why I suggest that thing

[KSingh77]

Maybe the strength aug can be upgraded to pick up a body,Adam can pick up crates,why not bodys?

[[FGS]Shadowrunner]

In DXMP/DX1 a body that was not bleeding, if picked up and dropped, will start bleeding.

[Kodaemon]

I suggest that when dragging bodies, the view should turn to 3rd person.

As if we don't have enough unnecessary, ridiculous, arbitrary perspective switching already. :mad2:

Oh, and if I remember correctly, there's a third person/second person trigger right.

Wrong, the game decides what is AWESOME enough to show in third person. Like ladder climbing. There is no toggle. Also, what the hell is second person view?

[JCpie]

Wrong, the game decides what is AWESOME enough to show in third person. Like ladder climbing. There is no toggle. Also, what the hell is second person view?

A second person view... a first person view which you can't control? :confused:

[NKD]

Second person, clearly the solution to all our troubles and a compromise we can all get behind.

[Ninjerk]

A second person view... a first person view which you can't control? :confused:

I think it would be you watching someone else watch Adam.

[Blade_hunter]

I heard about that kind of point of view, but I never figured out what it is I mean I don't think I've played a game with that point of view.
It's somewhat a mix of a main character being controllable in third person by using the view of an other person inside the game. second what I've heard about it

[Kodaemon]

I was thinking something like a reversal of a first person view conversation, where you see your character through the eyes of the character you're talking to. You could argue DX1 does that sometimes. So, I guess body dragging in second person view would be a view... from.. the... body...?...

[Irate Iguana]

I was thinking something like a reversal of a first person view conversation, where you see your character through the eyes of the character you're talking to. You could argue DX1 does that sometimes. So, I guess body dragging in second person view would be a view... from.. the... body...?...

Wouldn't second person view actually be the game doing the action for you without any input from you?

[Wilks]

I think it would be you watching someone else watch Adam.
Nah, that's just third person. Second would be like having a camera on the some guy who is watching you do things.

"Uh, you're like sneaking under a fence right now... Mmm, okay, so there's like a dude to your left, I think he's got a gun or something... You're shooting at him... You're not a very good shot, you know? Try to keep steady..."

[Kodaemon]

I like this thread much better now.

[Blade_hunter]

Wouldn't second person view actually be the game doing the action for you without any input from you?

No ;) that's the definition of a cutscene

@kodaemon sometimes it happen, yes, since the camera moves cinematicaly through the conversations but using second person in that context it's out of place.

Second person as said it's a third person view viewed through a first person view of somebody else.

[JCpie]

Like an RPG/adventure book?

'You turn the corner to find a goblin staring at you with dark green eyes. The Goblin proceeds to attack, you counter with your longsword'.

So, it would be like an interactive movie with RPG elements and a non linear story?

[Kodaemon]

Yeah, that's second person narrative view, as described on wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative_mode#Second-person_view

So wait, wouldn't second person in a game be breaking the fourth wall, like a character speaking to you, the player?

[Blade_hunter]

The JC pie version sounds a lot like those text based RPGs, and yes it's used that way, but we are talking about 3d games.

@ kodaemon it's like you control JC denton and see him through the Paul's eyes.

:confused:

[JCpie]

It's a bit difficult to get my head around.

Player: Move forward ten paces and crouch to get under the obstacle.

Character: Am I clear of the obsticle yet? Can I stand?

Player: You can stand now, turn to the left.

Something like that?

[Blade_hunter]

You're trying to be complicated here :hmm:
Thinks just about cameras you control the protagonist but you see it through somebody else eyes

[PlasmaSnake101]

I'm kind of concerned with this to, it looked terrible. I hope they still have time to address the issue, but I don't really know how long something like that could take. It seems like a really lazy way to go about doing this. Also, I hope they have or can incorporate a blood trail effect on guards killed instead of knocked out. Variance would be nice to, slight blood trail for pistol kills and normal melee kills, large thick trails for shotguns, assault rifle, sub-machine guns and take down kills.

I can't really recall the drag physics appearance, but I think I remember that looking odd too. Placing one hand could keep you safe and still armed in highly guarded areas, two hands could speed up the process. Why can't people think of these things, I guess they are a pain to set up. Hopefully they can do an update later on if they can't do it now.

[Angel-A]

Actually, I really liked the "floating" thing they had when you pick up objects. It's the same as DX1!
I agree though on the body dragging. I'll take benefit of the doubt and say it's an artifact of it still being in development; people seem to forget HR is not yet complete.

[Danjun]

Sorry, when I say second-person, I mean first-person. LOL.

Oh, and my point is also about the 'floating' objects.. I'd rather hope for a hand-model.

If you take Hitman Blood Money as an example, it's good. I like how we drag bodies. I'd prefer the same on DX3.

[breakdown234]

oh the pain , i love the threads title

and it implies what i wrote in the third person view thread on page 5 ....he must be dragging the guy with his dick gotta hurt dragging 176 pounds xD

[[FGS]Shadowrunner]

Actually, I really liked the "floating" thing they had when you pick up objects. It's the same as DX1!
I agree though on the body dragging. I'll take benefit of the doubt and say it's an artifact of it still being in development; people seem to forget HR is not yet complete.

That is so true, if DX3 is anything like DX1, new missions will still be under construction ten years later...

[JCpie]

You're trying to be complicated here :hmm:
Thinks just about cameras you control the protagonist but you see it through somebody else eyes

If you counted the player's vision, then all 3rd person games could be counted as 2nd person?

[breakdown234]

wtf is wrong with yall 2nd person doesnt exist,-,-´,rofl

he even corrected himself at the top of this page,xD

[Blade_hunter]

If you counted the player's vision, then all 3rd person games could be counted as 2nd person?

No, that's specific, second person is controlling your character while looking though somebody else eyes.
It's a rare view point used in games.

Imagine a boss battle
you control your character in the area, and look the whole area through the boss' eyes
And see a crosshair trying to get you, and you have to avoid it if you don't want to get damaged.

This is second person

Third person and first person are very different from this and second person is used only in specific cases.
Kodaemon seemed to understood what it is in the context even if it's unpractical
You gave an example about text RPGs which is an other usage of it

wtf is wrong with yall 2nd person doesnt exist,-,-´,rofl

he even corrected himself at the top of this page,xD

It exists dude, but as I said it's not used often mostly as a camera viewpoint

[Danjun]

Err.. yeah, I confused alot of you guys.

Anyway, why do you prefer 'floating objects'

I think it'll be better with a hand-model showing that you picked on an item and have to drop it to use weapons or so.

Oh, and I hope it has the same main-model or copy of the models on the first person, so it doesn't mismatch on third-person. If you see DX1, notice on the mirror. Both conflicts each other.

Check Thief-3/deadly shadows for an example, it's perfect. The third/first person triggering. And the same first-person model that matches the third person model.

[breakdown234]

id rather have them animate it all in fps than 3rd person talk about unreal and immersion breaking,:mad2::mad2::mad2:

[Pinky_Powers]

If you can't get immersed in third-person games, you have far deeper issues to contend with.

[breakdown234]

no my friend i dont have issues with 3rd person but when it gets mixed with fps in a game that makes no sense in 3rd person nor was made for 3rd person thats what gets me mad i hope you understand me a bit better now


if id want a 3rd person game then id play gears of war, dmc , re, mgs, bayonetta, etc etc etc.sheeesh why cant they stay on one track instead of mixing both,facepalm

[II J0SePh X II]

Going by the wiki explanation of the 2nd person view, all uncontrolled cutscenes and takedowns should be considered to be in the 2nd person view.

[Ashpolt]

If you can't get immersed in third-person games, you have far deeper issues to contend with.

Come on Pinky, you've been around on here long enough and involved in enough debates about this to know that the choice of individual viewpoint isn't the issue so much as the flip-flopping between the two, so why are you bringing up that idea again?

[Blade_hunter]

Second person point of view in games isn't cutscenes, you control the guy you see though somebody else eyes, that's not the case of a cutscene.
Cutscenes can use 3rd person 1st person and 2nd person point of view.
To show a game who have this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGqGU-bjorY

[Pinky_Powers]

Come on Pinky, you've been around on here long enough and involved in enough debates about this to know that the choice of individual viewpoint isn't the issue so much as the flip-flopping between the two, so why are you bringing up that idea again?

Because he's new. I have no idea what his stance is.

[breakdown234]

pinky bladehunters right its this godforsaken switcharoo about that we have going on here

plus as already said this isnt supposed to be a 3rd person game it isnt devil may cry for crying out loud ,

will they ever learn id say no , and what is it with the wielding guns with both hands and dragging the guy with your dick would you like to explain to me that maybe thats 2nd person too ,facepalms with the desk:mad2:

[Pinky_Powers]

plus as already said this isnt supposed to be a 3rd person game it isnt devil may cry for crying out loud ,

I tend to feel the pressure in situations like this, to preface my sentiments with a disclaimer of sorts: Human Revolution should be working toward the Deus Ex philosophy of the Immersive Sim. It should be furthering Spector's work in that area, not back-tracking or abandoning it. This is sinful and EM should be ashamed.

There, now that's out of the way...

Devil May Cry is a beat'em up title. Why are comparing that to Deus Ex gameplay? Because of third-person? By that logic the original Deus Ex is little different than DOOM because of all the first-person. Or to hit you harder: Halo is Deus Ex because it chose first-person perspective.
Your logic in illogical. Your reasoning is unreasonable.

Now, the constant perspective switching is going to be hard for some people... I'll concede to that. But I'd be willing to bet good coin most folk are going to find it isn't bad at all; even those who, today, claim it's a deal breaker and immersion nullify'er.

I've played Rainbow Six Vegas, and their third-person cover worked so bloody well. Say what you want about the game, but the mechanic is fluid and beautiful and should lend itself splendidly to stealth gameplay as well as combat.
Despite third-person being a deviation from one of the core principles of Deus Ex, its implementation fits nicely into the remaining core pillars... based on what I've seen, at least.

[Blade_hunter]

You know Pinky there is people who said Deus Ex isn't Half life for justifying the presence of third person...
As for the rest of core principles, a lot of games can fit them, that doesn't mean they can be considered to be Deus Ex, despite having mechanics who fits the game.
As for the complaints about sequels of Deus Ex, so DX IW and this title most complaints were made about the surroundings of the core rather than the core itself.
Turn a Mass effect game in first person and you will see if people will complain or not.

[Ashpolt]

I've played Rainbow Six Vegas, and their third-person cover worked so bloody well.

....For that game. Just like turn based combat works well for Final Fantasy games, and quick time events work well for God of War, and jetpacks worked well for Tribes. Just because something works well in one game, doesn't mean it's a good idea - much less the right idea - for another game. Rainbow Six Vegas may have been a decent game in its own right (though a terrible sequel and poor use of the franchise, but that's a matter for another time) and I agree, the cover system did work well there, for what is essentially a fairly straightforward shooter - but it's definitely not what I would expect or want to see from a Deus Ex game.

Also, lest we forget it (or just wilfully ignore it :rolleyes: ) DXHR is not just using third-person for cover, so the third-person moments will be more prevalent than Rainbow Six Vegas.

Despite third-person being a deviation from one of the core principles of Deus Ex, its implementation fits nicely into the remaining core pillars... based on what I've seen, at least.

Its implementation only fits - if at all - because EM have moved and reshaped the pillars. They're trying to get the square peg into the round hole, and to do so they've lathed the peg down. Deus Ex simply put the square peg into the square hole in the first place.

[EDIT] And for what it's worth, regarding the actual topic of this thread: Yeah, that's really one of the things I'm less worried about. There are much, much bigger problems with this game than the way dragging bodies is presented.

[Blade_hunter]

Well dude it can be improved but I prefer how it's actually made, than switching more in third person ...

[Pinky_Powers]

Its implementation only fits - if at all - because EM have moved and reshaped the pillars.

I don't see how this is true, or even how it can be perceived as true. :hmm:

Care to explain what you mean?

[Pinky_Powers]

....For that game. Just like turn based combat works well for Final Fantasy games, and quick time events work well for God of War, and jetpacks worked well for Tribes. Just because something works well in one game, doesn't mean it's a good idea - much less the right idea - for another game.

No, it doesn't automatically mean it's right. I don't necessarily see it as right or wrong. I ask myself, is the cover system dynamic enough to flow with the player's decisions? Can I still play it like Deus Ex and chose stealth, combat or neither? Yes, yes I can.

Good, I was getting worried there for a second.

[breakdown234]

guys like ashpolt said theres far worse things going on that dont fit at all in the game and i dont know if you already read my post in the third person view thread but check it out on page 5 about half way down maybe then i was able to open your eyes abit, im not a hater im just saying its not something thats supposed to be in a game that actually is a fps game ,and dont try comin with your unreasonable explanations instead just read the post on page 5 and youll understand after that , maybe youll see it a bit as it actually is and not try to make up some fake reality not looking at things the way they are,peace:)

[Ashpolt]

I don't see how this is true, or even how it can be perceived as true. :hmm:

Care to explain what you mean?

They've identified the pillars as combat, hacking, stealth and social. In Deus Ex, they were tools to achieve the one main pillar: an immersive simulator. They weren't regarded as "pillars" in themselves, so levels weren't obviously designed as "this is the stealth route," "this is the hacking route" etc etc. They were in there, but they were tools to achieve a larger goal rather than ends in themselves. EM have pulled them out - somewhat arbitrarily, IMO - and made them "the core values (tm)" while ignoring other things which I at least would consider equally important - resource management, character progression (as a separate entity to aug progression - a division which should be even more important in a game which has the morality of augmenting yourself as a key theme,) etc etc. The best way I can express them is to say that in Deus Ex, combat, stealth, hacking and being social were things you could do. In DX:HR, Combat, Stealth, Hacking and Social are Core Pillars (tm) which are the means of driving the game forwards.

Even the "pillars" they have kept have been largely reshaped. Combat - like it or not - is now a cover shooter. I'm sure you'll attempt to deny this, but you're just deluding yourself. If the combat in this is significantly different to Rainbow Six Vegas, I'll eat my hat. Melee combat is now virtually nonexistent, relegated to a single button press. Stealth has dropped shadow stealth entirely, choosing to focus solely on line-of-sight rather than including both systems. Both combat and stealth will be largely affected by bother the perspective shift and regenerating health. Hacking has been (apparently) deepened with the inclusion of a minigame, but narrowed in focus by shifting from three systems ("infiltration" would be a better title here - it's only "hacking" here because that's the only option they've left) - hacking, lockpicks and multitools - to just one, and removing resource management from the equation entirely. The social path may have been altered in a way actually beneficial to the game, I'll grant you - or it could just be PR spin on what we already have.

No, it doesn't automatically mean it's right. I don't necessarily see it as right or wrong. I ask myself, is the cover system dynamic enough to flow with the player's decisions? Can I still play it like Deus Ex and chose stealth, combat or neither? Yes, yes I can.

...And that argument only works if you accept EM's definition of The Four Pillars (tm.) As above (and as I've said countless times before) I believe the Deus Ex experience to be much more than simply a core surrounded by superfluous details which can be changed without any impact. Yes, you can still do these Four Pillars (tm) in the game EM are putting out, because these Four Pillars (tm) are the "core" values they've identified. But doing so won't feel like a Deus Ex game, because the way those Four Pillars (tm) are presented is radically different. It may be that it will all come together to work fine as its own game - and throughout the entire time I've been posting on these forums, I've never said otherwise - but it won't be the same type* of experience that Deus Ex provided, and hence not what I want from a follow-on. I've got thousands of games that provide different types of experience from Deus Ex. I would hope a successor would be the one that aimed for the same type.

*"Type" highlighted here so I don't get people coming along with "hurf durf u just want Desu Ex with bettar textchures iam so clevar *smug* u basemnt dweling vigrin."

[Pinky_Powers]

guys like ashpolt said theres far worse things going on that dont fit at all in the game and i dont know if you already read my post in the third person view thread but check it out on page 5 about half way down maybe then i was able to open your eyes abit, im not a hater im just saying its not something thats supposed to be in a game that actually is a fps game ,and dont try comin with your unreasonable explanations instead just read the post on page 5 and youll understand after that , maybe youll see it a bit as it actually is and not try to make up some fake reality not looking at things the way they are,peace:)

You're kidding me, right? You're using this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1510942&postcount=115) as an example of a well-argued point?

http://vandalizegeorge.com/wp-content/uploads/yapb_cache/facepalm_five.di3l1jsuwbkkks8gg04k88gsg.ae6egtt2xvk0sowk84g4ock8k.th.png

[IOOI]

They've identified the pillars as combat, hacking, stealth and social. In Deus Ex, they were tools to achieve the one main pillar: an immersive simulator.

Nicely put and also agree (as also the rest of your post). :thumb:

[JCpie]

I think Adam should be able to wear a bikini, it should put his persuasion and social skills up.

[Danjun]

Uh, I'd like to mention that, I have no problems with the third person view. I mean, it's not like third-person full-time. It's for a better view, so that you can see the animations they've made for ladder-climbing, or, taking cover. Besides, how can you imagine if, say, we're taking-cover, what do you expect? that we see through walls? That'd look ugly. I prefer the 3rd-person that toggles on specific events.


[EDIT] And for what it's worth, regarding the actual topic of this thread: Yeah, that's really one of the things I'm less worried about. There are much, much bigger problems with this game than the way dragging bodies is presented.

Are you serious? So they are alot of major bugs/errors, but you're saying that they should leave minor details? That sounds cheap to me.

I prefer as I've suggested, while dragging bodies, there should be a third-person trigger. Just like stealthing/taking cover.

[breakdown234]

yes pinky it is and if youd read it all then you would see it the way it is dont try fooling yourself ok

we all know that these are the facts,peace;)

[Jerion]

I think Adam should be able to wear a bikini, it should put his persuasion and social skills up.

I can see it now...

"I'm looking for a hacker named Arnie Vanbruggen. He had a job go bad and now he's on the run from the people who hired him...what are you looking at?"

[breakdown234]

and danjun you mustve missed out on most recent games such as dark athena etc they all have fps cover systems its funny hearing you say : well how exactly should we see whats going on ,hmmmm let me think ,what would you do in real life mount a camera to your head and watch yourself from a laptop all while hiding in cover waiting for the right moment or would you rather just peek around the corner and check out whats going on ,lol.. kids these days i tell ya -,-´ almost sounds like you guys never got to play an fps except for quake and doom both 2d-3d ,xD

btw i love the 3rd person ladder climbing animations their so next gen makes me feel as if i was almost climbing that ladder of course while watching myself thru a cam ...xDDDD

[Danjun]

We're not taking about real life. It's a way better solution that we view from a third-person view on the stealthing/taking cover than seeing in first person.

[JCpie]

We're not taking about real life. It's a way better solution that we view from a third-person view on the stealthing/taking cover than seeing in first person.

So you're basically saying... 'Screw it, it's a video game, it doesn't need to be realistic or immersive, 3rd person view has a reason, that reason being easier to kill people... any objections?'.

[FrankCSIS]

Never mind immersion, this will spark another endless debate on how immersion is subjective and whatnot.

It's silly enough to point out that it couldn't be done, and well, when it's already been done, all of it, in first person. There isn't even a need to bring immersion in the argument. I've also suggested something, which was basically first-person wall-hugging, which would have your back, or at least leaning shoulder, to the wall in first person, among other things, and this system was theorically perfected by another user. Of course it's all theory, because I can't possibly model it by myself, but solutions are there, for those who might want to look it up.

[Pinky_Powers]

They've identified the pillars as combat, hacking, stealth and social. In Deus Ex, they were tools to achieve the one main pillar: an immersive simulator. They weren't regarded as "pillars" in themselves, so levels weren't obviously designed as "this is the stealth route," "this is the hacking route" etc etc. They were in there, but they were tools to achieve a larger goal rather than ends in themselves.

This has bothered me on so many occasions. The notion that the original Deus Ex was not build with these "pillars" in the forefront of the Dev's minds is absurd. You bet your ass it was. You can bet your goddamn ass they built every map with these "pillars" etched into their skulls.

And you know what? It does not force a contrived "stealth route" or "combat route" or "social route". It creates an open environment that allows the player to go where he wants to go, and do what he wants to do. To play the way that feels right at the moment.

A door that can only be hacked, or a conversation that allows you access... these are "entry ways". You choose which way to get in, and once you're in, you choose which way to go from there. You think because the GamesCom demo was played in three different ways that you can't change on the fly? Read the previews again. You most certainly can. There's enough information to know it's true.

EM have pulled them out - somewhat arbitrarily, IMO - and made them "the core values (tm)" while ignoring other things which I at least would consider equally important - resource management, character progression (as a separate entity to aug progression - a division which should be even more important in a game which has the morality of augmenting yourself as a key theme,) etc etc.

This is all stuff I agree with.

The best way I can express them is to say that in Deus Ex, combat, stealth, hacking and being social were things you could do. In DX:HR, Combat, Stealth, Hacking and Social are Core Pillars (tm) which are the means of driving the game forwards.

This, however, is more nonsense. The original Deus Ex was 100% driven forward by those very same pillars. Without utilizing at least one of them, you could go nowhere in Deus Ex.

Unless we're going to add Exploration to the list, which Human Revolution is said to have a ton of as well. :)

Even the "pillars" they have kept have been largely reshaped. Combat - like it or not - is now a cover shooter. I'm sure you'll attempt to deny this, but you're just deluding yourself.

No more so than Deus Ex. If you're going to go combat forward in the original game, you're going to be taking plenty of cover.

You can add the R6V cover system to Deus Ex, and it would not make the enemy encounters play out like those big set pieces in Vegas. It's "delusional" to think so.

Surviving combat in Deus Ex requires cover and strategy. Stealth is better in the long run. :)

Melee combat is now virtually nonexistent,

This is certainly one of my biggest gripes as well.

The question was, does third-person require EM to reshape the other pillars? EM did remove melee in order to force players to use the third-person takedowns. That was hideous, vicious, and wrong of them. But it was not necessary. First-person melee would work just fine in the game they've built.

Third-person is not why they did that.

Stealth has dropped shadow stealth entirely, choosing to focus solely on line-of-sight rather than including both systems.

First off, the underlined word above is a lie. In both Deus Ex and Human Revolution stealth is about not being seen or heard.

Now, I agree that removing shadows from the equation entirely seems to weaken the concept a bit. But how much does it really? I don't know.

Levels have to be specifically designed for shadow stealth. And it's never been especially realistic. But I will miss it.

Levels have to be specifically designed for cover stealth too. But that's a lot easier to explain away, and Deus Ex did a great job; there's always something in an environment to hide behind.

...And that argument only works if you accept EM's definition of The Four Pillars (tm.) As above (and as I've said countless times before) I believe the Deus Ex experience to be much more than simply a core surrounded by superfluous details which can be changed without any impact. Yes, you can still do these Four Pillars (tm) in the game EM are putting out, because these Four Pillars (tm) are the "core" values they've identified.

Those "four pillars" are not "the four pillars of Deus Ex" They are the "four gameplay pillars of Deus Ex".

EM has shown they are very mindful of the many, many other things that make a Deus Ex game.

And here we go again...
It's all subjective I'm learning. For me, the Deus Ex experience consisted of a few key elements: Firstly, Cyberpunk universe. Open, multi-path environments. Multi-solution obstacles. A crowded, living world of NPCs that you can talk to. Player driven conversations that carried the story. Lots to do; side quests and exploration of the environments. The ability to truly play as I prefer; talk my way in, shoot my way in, hack my way in, or sneak my way in. Lived-in environments with books, datacubes and emails that flesh out the reality of the world, characters and story. Subtle choices that affect the story. Unknowable alliances of everyone you meet. World travel to real locations. And of course... conspiracies.

But doing so won't feel like a Deus Ex game, because the way those Four Pillars (tm) are presented is radically different.

"Presented" I think is the key word here. The third-person shift changes the presentation. But there's far more to the presentation than perspectives, and in the end, I'm thinking the disparity will be rather minimal in that regard.

[Pinky_Powers]

yes pinky it is and if youd read it all then you would see it the way it is dont try fooling yourself ok

we all know that these are the facts,peace;)

I did read it all. I read it when you first posted it, and I read it again on your request.

You're a joke, mate. You do not represent your position well.

[JCpie]

Never mind immersion, this will spark another endless debate on how immersion is subjective and whatnot.

Is it really immersive to have 'out of body experiences' every couple of minutes? I feel sorry for Adam.

[FrankCSIS]

It's just that you're opening yourself for hordes to come in and discuss how immersion has little to do with perspectives, followed by lists of games which did it well and this and that. Immersion will be mentionned a lot, and it will make me cry a little because most of the time the word won't be used correctly, with random definitions and claims.

All I'm saying one doesn't even have to bring immersion into the picture when discussing perspective, because simpler arguments already do a fine job at decorticating the issue ;) Saying that first person could not do as fine a job is just a lie. I'm personally of the opinion that coupled with full body awareness it would actually provide an even more satisfying experience than anything third person, but I'm opened to the idea that this may be subjective.

[JCpie]

It's not that 3rd person games are automatically less immersive than a first person game, just that I don't like a camera switch that happens quite often. I suppose in some games it's needed... but Deus Ex... switching camera for climbing a ladder?

[FrankCSIS]

Well I can't personally justify it either. Which is why, instead of twitter accounts (there I go again!), I always asked for design philosophy explanations from the devs. Where they're coming from, what they wanted to do, what were their experiences of the first game, and how this relates to what they wish to accomplish with this title. Never asked for a discussion to take place here, either. The dev blog would have sufficed. But alas, I remain ignored, as usual :( ;)

[Pinky_Powers]

It's not that 3rd person games are automatically less immersive than a first person game, just that I don't like a camera switch that happens quite often. I suppose in some games it's needed... but Deus Ex... switching camera for climbing a ladder?

No, third-person is absolutely not needed in this game. It was foolish of EM to go this route.

I just don't think it's as devastating as some would have you believe. Due to how they're handling it, it seems to come together quite well.

Human Revolution will certainly feel differently than Deus Ex. But how much?
If you take the gameplay, the settings, the characters, the Cyberpunk, the whole and complete everything, you have a game that could only be described as a Deus Ex title. Which I'm very grateful of.

I'm also very grateful that EM has clearly learned a lot from the failings of Invisible War. But I won't deny they're making a good measure of their own mistakes along the way. :hmm:

[FrankCSIS]

I know it's a whole other team, but I'm actually more frightened for Thief than I could worry about DX, because in the end Thief would be a game which stands to lose far more from these gameplay alterations. I still think, like Pinky, that the effect will have less impact than we (including myself) are decrying them to cause on Deus Ex, seeing the very nature of the game. If it goes down this route for Thief though, and seeing how they have a more massive, most vocal following, I'm gearing up for one rollercoaster ride.

You'll want to prepare for this one, Kyle, seriously!

[Ashpolt]

This has bothered me on so many occasions. The notion that the original Deus Ex was not build with these "pillars" in the forefront of the Dev's minds is absurd. You bet your ass it was. You can bet your goddamn ass they built every map with these "pillars" etched into their skulls.

And you know what? It does not force a contrived "stealth route" or "combat route" or "social route". It creates an open environment that allows the player to go where he wants to go, and do what he wants to do. To play the way that feels right at the moment.

I honestly don't believe the maps were designed this way in the original Deus Ex. I think the watchword was "freedom" and they designed the maps that way. Think of Liberty Island: there's no one route I would think of as the direct route, or one I'd think of as the stealth route. I can go guns blazing through the front door, or I can stealthily get through there. I can run and gun up the stairs, or I can sneak up the stairs. None of it, to me, felt like it was designed with any particular play style in mind. It may be that this is simply great map design, or very poor map design that happened to coincidentally work well. The point is though, at every point, I never made a conscious decision of "I'm going to be stealthy here" or "I'm'a gonna shoot some folk here." I looked at each and every scenario and made a decision based on that scenario.

Eidos Montreal, on the other hand, openly talk about the "pillars" as four separate things. It may be that they end up not being so distinct in the game, but it's not the impression they particularly give from interviews or the footage they've released so far. The first thing we see in the docks is the guy sneaking round one side to lift a box to reveal a hidden passage, and if you've watched it with commentary, they say "if he didn't have the strength aug, he'd have to assault the front gate head on."

This, however, is more nonsense. The original Deus Ex was 100% driven forward by those very same pillars. Without utilizing at least one of them, you could go nowhere in Deus Ex.

Driven by, but not guided by. It's what I said above about never making a conscious decision to play one particular way, but instead judging each scenario individually.

No more so than Deus Ex. If you're going to go combat forward in the original game, you're going to be taking plenty of cover.

Now you're just being facetious. You know very well what I meant by the term "cover shooter."

You can add the R6V cover system to Deus Ex, and it would not make the enemy encounters play out like those big set pieces in Vegas. It's "delusional" to think so.

Where did I say it would? I simply said it would turn it away from Deus Ex, not that it would turn it in to R6V. Lest we forget, you're the one making the comparison with R6V, using its quality in that game as "justification" for it being used here. I'm the one saying that what works in one game doesn't necessarily work in another.

The question was, does third-person require EM to reshape the other pillars? EM did remove melee in order to force players to use the third-person takedowns. That was hideous, vicious, and wrong of them. But it was not necessary. First-person melee would work just fine in the game they've built.

Third-person is not why they did that.

No, actually, the question in this conversation and this context was simply "have the pillars been reshaped?" I said I disagree with the way the pillars have been reshaped, and that third person was part of that, not the cause of it. Your answer here implies that you have now conceded that the pillars have, indeed, been reshaped?

First off, the underlined word above is a lie. In both Deus Ex and Human Revolution stealth is about not being seen or heard.

Gah, fine, I will concede this needlessly nitpicky point (nitpicky not because it's unimportant, but because once again I know very well that you know exactly what I mean.) The point still remains though that they've removed one of the factors of stealth entirely.

Those "four pillars" are not "the four pillars of Deus Ex" They are the "four gameplay pillars of Deus Ex".

Again though, my point remains - and I'm aware I didn't make my point very clearly in my last post, so I'll clarify it here:

***This is the important bit of my post: If you're only going to read one bit and skip the rest, read this bit:***

You are using EM's definition of the "core values" of Deus Ex (and we can take this as a broader term than just the four pillars which are, as you point out, solely gameplay pillars) to defend the game they have created. By doing this, of course it's going to match up with these expectations of a Deus Ex game, because they're the very principles they used to define the thing in the first place - if they'd chosen different core values, then we could very well have ended up with an entirely different game.

For example, when listing the "core values" of Doom, one might choose first person shooting with a variety of weapons in a colony on Mars. This definition also applies to Red Faction. On the other hand, you could choose shooting demonic creatures while playing as a heavily armoured dude - but that also applies to Dead Space.

So with Deus Ex, you can ask "does third person take away from any of the core values of Deus Ex?" and the answer is (arguably) no - if you don't define a consistent first person viewpoint (at least while in control of your character) as a core value of Deus Ex. By choosing to use EM's definition of the core values of Deus Ex, all you're showing by pointing out that their game fits with their interpretation of the core values is that they're not hypocrites.

And as you point out yourself with that quote you're so proud of, core values are very subjective - I've said myself many times that I wouldn't personally consider a cyberpunk setting to be an absolute necessity for a Deus Ex game, and I know a hell of a lot of people on here would disagree with that - so you've got to look at the package as a whole. That's not to say that every little detail needs to be identical, but the experience has to be broadly similar. And is it? That's certainly not the impression I'm getting from DXHR. "Quality" - as subjective as it is - aside, I genuinely believe that DXHR will be vastly more of a departure from Deus Ex than Invisible War ever was.

***We now return you to your regularly scheduled skimreadin.***

EM has shown they are very mindful of the many, many other things that make a Deus Ex game.

....If you agree with what their definition of what makes a Deus Ex game. And even then, only arguably. I'd be surprised if you can name me more than a handful of things which haven't changed significantly. And I mean important things - "the look of picking up crates is still the same as Deus Ex 1!" is not a big thing, despite how much EM may try to play it up in interview.

This isn't a challenge btw. That would lead down a whole other discussion ("They've kept the cyberpunk story!" "Yes, but with an entirely new flavour and an apparent disregard for canon" etc etc) which I can't be bothered to get into.

"Presented" I think is the key word here. The third-person shift changes the presentation. But there's far more to the presentation than perspectives, and in the end, I'm thinking the disparity will be rather minimal in that regard.

But they don't just change the presentation. As mentioned before, they change level design, the relationship between the player and the character, and simply putting them in at all shows a large change in design philosophy from Spector and Co. To claim - or rather, in your case, imply - that the change to this new, shifting camera view is purely one of presentation is very naive.

[breakdown234]

i never thought i could actually get a headache from a conversation but here we are moving around in circles, in the end deus ex 3 wont change well that is till we get the sdk to make the required and much needed changes

and maybe some might not see it as drastical as me but me neither i just lay out the facts and that im quite pissed about them making us modders have to work our asses off instead of just releasing a version with game settings like being able to switch off the cinematics and 3rd person view and make it all happen in first person or just add a fps only mode ,for christ sakes how hard could it be :scratch:..:confused::confused::confused:

btw trying to be ignorent of facts just shows how imature one can be,-,-´ .peace

[JCpie]

i never thought i could actually get a headache from a conversation but here we are moving around in circles, in the end deus ex 3 wont change well that is till we get the sdk to make the required and much needed changes

and maybe some might not see it as drastical as me but me neither i just lay out the facts and that im quite pissed about them making us modders have to work our asses off instead of just releasing a version with game settings like being able to switch off the cinematics and 3rd person view and make it all happen in first person or just add a fps only mode ,for christ sakes how hard could it be :scratch:..:confused::confused::confused:

I don't know much in this area, but aren't people being a bit too optimistic about the SDK? It seems like a pretty advanced game, and do 'advanced' games like this get SDKs as of late?

[Blade_hunter]

The point of having an SDK is practically impossible, I say practically because they have DLCs, and we know that most games with DLCs doesn't support modding, however there is some games that allows to do so, but since the TRU engine isn't even famous for that and even having DLCs ...
There is practically no chance here

[AlexOfSpades]

The point of having an SDK is practically impossible, I say practically because they have DLCs, and we know that most games with DLCs doesn't support modding, however there is some games that allows to do so, but since the TRU engine isn't even famous for that and even having DLCs ...
There is practically no chance here

I dont know, Oblivion and Fallout III had.

Why do you think that?

[breakdown234]

AlexOfSpades, thanks it was almost to obvious to point out but well you already did thanks for the support it seems im fighting against a bunch of people trying to make themselfes feel at ease by telling a lie to emselfes :nut::nut:


anyhow i like you guys its fun here and a fresh breeze from all the stale forums thats for sure, oh and about the topic advanced games crysis 2 is shipping from day 1 with sdk just to let you know and thats just one out of many,;)

btw where talking here the pc version not the console ,even thou i could imagine there being a patch made for the console version making a fps mod nudg nudge jtag wink wink.xD

ps. dlc is just a ripoff trying to get your money in the early days its what we called mods and still are called without having to pay,xD

[Pinky_Powers]

I honestly don't believe the maps were designed this way in the original Deus Ex. I think the watchword was "freedom" and they designed the maps that way. Think of Liberty Island: there's no one route I would think of as the direct route, or one I'd think of as the stealth route. I can go guns blazing through the front door, or I can stealthily get through there. I can run and gun up the stairs, or I can sneak up the stairs. None of it, to me, felt like it was designed with any particular play style in mind. It may be that this is simply great map design, or very poor map design that happened to coincidentally work well. The point is though, at every point, I never made a conscious decision of "I'm going to be stealthy here" or "I'm'a gonna shoot some folk here." I looked at each and every scenario and made a decision based on that scenario.

You just described what I've seen and read of Human Revolution. Except, replace Liberty Island with Hengsha or Detroit.

Eidos Montreal, on the other hand, openly talk about the "pillars" as four separate things. It may be that they end up not being so distinct in the game, but it's not the impression they particularly give from interviews or the footage they've released so far.

How can you possibly claim that with any sincerity? Open your eyes already! With the tools and systems they've built, you can move in and out of combat or stealth with ease.

You look at the E3 demo and see them use the crossbow on that guard on the roof of the shed. And your mind goes "no! I don't like crossbows! They're going to force me to use the crossbow on that guy!" You don't need to use the crossbow on that guy, Ashpolt! You could leave him alone if you wanted to.
The demoer is stealthy in certain places and noisy in others. Your mind tells you "Damn! Look! I have to be stealthy if I go that way, and I have to be noisy if I go there!"

Okay, bad example. If you drop down through the ceiling, you're going to make some noise. :)

But how am I supposed to have a conversation with someone like like?

EM talks about the "pillars" and Spector didn't... who the f**k cares? It doesn't change anything.

Driven by, but not guided by. It's what I said above about never making a conscious decision to play one particular way, but instead judging each scenario individually.

Which is exactly what we've seen from Human Revolution so far.



Now you're just being facetious. You know very well what I meant by the term "cover shooter."

You missed the immense wisdom of what I said if you think that was facetious.

Rainbow Six Vegas is a covershooter. Gears of War is a cover-shooter. Deus Ex would not suddenly be a cover-shooter if you simply gave it a cover-mechanic. And neither is Human Revolution.

A Deus Ex game is not a cover-shooter, but you do take a lot of cover.

Where did I say it would? I simply said it would turn it away from Deus Ex, not that it would turn it in to R6V.

See above.

No, actually, the question in this conversation and this context was simply "have the pillars been reshaped?" I said I disagree with the way the pillars have been reshaped, and that third person was part of that, not the cause of it. Your answer here implies that you have now conceded that the pillars have, indeed, been reshaped?

If we want to call melee an actual pillar of the game, then yeah, I'll concede that one of the "pillars" has been "reshaped".

Gah, fine, I will concede this needlessly nitpicky point (nitpicky not because it's unimportant, but because once again I know very well that you know exactly what I mean.) The point still remains though that they've removed one of the factors of stealth entirely.

"Lie" may have been rather harsh. I get flustered trying to get through your twisted perception of things.

A lot of people read these forums, not just you and me. I don't want anyone to despair of the game based on misrepresented information.
And even if it was just you and me, I've found it's surprisingly easy to forget important points like that. :)


***This is the important bit of my post: If you're only going to read one bit and skip the rest, read this bit:***

I don't understand. Did my last post make you think I only skim your replies?

So with Deus Ex, you can ask "does third person take away from any of the core values of Deus Ex?" and the answer is (arguably) no - if you don't define a consistent first person viewpoint (at least while in control of your character) as a core value of Deus Ex. By choosing to use EM's definition of the core values of Deus Ex, all you're showing by pointing out that their game fits with their interpretation of the core values is that they're not hypocrites.

I agree.
"Oh no! What does he mean by that?!"

I've said a few times in the past already (even earlier in this thread, I think) that the Immersive Simulation (something I personally believe can only be achieved through first-person) was indeed a core "pillar" of Deus Ex... one EM disregarded entirely.

There is no excuse for this. But I don't buy that it was done on purpose. I think it was just their own ignorance at play.

Either way, we have certainly lost what I would consider an honest-to-god core philosophy.

And as you point out yourself with that quote you're so proud of, core values are very subjective - I've said myself many times that I wouldn't personally consider a cyberpunk setting to be an absolute necessity for a Deus Ex game, and I know a hell of a lot of people on here would disagree with that - so you've got to look at the package as a whole. That's not to say that every little detail needs to be identical, but the experience has to be broadly similar. And is it? That's certainly not the impression I'm getting from DXHR. "Quality" - as subjective as it is - aside, I genuinely believe that DXHR will be vastly more of a departure from Deus Ex than Invisible War ever was.

I truly appreciate this opinion. Don't worry, you don't have to believe me. But there's a portion of my last post which applies splendidly to this...

I just don't think it's as devastating as some would have you believe. Due to how they're handling it, it seems to come together quite well.

Human Revolution will certainly feel differently than Deus Ex. But how much?
If you take the gameplay, the settings, the characters, the Cyberpunk, the whole and complete everything, you have a game that could only be described as a Deus Ex title. Which I'm very grateful of.


....If you agree with what their definition of what makes a Deus Ex game. And even then, only arguably. I'd be surprised if you can name me more than a handful of things which haven't changed significantly. And I mean important things - "the look of picking up crates is still the same as Deus Ex 1!" is not a big thing, despite how much EM may try to play it up in interview.

This isn't a challenge btw. That would lead down a whole other discussion ("They've kept the cyberpunk story!" "Yes, but with an entirely new flavour and an apparent disregard for canon" etc etc) which I can't be bothered to get into.

I'm glad this wasn't a challenge, cause I just can't accept the premise of the thing.

I feel very little has changed significantly. Everything, however, has changed a bit. And rightly so, it's a very new game.

But they don't just change the presentation. As mentioned before, they change level design, the relationship between the player and the character, and simply putting them in at all shows a large change in design philosophy from Spector and Co. To claim - or rather, in your case, imply - that the change to this new, shifting camera view is purely one of presentation is very naive.

I don't understand what you mean by "they change level design". They are completely new maps, but the philosophies are strictly Deus Ex.

You have a point, though. Changing the presentation brings with it layers of other change.

[kud13]

ps. dlc is just a ripoff trying to get your money in the early days its what we called mods and still are called without having to pay,xD

we also used to call them "expansion packs", when they were worth the money and the time.

[Blade_hunter]

I dont know, Oblivion and Fallout III had.

Why do you think that?

And ? they are marginal cases, gamebryo is also a popular game engine widely modded, compare this engine with the CD engine.
That's why I say practically because most of these games with DLCs doesn't have any serious mod and the fact that they use an engine which isn't very modded you even reduce that possibility.

[breakdown234]

oh my god pinky actually stated what i was trying to point out to him all this time:


I've said a few times in the past already (even earlier in this thread, I think) that the Immersive Simulation (something I personally believe can only be achieved through first-person) was indeed a core "pillar" of Deus Ex... one EM disregarded entirely.

There is no excuse for this. But I don't buy that it was done on purpose. I think it was just their own ignorance at play.

Either way, we have certainly lost what I would consider an honest-to-god core philosophy.


so you do understand me wtf dude why didnt you say so instead of babbling on :confused::confused:

and to bladehunter yeah well thats what you call a challenge it wont be done in a day of course itll take more time then that ,but as everyone agrees here they took out a core value wich is the most basic in order to keep that core running without it crashing down but them developers are as pinky said just being ignorent doom your ignorence developers doom your i g n o r e n c e!!!;).. thou ill still enjoy the game and once the sdks out ill get some workin done sadly i must say:(,peace

[Pinky_Powers]

so you do understand me wtf dude why didnt you say so instead of babbling on :confused::confused:

Having an opinion that matches your own is not the same as understanding you. :D

Whatever. Now that you know where I stand, even though it was one of the first things I said (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1511510&postcount=41), you should reread all my posts, and see the grand genius of my work. :cool:

[breakdown234]

:lol::lol:

you do have humor ,:nut::nut::nut::nut:

anyhow well im gona follow this site to see what else you guys come up with,peace

[sonicsidewinder]

This debate must have taken the wrong turn at Albuquerque :lol:

Should have made his hands more 'interactive' from the start. It's an improvement over the older games. Eidos would have had their 'We want you to see the ARMS we made!' mandate covered (partially) and it would have ballanced the 1st Person/3rd Person equation rather nicely.

No one can argue with that.

[breakdown234]

sonicsidewinder dude thats only one of the things i discussed check it out in the third person view thread on page 5 half way down theres a bunch of stuff i mentioned if your not exactly ignorant to the facts then youd see it exactly as it is.:(

[sonicsidewinder]

sonicsidewinder dude thats only one of the things i discussed check it out in the third person view thread on page 5 half way down theres a bunch of stuff i mentioned if your not exactly ignorant to the facts then youd see it exactly as it is.:(

That was a hell of a thread (the third person thread). Lolled at the Pinky Proff Quirrel pic, Had a brain surge off ur post, and roared at the sight of G-zilla.

---

Bull**** asside. Yeah then. GOOD JOB! You sure called it man! Terd Person is BAAAAD.

can i get an encore? cus i do want more.

You're right man. Everyone is right cept people whom say 'put more 3rd person in'. The game will be 'fine' the way it is now. Just when you look at it ans see what 'should have been there'. Hand animation.


I'm talking in circles. ENOUGH!

[progressor]

I honestly don't believe the maps were designed this way in the original Deus Ex. I think the watchword was "freedom" and they designed the maps that way.

This is not quite true. I seem to remember some alleyway map that three very distinct ways of getting from A to B: one was inside, cramped with crates and mines, another was outside, full of turrets and turns, and the third one I don't recall. I remember this level because I loaded it three times and went from A to B three different ways, without stepping on the same polygon twice. But generally, you are correct, DX1 maps were multi-purpose, with run-and-gun space in the middle and sneaky crawl-ways at the fringes.

Actually, third-person simulation can be immersive, too. Some examples are Resident Evil 4, Dead Space and Tomb Raider. Switching perspectives is what really sucks, because it forces you to exist in some area of uncertainty between "and now, I probably should turn left" and "and now, we [i.e. you and the protagonist] probably should turn left."

You know what guys, maybe we're blowing it out of proportion and it won't be so bad. I remember playing Fallout 3 and being very immersed despite the fact that V.A.T.S. would pull the camera out of my head and show me my body firing a gun every five minutes. In fact, I got a fairly Deus Ex-y feeling in many points throughout the game.

[Rindill the Red]

No, that's specific, second person is controlling your character while looking though somebody else eyes.
It's a rare view point used in games.

Imagine a boss battle
you control your character in the area, and look the whole area through the boss' eyes
And see a crosshair trying to get you, and you have to avoid it if you don't want to get damaged.

This is second person

Third person and first person are very different from this and second person is used only in specific cases.
Kodaemon seemed to understood what it is in the context even if it's unpractical
You gave an example about text RPGs which is an other usage of it



It exists dude, but as I said it's not used often mostly as a camera viewpoint

I just want to mention one game that has made use of second person... Psychonauts.

[Rindill the Red]

Is it really immersive to have 'out of body experiences' every couple of minutes? I feel sorry for Adam.

I sometimes dream in the third person... yeah, I play too many video games...

It's going to feel different than DX, that's true... but will it be worse, I don't think so, just different.

Would I rather see a total first person "body awareness" ala. Mirror's Edge? Yes. But this'll be fun too.

[breakdown234]

dude nobodys saying it wont be fun but its definitely not gona be tolerated to be just let sitting without anybody even touching the sdk, power to the modding community ,its a sad sad day for us gamers ,were talkin real gamers not some generic douches trying to ignore the facts that 3rd person doesnt belong into dx3,my 2 cents,and anybody else feeling different about it must be blind or ignorant as can be,peace and ill be keeping an eye out on this forum till the game releases, i even got 1 guy to help me out with the modding already and the game hasnt even released yet..xD talk about impatience..xD

btw about you mentioning mirrors edge thats a way to maybe make people actually understand , i mean what if they made mirrors edge in 3rd person or gave it 3rd person camera switching would anybody even pick up their controller and start the game id doubt it .

[Ashpolt]

For the sakes of brevity (and trying to keep this as a discussion rather than a bickering) I've skipped out the ad-hominem, the self-importance and the bits where we agree, and merged some of the points together to respond to as one.

You just described what I've seen and read of Human Revolution. Except, replace Liberty Island with Hengsha or Detroit.

How can you possibly claim that with any sincerity? Open your eyes already! With the tools and systems they've built, you can move in and out of combat or stealth with ease.

You look at the E3 demo and see them use the crossbow on that guard on the roof of the shed. And your mind goes "no! I don't like crossbows! They're going to force me to use the crossbow on that guy!" You don't need to use the crossbow on that guy, Ashpolt! You could leave him alone if you wanted to.
The demoer is stealthy in certain places and noisy in others. Your mind tells you "Damn! Look! I have to be stealthy if I go that way, and I have to be noisy if I go there!"

Okay, bad example. If you drop down through the ceiling, you're going to make some noise. :)

With regards to all of this: as I said in my last post, at the very start of the docks demo, when JJB talks through it, he says "We're taking the stealthy route, if we didn't have the strength aug to lift this box, we would have to assault the front gate head on." Firstly, he's clearly laying out for us "this is the stealth route, this is the combat route." Secondly, as soon as you've assaulted the gate head on, the guards are going to be on alert and gunning for you (I think it's safe to assume the AI is now that advanced) and you get things like the boxguard being called in. At that point, it doesn't sound like you're going to be able to switch back to stealth, and you're certainly not going to be able to talk your way out of it. Ditto the police station: as soon as you shoot anyone - at least, anyone in plain view - that is going to be [i]it, you will be locked into the combat route for that section. So you've got the choice initially, sure: but it's more of a choice of how long you delay combat for than anything else.

EM talks about the "pillars" and Spector didn't... who the f**k cares? It doesn't change anything.

No, it indicates something has already changed, namely the game design philosophy. If you honestly think what comes out of the mouths of JJB, JFD et al when they speak is just talk with no thought behind it, then you're more critical of them than I.

You missed the immense wisdom of what I said if you think that was facetious.

Rainbow Six Vegas is a covershooter. Gears of War is a cover-shooter. Deus Ex would not suddenly be a cover-shooter if you simply gave it a cover-mechanic. And neither is Human Revolution.

I didn't say that the entirety of DX:HR would turn into a cover-shooter by implementing this mechanic. I said that the combat portions of the game would turn into a cover shooter.

I've said a few times in the past already (even earlier in this thread, I think) that the Immersive Simulation (something I personally believe can only be achieved through first-person) was indeed a core "pillar" of Deus Ex... one EM disregarded entirely.

There is no excuse for this. But I don't buy that it was done on purpose. I think it was just their own ignorance at play.

...Again, you're more critical of them than I am. I think they did it with full knowledge of what they were doing, but their goals didn't match our desires.

Either way, we have certainly lost what I would consider an honest-to-god core philosophy.

And if you believe this, why are you still defending EM on the very basis that this, in your opinion, supports the four pillars they've identified? All you're saying is, essentially, "this game keeps four pillars of Deus Ex, and as such is a worthy sequel!" Then when pressed you turn around and say "But of course it also misses out x amount of other pillar(s) which are also vital."

If you take the gameplay, the settings, the characters, the Cyberpunk, the whole and complete everything, you have a game that could only be described as a Deus Ex title.

...Except for, as you've said yourself, it misses out (at least) one of the core philosophies of the series. Saying this can "only be described as a Deus Ex game" only means that there are relatively few other games in this broad area, it doesn't mean this game is particularly close to its predecessors.

I'm glad this wasn't a challenge, cause I just can't accept the premise of the thing.

I feel very little has changed significantly. Everything, however, has changed a bit. And rightly so, it's a very new game.

And you don't believe all those small changes will add up to a significant one?

Ignoring that, I can't accept the premise that combat, at least, hasn't changed significantly. Shooting has turned into a third person cover shooter and melee basically no longer exists except as "press X to win!" (again, third person) and character skill has been removed from both. They couldn't really have changed the combat more without either removing it entirely or adding motion controls. How can you not see that as a significant change? What, pray tell, would count as a significant change for you?

I don't understand what you mean by "they change level design". They are completely new maps, but the philosophies are strictly Deus Ex.

We've discussed this before. Having environments suitable for third person means making sure there are no narrow spaces - corridors have to be widened to allow wide enough shots to get everything in the action, rooms have to be at least of a certain size - and that's just the stuff that I, a person who last programmed in QBasic, know of. Last time we had the discussion, other people with far more programming / level design experience than me were chipping in, and had more to add. Suffice to say, the shift in perspective is more than just a presentation change.

[Blade_hunter]

We've discussed this before. Having environments suitable for third person means making sure there are no narrow spaces - corridors have to be widened to allow wide enough shots to get everything in the action, rooms have to be at least of a certain size - and that's just the stuff that I, a person who last programmed in QBasic, know of. Last time we had the discussion, other people with far more programming / level design experience than me were chipping in, and had more to add. Suffice to say, the shift in perspective is more than just a presentation change.

Can I add something to this ?
Let's say blindfiring in first person and in third is totally different, while in first person you can't see anything behind the wall; in third person the blindfire isn't blind, you can aim your enemies even if developers added balancing tweaks to it, it doesn't make it blind, you can see them coming, and it helps a lot to know what they are doing while your character is safely hidden.
As for playing stealth in first or third person, that's even totally different, while in third person a cover system is unnecessary, in first person; leaning or a cover system is almost necessary since leaning and peeking are precisely made to watch things around corners, by reducing our exposure or even the use of intermediate tools like a mirror or things a like when there is no cover system and when you do so you are unarmed except if you have a cornershot style weapon or see through walls tools ...
Why in third person it's unnecessary ? simple you can hide your character behind something and use the borders of your camera FOV to watch, despite not showing everything as a cover system can do because the cover system puts the camera close to the center of the entrance, you can watch a lot of things while even in first person you have your left or right arm exposed if you want to watch without any tool/special move(mirror/leaning).
While not only the gameplay is affected by the change of perspective, the feelings are different.

While I can agree that the perspective shift in the way it is in DX HR can be less devastating than in Thief, that's only because in thief stealth is everything, while in Deus Ex HR some other elements keeps the view in first person. but in therms of gameplay there is a lot of perspective shift more than 70% of the gameplay, and it stays devastating enough since it shifts completely the experience and as said above it affects level design, gameplay and other things.

[breakdown234]

ummmm... yeah whatever hes saying...xD..anyhow it all boils down to the constant perspective switching oh and about the 3rd person cover system .dude im not gona start this again i explained many times how unimmersive and stupid it is now why would it be called blind firing if you can see all your enemys its like cheating and totally breaks immersion not even starting about how fps is by far more immersive ,anybody arguing against this point is just simply being ignorant and should go back to gears of war or whatnot,peace

anybody see 3rd person in duke nukem forevers demo except driving ,nooooooooo,peace

any 3rd person in mirrors edge no not even the climbing oh my god!!xD

and for how stealth wouldnt work in fps well buddy im just saying you ought to play dark athena then come back

and last but not least for epic melee well id give you the tipp go to youtube and type in breakdown xbox game and maybe youl understand

what actual combat is,-,-´..sheesh kids these days i always say it unbelievable

[Laputin Man]

ummmm... yeah whatever hes saying...xD..anyhow it all boils down to the constant perspective switching oh and about the 3rd person cover system .dude im not gona start this again i explained many times how unimmersive and stupid it is now why would it be called blind firing if you can see all your enemys its like cheating and totally breaks immersion not even starting about how fps is by far more immersive ,anybody arguing against this point is just simply being ignorant and should go back to gears of war or whatnot,peace

anybody see 3rd person in duke nukem forevers demo except driving ,nooooooooo,peace

any 3rd person in mirrors edge no not even the climbing oh my god!!xD

and for how stealth wouldnt work in fps well buddy im just saying you ought to play dark athena then come back

and last but not least for epic melee well id give you the tipp go to youtube and type in breakdown xbox game and maybe youl understand

what actual combat is,-,-´..sheesh kids these days i always say it unbelievable

I agree with what you say, but do you think you could maybe come up with a less agitating and grating way of saying it?

[breakdown234]

hardly the problem nowadays is when you try being rational with people atleast here i noticed some of em dont understand and trust me i tried just check my posts,peace and keep the postin comin ill be checkin this site out once in a while ..xD..well ok maybe more then once ,he..xD

[Pinky_Powers]

With regards to all of this: as I said in my last post, at the very start of the docks demo, when JJB talks through it, he says "We're taking the stealthy route, if we didn't have the strength aug to lift this box, we would have to assault the front gate head on." Firstly, he's clearly laying out for us "this is the stealth route, this is the combat route."

You've just done it again. You get so hung up on what the demoer does or says, you refuse to accept what's really there.
He lifts the box and goes in stealthily.
What's to stop him from shooting everybody once he's in there? Or what's to stop him from opening fire with his assault rifle, getting everyone alerted, killing everyone, and then moving the box?
And what about assaulting the front gate? Why would he have to do that? He could maybe disable the cameras some other way, stealth head-shot the patrolling guard, and sneak in.

Liberty Island: there's a back way in, over the shipping containers and stuff... you have to move a box to get in. That is very much a stealth rout. But it doesn't have to be. In all reality, it's just another way in.

It doesn't matter what the Demoer showed you, or the words EM used to describe something. There is enough information there to see a vastness of potential and freedom. And if you'd just try, you'd see it's the same concepts found in just about every map of the original.

Secondly, as soon as you've assaulted the gate head on, the guards are going to be on alert and gunning for you (I think it's safe to assume the AI is now that advanced) and you get things like the boxguard being called in. At that point, it doesn't sound like you're going to be able to switch back to stealth, and you're certainly not going to be able to talk your way out of it. Ditto the police station: as soon as you shoot anyone - at least, anyone in plain view - that is going to be [i]it, you will be locked into the combat route for that section. So you've got the choice initially, sure: but it's more of a choice of how long you delay combat for than anything else.

It is shocking that this bothers you. You open fire on people and they respond. :eek:

What need to accept, however, is that a stealth-build character has some tools in his arsenal.
Let's say you alert the docks to your presence, and they're all firing at you. You can duck behind some cover, and sneak away. You can throw on your Cloak Aug, and sneak away. The enemy is going to continue looking for you, I assume, but you can go right back to stealth, no matter how challenging the situation might have turned due to your actions.

There is no reason to fear a challenging game.

No, it indicates something has already changed, namely the game design philosophy. If you honestly think what comes out of the mouths of JJB, JFD et al when they speak is just talk with no thought behind it, then you're more critical of them than I.

Deus Ex did not exist before... Deus Ex. Ten years later, talking about a prequel is going to be very different than Spector talking about a new IP. The vocabulary has changed. This is not something to fear.
Deus Ex was built upon these very same philosophies, no matter what words they use, the concepts are the same.

I didn't say that the entirety of DX:HR would turn into a cover-shooter by implementing this mechanic. I said that the combat portions of the game would turn into a cover shooter.

:mad2:

You really, truly, haven't read a word I've written, have you?

And if you believe this, why are you still defending EM on the very basis that this, in your opinion, supports the four pillars they've identified? All you're saying is, essentially, "this game keeps four pillars of Deus Ex, and as such is a worthy sequel!" Then when pressed you turn around and say "But of course it also misses out x amount of other pillar(s) which are also vital."

My feelings on the matter are complicated, but everything I've said comes together under a mutual harmony.

Removing a pillar does not change the shape of the others. And while I would not go so far as to call Third-Person a replacement pillar, it is a new feature, and it mingles with the remaining pillars without any real difficulty. ...from what we've seen. :hmm:

...Except for, as you've said yourself, it misses out (at least) one of the core philosophies of the series. Saying this can "only be described as a Deus Ex game" only means that there are relatively few other games in this broad area, it doesn't mean this game is particularly close to its predecessors.

It's all subjective, I'm learning... ;)

But I appreciate how close it is.

And you don't believe all those small changes will add up to a significant one?

I think all those changes will add up to a significant new game. But the gameplay, the world, the experience should feel very much like a proper Deus Ex title. We'll just have a whole new one. :D

That's my hope, at least. It's based on what we've all seen and read.

Ignoring that, I can't accept the premise that combat, at least, hasn't changed significantly. Shooting has turned into a third person cover shooter and melee basically no longer exists except as "press X to win!" (again, third person) and character skill has been removed from both. They couldn't really have changed the combat more without either removing it entirely or adding motion controls. How can you not see that as a significant change? What, pray tell, would count as a significant change for you?

If the maps had been designed as a linear stream of set-pieces, and combat resulted in moving from set-piece to set-piece, killing wave after wave of enemies from your Cover... that would be a cover-shooter. That would be a significant deviation.

But simply adding in the cover mechanic... it doesn't damage my impression of Deus Ex.

We've discussed this before. Having environments suitable for third person means making sure there are no narrow spaces - corridors have to be widened to allow wide enough shots to get everything in the action, rooms have to be at least of a certain size - and that's just the stuff that I, a person who last programmed in QBasic, know of. Last time we had the discussion, other people with far more programming / level design experience than me were chipping in, and had more to add. Suffice to say, the shift in perspective is more than just a presentation change.

Blah blah blah. The question is, does it work within the formula. Does it look good? Does it still play out like Deus Ex? Can I still get on top of things? Can I make my own way?
Everything has to function in first-person and third. That's robust design, and something I'm sure they're proud of.

[OwlSolar]

Looks like the term "cover shooter" is starting to become subjective.

[Pinky_Powers]

Looks like the term "cover shooter" is starting to become subjective.

ho ho! Indeed. :)

[Ashpolt]

You've just done it again. You get so hung up on what the demoer does or says, you refuse to accept what's really there.
He lifts the box and goes in stealthily.
What's to stop him from shooting everybody once he's in there? Or what's to stop him from opening fire with his assault rifle, getting everyone alerted, killing everyone, and then moving the box?
And what about assaulting the front gate? Why would he have to do that? He could maybe disable the cameras some other way, stealth head-shot the patrolling guard, and sneak in.

Liberty Island: there's a back way in, over the shipping containers and stuff... you have to move a box to get in. That is very much a stealth rout. But it doesn't have to be. In all reality, it's just another way in.

It doesn't matter what the Demoer showed you, or the words EM used to describe something. There is enough information there to see a vastness of potential and freedom. And if you'd just try, you'd see it's the same concepts found in just about every map of the original.

And you didn't listen to what he said, or what I said. He specifically says "without X aug in this circumstance, you will be forced to go the assault route." In Deus Ex, there were always multiple options for avoiding violence - if you didn't have a password, you might have lockpicks: if you didn't have lockpicks, you might be able to blow the door: if you can't blow the door, you might be able to simply find the password in a datacube somewhere. In this specific instance in DXHR though, EM have explicitly said "without the correct equipment here, you will have to go loud." And personally, if I play through as a stealthy player, the strength aug would probably not be one I'd go for - it seems more like a combat aug to me (though now they've all but removed melee, I guess not anymore!) so i'd be very unlikely to have the correct equipment to go the stealth route here. You can accuse me of being irrational or lacking imagination as much as you like, but the fact remains: I am going with the information we have. You're assuming things will go the way you imagine.

And I said two posts ago that it may be that the game as a whole does not work like this. But again, that's an assumption, not based on any solid, factual information that we have. If they show us otherwise, I'll believe otherwise.

My response to your next point also applies to the above;

It is shocking that this bothers you. You open fire on people and they respond. :eek:

What need to accept, however, is that a stealth-build character has some tools in his arsenal.
Let's say you alert the docks to your presence, and they're all firing at you. You can duck behind some cover, and sneak away. You can throw on your Cloak Aug, and sneak away. The enemy is going to continue looking for you, I assume, but you can go right back to stealth, no matter how challenging the situation might have turned due to your actions.

....Which would be true, if it weren't for the fact that we know that violence begets violence in this game - start killing people overtly, and we get things like the boxguard getting called in - and in the demo, in quite a cramped area too. You going to stealth around that?

I accept that this is a side affect of improved AI, and from that perspective is a good thing. However like I said before, it means that the stealth playstyle becomes more on of delaying run and gun, rather than avoiding it entirely, unless you are 100% perfect (which, let's face it, none of us are going to be.) Now it could be that the guards, like those in MGS, forget about you after a while*, in which case this problem wouldn't occur....except for the fact that we get things like the boxguard being called in. So you're a stealthy player, you screw up once, have to off a few guards loudly to get out of that situation, and suddenly you're faced with a giant mech being dropped on top of you, creating an action set piece and pretty much screwing up your stealth possibilities.

As I said before (and indeed in this post) I may be wrong about this, but it fits in with the way Eidos Montreal talk about the game. I know you're inclined to disregard that as mindless blabber, but I'm not.

Deus Ex did not exist before... Deus Ex. Ten years later, talking about a prequel is going to be very different than Spector talking about a new IP. The vocabulary has changed. This is not something to fear.

This is true, but a non-sequitur not relevant to the point I was making at all. Whether this is a new IP or a follow on doesn't affect the vocabulary used in this specific instance. In fact, if anything there'd be more inclined to use vocabulary more in line with the original.

You really, truly, haven't read a word I've written, have you?

Apparently not, being that even on re-reading I've not seen anything you've said that is relevant to the quote you were responding to. Enlighten me.

My feelings on the matter are complicated, but everything I've said comes together under a mutual harmony.

Removing a pillar does not change the shape of the others. And while I would not go so far as to call Third-Person a replacement pillar, it is a new feature, and it mingles with the remaining pillars without any real difficulty. ...from what we've seen. :hmm:

So you're saying that as long as a removed pillar is replaced with something that can work with the remaining ones, it's fine? Congratulations, you've just given game developers everywhere a licence to change everything about a sequel. You count the cyberpunk setting as a core pillar of Deus Ex? Well, a Western setting would still work with the pillars of choice and consequence, combat, stealth, infiltration and social aspects, so it's fine to replace that. You think a complex, multi-layered story is important? Well, to be honest, those elements could all still work well coupled with a fairly straightforward story, so we don't need that. And so on and so on.

It's all subjective, I'm learning... ;)

But I appreciate how close it is.

So you're willing to settle for "good enough." I'm not.

I think all those changes will add up to a significant new game. But the gameplay, the world, the experience should feel very much like a proper Deus Ex title. We'll just have a whole new one. :D

Firstly, you're contradicting yourself, as you've said previously that you think the experience will be different. Secondly, I don't see how you can possibly claim that the gameplay will feel like a Deus Ex title, for reason I've mentioned before. The world....eh. Could do. We'll see.

If the maps had been designed as a linear stream of set-pieces, and combat resulted in moving from set-piece to set-piece, killing wave after wave of enemies from your Cover... that would be a cover-shooter. That would be a significant deviation.

But simply adding in the cover mechanic... it doesn't damage my impression of Deus Ex.

....Which is why I said it changes the combat sections of the game into a cover shooter (was that enough emphasis on "combat sections" for you?) What you propose there is a change to the game as a whole, not purely to the combat sections. And as I said in my last post....

I didn't say that the entirety of DX:HR would turn into a cover-shooter by implementing this mechanic. I said that the combat portions of the game would turn into a cover shooter.

[breakdown234]

+1 for ashpolt ,sorry pinky....xD

[rokstrombo]

And you didn't listen to what he said, or what I said. He specifically says "without X aug in this circumstance, you will be forced to go the assault route." In Deus Ex, there were always multiple options for avoiding violence - if you didn't have a password, you might have lockpicks: if you didn't have lockpicks, you might be able to blow the door: if you can't blow the door, you might be able to simply find the password in a datacube somewhere. In this specific instance in DXHR though, EM have explicitly said "without the correct equipment here, you will have to go loud." And personally, if I play through as a stealthy player, the strength aug would probably not be one I'd go for - it seems more like a combat aug to me (though now they've all but removed melee, I guess not anymore!) so i'd be very unlikely to have the correct equipment to go the stealth route here.

The Radar Transparency augmentation would have probably allowed entry through the main gate, but this is presuming that the main gate is the vehicle entrance and that there isn't a personnel entrance to the right. I can't tell for certain if there is another gate under the first security camera, but there are certainly hinges on the far right post. There is an obvious blind spot in the coverage of the cameras that could allow the player to enter through here after waiting for the lone patrolling guard to walk away. Even if the vehicle entrance is the only way into the compound, perhaps the Speed augmentation could allow entry by finding cover before the camera locks on. The road blocks are only 2m from the gates.

Regarding the quote from EM about going loud, I didn't hear that in the three different presentations I have saved (E3, EuroGamer, PAX). All three presentations included at least one qualifier to describe the effect of such an approach on Adam's ability to avoid detection. It's possible also that this description applies only to the carefully choreographed demo (strength and jumping augmentations, deliberately placed weapons and upgrades, etc). This specific challenge could have been altered specifically for the demo quite simply by toggling the camera to be stationary rather than swiveling. An earlier screenshot of this area during combat shows this camera at a different angle.

I'm a bit concerned about the term "the stealth route" used in the presentations, but this could easily be an artifact of the carefully planned demo.

....Which would be true, if it weren't for the fact that we know that violence begets violence in this game - start killing people overtly, and we get things like the boxguard getting called in - and in the demo, in quite a cramped area too. You going to stealth around that?

I accept that this is a side affect of improved AI, and from that perspective is a good thing. However like I said before, it means that the stealth playstyle becomes more on of delaying run and gun, rather than avoiding it entirely, unless you are 100% perfect (which, let's face it, none of us are going to be.) Now it could be that the guards, like those in MGS, forget about you after a while*, in which case this problem wouldn't occur....except for the fact that we get things like the boxguard being called in. So you're a stealthy player, you screw up once, have to off a few guards loudly to get out of that situation, and suddenly you're faced with a giant mech being dropped on top of you, creating an action set piece and pretty much screwing up your stealth possibilities.

A stealth play-through without resorting to violence in Deus Ex required detailed knowledge of the game and a quite a bit of luck. It would be very difficult to get through the entire game without relying heavily on quick save. The only solution to this would be to make the stealth approach easier to compensate for the player's mistakes.

There are ways to avoid Box Guards, such as by sneaking or by activating the Radar Transparency augmentation equivalent (assuming it exists). Perhaps a Scrambler grenade or EMP attack could be used to avoid confrontation. I can't think of how this situation is any different to Deus Ex, aside from the spawning of one additional bot after a specific trigger. In Deus Ex, the bots would have been waiting dormant in an otherwise empty room until the alarm was triggered. I think the bigger question is how that helicopter got into the air with only 20 seconds of notice!

[Pinky_Powers]

And you didn't listen to what he said, or what I said. He specifically says "without X aug in this circumstance, you will be forced to go the assault route." In Deus Ex, there were always multiple options for avoiding violence - if you didn't have a password, you might have lockpicks: if you didn't have lockpicks, you might be able to blow the door: if you can't blow the door, you might be able to simply find the password in a datacube somewhere. In this specific instance in DXHR though, EM have explicitly said "without the correct equipment here, you will have to go loud." And personally, if I play through as a stealthy player, the strength aug would probably not be one I'd go for - it seems more like a combat aug to me (though now they've all but removed melee, I guess not anymore!) so i'd be very unlikely to have the correct equipment to go the stealth route here. You can accuse me of being irrational or lacking imagination as much as you like, but the fact remains: I am going with the information we have. You're assuming things will go the way you imagine.

I did not imagine the Cloak Aug. I did not imagine Adam carrying a silenced pistol. With these items, Adam could take out the guard and the cameras and walk right in the font door without alerting anyone... assuming the gate isn't locked. :eek:

You going to stealth around that?

Honestly, I can't see a single reason why not. :scratch:

I accept that this is a side affect of improved AI, and from that perspective is a good thing. However like I said before, it means that the stealth playstyle becomes more on of delaying run and gun, rather than avoiding it entirely, unless you are 100% perfect (which, let's face it, none of us are going to be.) Now it could be that the guards, like those in MGS, forget about you after a while*, in which case this problem wouldn't occur....except for the fact that we get things like the boxguard being called in. So you're a stealthy player, you screw up once, have to off a few guards loudly to get out of that situation, and suddenly you're faced with a giant mech being dropped on top of you, creating an action set piece and pretty much screwing up your stealth possibilities.

As I said before (and indeed in this post) I may be wrong about this, but it fits in with the way Eidos Montreal talk about the game. I know you're inclined to disregard that as mindless blabber, but I'm not.

I've seen all the videos and read all the articles. I do not understand where you get this impression from.

If you drop in through a ceiling, that is clearly going to be a noisy approach. In Detroit, if you fire your .357 into a cop's face at the front door of the Police Station... you understand.
There are things the player can do that would only be done by someone who has no issue with making a racket. But in a Deus Ex game, the stealth player has the tools to forge his own destiny. The simple scenario I painted about the gate at the docks illustrates that point.
You have to learn how to take the problems you're shown, and find your own solutions with the tools the player has. This is what Deus Ex is about.

This is true, but a non-sequitur not relevant to the point I was making at all. Whether this is a new IP or a follow on doesn't affect the vocabulary used in this specific instance. In fact, if anything there'd be more inclined to use vocabulary more in line with the original.

Not even close to an honest replay.

Today, we have a massive store of hindsight. We've dissected, we've talked, debated, we've meditated on Deus Ex. When EM talks about the pillars, most of us can see how right on the money they are. They're using a new vocabulary, but they're speaking about a close friend now... not a blind date.

Apparently not, being that even on re-reading I've not seen anything you've said that is relevant to the quote you were responding to. Enlighten me.

I would gladly enlighten you if I could, but there's nothing more I can say about it. I made my point perfectly. :hmm:

So you're saying that as long as a removed pillar is replaced with something that can work with the remaining ones, it's fine?

There are no universal rules here; I'm not establishing laws for the industry to abide by. There is no "so long as"...

My stance is simple: what they've done seems to work. Not as well as if they had kept that fine pillar and toiled to further the Immersive Sim concepts... but it works quite well, nonetheless.


So you're willing to settle for "good enough." I'm not.

I'm willing to settle for "close enough"... close enough to the original Deus Ex... but only if the game is truly great.
It looks like it might be, but only time will tell for sure.

Firstly, you're contradicting yourself, as you've said previously that you think the experience will be different. Secondly, I don't see how you can possibly claim that the gameplay will feel like a Deus Ex title, for reason I've mentioned before. The world....eh. Could do. We'll see.

1. There's absolutely no contradiction. Both of my statements are simultaneously true.
2. We have both expressed how we perceive the gameplay of Human Revolution... have we not come to an impasse?

....Which is why I said it changes the combat sections of the game into a cover shooter (was that enough emphasis on "combat sections" for you?) What you propose there is a change to the game as a whole, not purely to the combat sections. And as I said in my last post....

I apologize, I guess I don't understand what you mean by "combat sections".

In a Deus Ex game, combat is really only what you make of it... and when you make of it. I don't see why Human Revolution must be any different than the original, in this regard. You take a lot of Cover when the s**t hits the fan... it's the sign of a good game... which Deus Ex is, and Human Revolution is shaping up to be.

[AlexOfSpades]

I'm sorry but i rather cover system than the lame strafing ability everyone back in the first Deus Ex had.

You shot a guard in the crotch with a sniper rifle. He started to run, strafe and croutch in supernatural speed while holding his assault rifle with one hand, shooting you.

It kinda felt like he was about to do a Double Jump and blow my butt with a Flak Cannon.

[Danjun]

Oh god, what have I done.. I can't read all that.. SORRY

[breakdown234]

well buddy shouldve thought that before you post that kind of thread....:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[OwlSolar]

So you're willing to settle for "good enough." I'm not.
My interpretation is that he realizes that not everything in his life will go exactly as he wants it to.

...I could be wrong, though.

(:cool:)

[Ashpolt]

Again, attempting to keep this as short as possible....I'm getting too old (and too disinterested) for these point-by-point debates...

I did not imagine the Cloak Aug. I did not imagine Adam carrying a silenced pistol. With these items, Adam could take out the guard and the cameras and walk right in the font door without alerting anyone... assuming the gate isn't locked. :eek:

Again, you're assuming. I agree that there seem to be other options - assuming that the player will actually be able to have the cloak aug by that point, and it wasn't just in there for the demo (remember, the demo is from about 1/4 of the way through the game, maybe less) - however, the commentary says otherwise. And for rokstrombo's info: I'm going with what JJB said at the Eurogamer Expo.

You have to learn how to take the problems you're shown, and find your own solutions with the tools the player has. This is what Deus Ex is about.

This is what Deus Ex was about. It remains to be seen how much this is still present in DXHR.

You've got to ask yourself: if the ability to play any way you choose is really not only present, but as prevalent as the original Deus Ex, why are they playing through that docks demo exactly the same way every time we see it? We're not seeing even slight variations. Yes, yes, it's pre-alpha, blah blah blah, but surely there's room for some variation? Also, why is the Detroit demo (which we the public still haven't seen) being played through each time in a definite "stealth playthrough", "combat playthrough" and "social playthrough"? Why not mix it up a bit?

Come to think of it, as a sidenote - we haven't actually seen any stealth gameplay yet, have we? We've seen Adam run up to a couple of guards without getting seen and kill them, and kill one guard while cloaked, but we haven't actually seen anything of him just avoiding the guards.

Not even close to an honest replay.

Today, we have a massive store of hindsight. We've dissected, we've talked, debated, we've meditated on Deus Ex. When EM talks about the pillars, most of us can see how right on the money they are. They're using a new vocabulary, but they're speaking about a close friend now... not a blind date.

...And in the context of whether you describe the game as a series of pillars or an experience open to your own playstyle, the fact that this is a sequel rather than a new IP doesn't matter.

I would gladly enlighten you if I could, but there's nothing more I can say about it. I made my point perfectly. :hmm:

Evidently you didn't, or I wouldn't have had to ask for clarification. If you're certain in your response, please at least repeat it for me.

My stance is simple: what they've done seems to work. Not as well as if they had kept that fine pillar and toiled to further the Immersive Sim concepts... but it works quite well, nonetheless.

I'm willing to settle for "close enough"... close enough to the original Deus Ex... but only if the game is truly great.
It looks like it might be, but only time will tell for sure.

So again, you're saying "it works as a game in its own right, it doesn't really matter that it doesn't stick to the values of its predecessors." And I think that's the crux of our disagreement. I want more than just a good game in its own right, I want a good Deus Ex game.


I apologize, I guess I don't understand what you mean by "combat sections".

It's not difficult. I simply mean "sections where you are engaged in combat." What I am saying, in the most simple way I can put it, is that when you choose to engage in combat in this game, it will play more like Rainbow Six Vegas / Gears of War / Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway etc etc than Deus Ex.

Before you trot out the obvious reply: No, it's not just because the AI will be better etc.

My interpretation is that he realizes that not everything in his life will go exactly as he wants it to.

Sure, I realise that as well. But it doesn't mean I have to accept it, much less like it, and much less defend the people who are giving me less than what I want.

[Anasumtj]

Pinky doesn't make sense half the time any way, so I'm going to default a million points to Ashpolt for being a ****in' rad dude.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

Pinky doesn't make sense half the time any way, so I'm going to default a million points to Ashpolt for being a ****in' rad dude.

Agreed.

All hail Ashpolt, leader of the dissenters! Huzzah!

(No sarcasm intended whatsoever. I mean it)

[AlexOfSpades]

Agreed.

All hail Ashpolt, leader of the dissenters! Huzzah!

(Extreme sarcasm intended.)

[breakdown234]

well look what happens if im gone for just one day or so well here you derserve THIS (no sarcasm whatsoever ;) )

http://i397.photobucket.com/albums/pp58/filus69/Anime%20Demoty/ca0cf7c387ffe16c80b54b9817c8c3d6123.jpg

[OwlSolar]

Again, attempting to keep this as short as possible....I'm getting too old (and too disinterested) for these point-by-point debates...
Ha, same here. And yet I still keep coming back for more...

Again, you're assuming. I agree that there seem to be other options - assuming that the player will actually be able to have the cloak aug by that point, and it wasn't just in there for the demo (remember, the demo is from about 1/4 of the way through the game, maybe less) - however, the commentary says otherwise. And for rokstrombo's info: I'm going with what JJB said at the Eurogamer Expo.
What commentary? I apologize for making you repeat yourself, if you are. I'm like a goldfish. :)
Also, what's your point? If there are other options, then how are you forced into anything?

This is what Deus Ex was about. It remains to be seen how much this is still present in DXHR.

You've got to ask yourself: if the ability to play any way you choose is really not only present, but as prevalent as the original Deus Ex, why are they playing through that docks demo exactly the same way every time we see it? We're not seeing even slight variations. Yes, yes, it's pre-alpha, blah blah blah, but surely there's room for some variation? Also, why is the Detroit demo (which we the public still haven't seen) being played through each time in a definite "stealth playthrough", "combat playthrough" and "social playthrough"? Why not mix it up a bit?
Isn't this obvious? They don't want to reveal too much. It's like how people don't want to spoil the plot of something. They don't want to spoil the exact layout of a level, so they're showing as little as possible.
...As least that's my interpretation. So I guess it's not obvious. :o

But at the very least, I'm certain that the answer isn't "because that's the only way to do it."

Come to think of it, as a sidenote - we haven't actually seen any stealth gameplay yet, have we? We've seen Adam run up to a couple of guards without getting seen and kill them, and kill one guard while cloaked, but we haven't actually seen anything of him just avoiding the guards.
...Now you're just being picky. My definition of stealth is not being seen and avoiding open conflict. Not complete pacifism.
Is stealth a subjective term now as well?

...And in the context of whether you describe the game as a series of pillars or an experience open to your own playstyle, the fact that this is a sequel rather than a new IP doesn't matter.
Agreed, although I don't see why this is relevant. Probably because I don't know the context...

Evidently you didn't, or I wouldn't have had to ask for clarification. If you're certain in your response, please at least repeat it for me.
Seconded. Again, I'm like a goldfish. :(

So again, you're saying "it works as a game in its own right, it doesn't really matter that it doesn't stick to the values of its predecessors." And I think that's the crux of our disagreement. I want more than just a good game in its own right, I want a good Deus Ex game.
He never said that it doesn't have to stick to the old values. The problem is that people disagree on what those values are. That's the real crux of the disagreement.

It's not difficult. I simply mean "sections where you are engaged in combat." What I am saying, in the most simple way I can put it, is that when you choose to engage in combat in this game, it will play more like Rainbow Six Vegas / Gears of War / Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway etc etc than Deus Ex.
This seems more like an improvement to me.

Before you trot out the obvious reply: No, it's not just because the AI will be better etc.
What? :confused:

Sure, I realise that as well. But it doesn't mean I have to accept it, much less like it, and much less defend the people who are giving me less than what I want.
That's irrelevant. My point is that if you want everything to be exactly as you want it, you're going to be disappointed.

Also:

All hail Ashpolt, leader of the dissenters! Huzzah!

(Mild-to-moderate amount of sarcasm intended.) :cool:

[Ashpolt]

What commentary? I apologize for making you repeat yourself, if you are. I'm like a goldfish. :)

Hint: The answer to that question is in the very part you quoted. :P

Also, what's your point? If there are other options, then how are you forced into anything?

It's really a question of whether the levels are laid out as specifically "this is the stealth route, this is the combat route, this is the social route, and never (or at least, rarely) shall they meet." it goes back to what I said to Pinky a couple of pages back: think of Liberty Island in Deus Ex 1. There's no set stealth route, no set combat route. You can go guns blazing through the front door, or stealth through the front door: guns blazing up the stairs, or stealth up the stairs. The way EM talk about DXHR, it seems more like they're designing the levels with a specific stealth route in mind, a specific combat route in mind.

I fully, fully admit that I may well be wrong on this, it's just the impression that I get. And besides, this is one of my lesser worries about the game anyway, it's just gotten somewhat out of hand in this thread. And moreover, it's got away from my original point, which was that Pinky was defending EM's decision using their own definition of the "core values" of Deus Ex - and doing so will by definition justify their actions (unless they're hypocrites) because you're using their game to justify their game.

Isn't this obvious? They don't want to reveal too much. It's like how people don't want to spoil the plot of something. They don't want to spoil the exact layout of a level, so they're showing as little as possible.
...As least that's my interpretation. So I guess it's not obvious. :o

Not wanting to spoil the plot I can understand (and support fully.) Not wanting to spoil the layout of a single level is a different thing entirely, and going too far on the secrecy scale IMO. It wouldn't be spoiling too much to show us Adam avoiding a couple of guards, would it?

...Now you're just being picky. My definition of stealth is not being seen and avoiding open conflict. Not complete pacifism.
Is stealth a subjective term now as well?

To be honest, this is usually my idea of a "stealth" playthrough as well - I'm more of a silent assassin type than an unseen infiltrator. Nonetheless, Deus Ex allowed for almost complete pacifism, and EM are saying that DXHR allows you to play through without killing anyone other than bosses - I'm assuming they mean more than simply "you can opt for non-lethal takedowns / weapons rather than fatal ones" being as, in all honesty, they're functionally near enough identical, and as such, why haven't we seen anything of this pacifist route?

He never said that it doesn't have to stick to the old values. The problem is that people disagree on what those values are. That's the real crux of the disagreement.

But Pinky did agree specifically that first person was a core value of Deus Ex. If he says that, and still defends the new game, surely by definition he's stating that DXHR does not need to stick to Deus Ex's values?

This seems more like an improvement to me.

....I'm going to pretend you didn't say that. This had been such a nice conversation up to this point. :P

But seriously, I understand the need to bring Deus Ex's combat somewhat up-to-date, but there are a lot of games that would provide a better model for it than Rainbow Six Vegas, Gears of War etc. Something along the lines of Killzone 2 (without the bullet-sponge enemies) or STALKER could've provided a good template for strong tactical combat without the need for flitting between first and third person, and without degenerating into a cover shooter.

That's irrelevant. My point is that if you want everything to be exactly as you want it, you're going to be disappointed.

This is true. But when being force fed dirt, I'd rather stand up and say "hey, this isn't food, this is dirt!" than sit back and simply accept that dirt is better than nothing.

[breakdown234]

dude you obviously havent read my posts have you nudg nudge breakdown, killzone 3 wink wink mirrors edge nudge dark athena ,crysis 1-2, duke nukem forever... must i say more then please say so

btw. ashpolt is right who wants to eat dirt when they could easily have a full course gourmet dinner, facepalm ... looks like we got us some dirt lovers here eh ashpolt

[OwlSolar]

Hint: The answer to that question is in the very part you quoted. :P
I have no idea which one that is. :o

It's really a question of whether the levels are laid out as specifically "this is the stealth route, this is the combat route, this is the social route, and never (or at least, rarely) shall they meet." it goes back to what I said to Pinky a couple of pages back: think of Liberty Island in Deus Ex 1. There's no set stealth route, no set combat route. You can go guns blazing through the front door, or stealth through the front door: guns blazing up the stairs, or stealth up the stairs. The way EM talk about DXHR, it seems more like they're designing the levels with a specific stealth route in mind, a specific combat route in mind.
I'm not getting that impression. They've said that for the Detroit mission at least, that there are several entrances to the place. It's not just the sewers and the back door. That implies that there is more than just a single stealth route. Good enough? As for whether you can switch between the two, why not? If you're playing stealth, you can simply start attacking the enemy. If you want to switch to stealth, you can just run and hide. Not that hard.
It's true that they used the word "routes," but that just seems to be a matter of semantics. It's clear that they meant "playstyles." Absolutely nothing that has been revealed points to the first option.

I fully, fully admit that I may well be wrong on this, it's just the impression that I get. And besides, this is one of my lesser worries about the game anyway, it's just gotten somewhat out of hand in this thread. And moreover, it's got away from my original point, which was that Pinky was defending EM's decision using their own definition of the "core values" of Deus Ex - and doing so will by definition justify their actions (unless they're hypocrites) because you're using their game to justify their game.
I don't completely understand the point here, so forgive me if this is irrelevent. But why shouldn't they use their own definition of core values? It's not like there's a fixed set of values anyway. Again, it's all subjective.
Personally, I'm fine with them using their own idea of core values. It shows that they know they're trying to make a Deus Ex game.

Not wanting to spoil the plot I can understand (and support fully.) Not wanting to spoil the layout of a single level is a different thing entirely, and going too far on the secrecy scale IMO. It wouldn't be spoiling too much to show us Adam avoiding a couple of guards, would it?
Funny, I remember a lot of people saying that they value exploration and would rather find things out themselves. But I could be wrong. I'm like a goldfish.

To be honest, this is usually my idea of a "stealth" playthrough as well - I'm more of a silent assassin type than an unseen infiltrator. Nonetheless, Deus Ex allowed for almost complete pacifism, and EM are saying that DXHR allows you to play through without killing anyone other than bosses - I'm assuming they mean more than simply "you can opt for non-lethal takedowns / weapons rather than fatal ones" being as, in all honesty, they're functionally near enough identical, and as such, why haven't we seen anything of this pacifist route?
No, they're not identical. Unconscious enemies can actually wake up in this game. :) It's also a matter
of immersion. Even if it's functionally identical, some people go the pacifist route because they actually don't want to kill people.
Personally, I think that it will be possible to go through the entire game without even touching anyone, but it'll be difficult and less than ideal. Which is the norm, really.

But Pinky did agree specifically that first person was a core value of Deus Ex. If he says that, and still defends the new game, surely by definition he's stating that DXHR does not need to stick to Deus Ex's values?
He did? :confused: Huh. Well, I'm not going to speak on his behalf.
Personally, I don't consider first-person to be a core value. Whether or not I like it, I find it to be more of a mechanic than an actual value. I think that the makers of Deus Ex didn't go and say, "Hey, let's go make a first-person game!" I think they said something more along the lines of "Hey, let's make an Action/RPG hybrid with strong immersion and many options!"

....I'm going to pretend you didn't say that. This had been such a nice conversation up to this point. :P

But seriously, I understand the need to bring Deus Ex's combat somewhat up-to-date, but there are a lot of games that would provide a better model for it than Rainbow Six Vegas, Gears of War etc. Something along the lines of Killzone 2 (without the bullet-sponge enemies) or STALKER could've provided a good template for strong tactical combat without the need for flitting between first and third person, and without degenerating into a cover shooter.
I'm confused by your choice of Killzone 2. That game was a cover shooter through and through. The only difference was that it was in first person the entire way.
I know I've said this before, but it's all about level design. I found Gears of War to be a boring game, but I enjoyed Uncharted 2, which used practically the same system. Uncharted 2 just had better level design.

This is true. But when being force fed dirt, I'd rather stand up and say "hey, this isn't food, this is dirt!" than sit back and simply accept that dirt is better than nothing.
Eh, fair enough.

[Pinky_Powers]

Again, you're assuming.
I'm not assuming Adam will have a gun. I'm not assuming the cover mechanic works for stealth. There are tools, there are game mechanics, and they work toward the freedom of the player.

Anybody who has even an ounce of critical thinking can watch the E3 demo and see hundreds of variations that are not explicitly performed by the demoer. But they're still there, and you can see them with your bloody eyes. You've just gotta get your head out of your ass.

I know you think it's cute to question the existence of things that aren't presented to you in a bright red bow, but that's not what Deus Ex is about. The freedom in that game is subtle, but ever-present.

This is what Deus Ex was about. It remains to be seen how much this is still present in DXHR.

I agree that much of it is yet to be seen. But you are stubbornly refusing to accept what has been seen.

You've got to ask yourself: if the ability to play any way you choose is really not only present, but as prevalent as the original Deus Ex, why are they playing through that docks demo exactly the same way every time we see it? We're not seeing even slight variations. Yes, yes, it's pre-alpha, blah blah blah, but surely there's room for some variation? Also, why is the Detroit demo (which we the public still haven't seen) being played through each time in a definite "stealth playthrough", "combat playthrough" and "social playthrough"? Why not mix it up a bit?

From EM's explanation, the E3 playthrough was agreed upon and set in stone because it did it all. It showed stealth and combat. Lethal and non-lethal takedowns. A variety of weapons. A variety of enemies... playing it through exactly the same ensures that everyone sees the fullness of what the game allows.

I can imagine, if you had Demoers riffing each time, you'd start to lose the quality of the presentation.

But for us... who got the leaked video, and scoured for every recording made at PAX... it gets very old. But because of the strictness of the playthrough, everyone who sees it for the fist time sees an incredible amount of what Human Revolution has to offer.

I know you're intelligent enough to understand this on some level. But you refuse to accept it, for some reason.

Come to think of it, as a sidenote - we haven't actually seen any stealth gameplay yet, have we? We've seen Adam run up to a couple of guards without getting seen and kill them, and kill one guard while cloaked, but we haven't actually seen anything of him just avoiding the guards.

Firstly, every silent take-down or kill is stealth gameplay. You think Thief is no longer a stealth game because Garret clubs or kills a guard from time to time? If you can do it without alerting nearby patrols, IT'S STEALTH!

And second... The Guard outside the gate, who walks back and forth near the Security Shed... Adam avoids him. :eek:

And before you say "Okay, so he avoided one guy... but why not more? What's EM hiding?" ...are you really that petty?

Evidently you didn't, or I wouldn't have had to ask for clarification. If you're certain in your response, please at least repeat it for me.

This is an Internet forum, mate. Our responses are recorded in clear text. If you're having trouble remember something I said, just go back a page or two, it's right there.

Or, continue reading, and I'll do that immense work myself. :hmm:

So again, you're saying "it works as a game in its own right, it doesn't really matter that it doesn't stick to the values of its predecessors." And I think that's the crux of our disagreement. I want more than just a good game in its own right, I want a good Deus Ex game.

I understand that, for I want the same. But your demand is perfection.
Deus Ex wasn't perfect, and Human Revolution won't be either. The only question that matters is, will it be close enough?
And in the end, that's something each of us will have to answer for ourselves.

What I am saying, in the most simple way I can put it, is that when you choose to engage in combat in this game, it will play more like Rainbow Six Vegas / Gears of War / Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway etc etc than Deus Ex.

I know what you mean. You were clear from the very start. But you need to open your mind a bit and understand the wisdom I have to offer.

You can add the R6V cover system to Deus Ex, and it would not make the enemy encounters play out like those big set pieces in Vegas. It's "delusional" to think so.

Rainbow Six Vegas is a covershooter. Gears of War is a cover-shooter. Deus Ex would not suddenly be a cover-shooter if you simply gave it a cover-mechanic. And neither is Human Revolution.

A Deus Ex game is not a cover-shooter, but you do take a lot of cover.

If the maps had been designed as a linear stream of set-pieces, and combat resulted in moving from set-piece to set-piece, killing wave after wave of enemies from your Cover... that would be a cover-shooter. That would be a significant deviation.

But simply adding in the cover mechanic... it doesn't damage my impression of Deus Ex.

In a Deus Ex game, combat is really only what you make of it... and when you make of it. I don't see why Human Revolution must be any different than the original, in this regard. You take a lot of Cover when the s**t hits the fan... it's the sign of a good game... which Deus Ex is, and Human Revolution is shaping up to be.

Sure, I realise that as well. But it doesn't mean I have to accept it, much less like it, and much less defend the people who are giving me less than what I want.

It's really hard to remember, but I don't think that was what this debate was about. I'm fairly sure you engaged me. This whole thing started with me defending my opinions from you. And then you said some things that were savagely backwards and wrong... I've spent most of the remainder of our correspondence trying to show you that.

I've failed miserably. :D

[Laokin]

Nah, that's just third person. Second would be like having a camera on the some guy who is watching you do things.

"Uh, you're like sneaking under a fence right now... Mmm, okay, so there's like a dude to your left, I think he's got a gun or something... You're shooting at him... You're not a very good shot, you know? Try to keep steady..."

I read that in a British accent.... and it was simply hilarious. Part of me, actually wants that now! LOL.

"What I am saying, in the most simple way I can put it, is that when you choose to engage in combat in this game, it will play more like Rainbow Six Vegas / Gears of War / Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway etc etc than Deus Ex." - Aspholt

Yeah, you are right there.... but really, DX's combat sucked. It was the rest of the game that was awesome, the combat was awkward. I don't think it needed the 3rd person, but really, it doesn't completely change the style of play. I.E. DX 1 -- see enemy, see boxes/table, run hide behind boxes/table. DX:HR -- see enemy, see boxes/table, run hide behind boxes/table. It just mimics modern traditions. DX1 also mimicked modern traditions (when it came to combat.) It wasn't totally different from Unreal or Half Life. The choices are what made DX 1.

All in all, when I started following HR (way back when it was announced) I didn't understand how the game could have 3rd person elements and a cover system, and comprehend the statement that it's taking it back to the roots. I get it now, the gameplay is ultimately very similar, and will present a modern "upgrade" to the combat in the game. You happen to not like the current trend, but the trend exists for a reason(evidently, more people like modern play style with cover systems than vanilla days of old.) It even makes me understand Warren's perspective of it now too. Time to mature a bit, I believe.

"I've failed miserably." - Pinky_Powers

Cut yourself some slack, you did an amazing job! :cool:

[breakdown234]

well now youre just lying to yourself there bro maybe its time for you to mature id say,-,-´

[Laokin]

well now youre just lying to yourself there bro maybe its time for you to mature id say,-,-´

....? That's a proclamation based on unreasonable or logical debate. If the gameplay some how changes from the addition of a cover system and a purely aesthetic and superficial addition such as momentary thirdperson, do elaborate. (I don't like it either, and I've made this extremely clear in the past, here, on this board. However, it doesn't factually damage the integrity of the gameplay experience in any way, shape, form, or fashion.)

[breakdown234]

well now your just lying to yourself once again..;) btw yeah i know that about your standpoint but let me be frank here for a sec my friend.... its not gona hinder us playing the game and youd know that if youd read my posts but the point here being that we simply wont accept this dirt.. .we want good food depending if youre a dirt lover..im not.... anyhow to the point ... if they dont implement some options to turn off this garbage in the game menu well then its up to the modding community to get the work done , as already stated in my posts wich is very sad seing as they couldve easily implemented options in the menu ,:rolleyes:



btw if youd watched the e3 demo and the current one .. .youd see its not just momentary 3rd person ...its constant 3rd - first person switching you my friend have deserved a goodie for such ignorance...

http://implied.facepalm.de/facepalm_implied.jpg

[OwlSolar]

Are you a troll? Listen, I'm sorry, but I haven't seen a single rational post from you. Everyone in this topic, no matter what side of the argument they're on, is being reasonable; they're having a nice, friendly debate. From what I've seen from your posts, you have done nothing but insult other people and their opinions.

[Pinky_Powers]

Are you a troll? Listen, I'm sorry, but I haven't seen a single rational post from you. Everyone in this topic, no matter what side of the argument they're on, is being reasonable; they're having a nice, friendly debate. From what I've seen from your posts, you have done nothing but insult other people and their opinions.

Ho ho! I've stepped over the "friendly debate" line a few times in this thread. :D Nothing intentional; I just get worked up some times.

But you're absolutely right. His posts have added nothing of any real quality yet. If he doesn't at least try, he'll be on a lot of folk's Ignore List... then his trolling will turn masturbatory, and things 'ill get really weird.

[OwlSolar]

Everyone in this topic except for Pinky is being reasonable; they're all having a nice, friendly debate.
There, happy now? :)

[Pinky_Powers]

You botched it again you fowl (http://wild-facts.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/guinea-fowl_knp-5115.jpg) creep!

I'm being very "reasonable", it's just my "friendliness" can get a bit gimped at times.

[Kodaemon]

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/9318/thief2worldohurt.jpg
flamessurroundyouflamesnothingbutflamesburningyourflesh

[OwlSolar]

Arrgh!

Everyone in this topic, no matter what side of the argument they're on, is being reasonable; they are, with the exception of Pinky, having a nice, friendly debate.

Third time's the charm, they say.

[Pinky_Powers]

Arrgh!

Everyone in this topic, no matter what side of the argument they're on, is being reasonable; they are, with the exception of Pinky, having a nice, friendly debate.

Third time's the charm, they say.

http://www.aridiwrites.com/ChuckNorrisApproved.png

[OwlSolar]

I can now die happy.

[sexus]

talk about immature and here i thought im the only one with the inner child ...xD

[Kodaemon]

I thought it was inner ADHD.

[sexus]

shhhh dont tell them or else theyl use my weakness against me ...xD

[OwlSolar]

talk about immature and here i thought im the only one with the inner child ...xD
If you of all people find me immature, then I have reached a new low. :p

[Kodaemon]

shhhh dont tell them or else theyl use my weakness against me ...xD

Actually, you're an asset! Living proof that even a hyperactive spazzball can enjoy a "slow" game like DX. So there's no need for dumbing it down by providing COOL action sequences and instant gratification third person takedowns.

[sexus]

word +1 for kodaemon we dont need 3rd person takedowns nor 3rd person anything nor cinematics,

btw . dont take it negative owl solar we all have our inner child...xD

[The Youth Counselor]

What bothered me was that it looked like both of Adam's hands were on the gun as he dragged the body. Or am I remembering incorrectly?

[Esnuk]

What bothered me was that it looked like both of Adam's hands were on the gun as he dragged the body. Or am I remembering incorrectly?

Unfortunately, you ARE remembering it correctly.

[ThePrecursor]

Unfortunately, you ARE remembering it correctly.

Indeed. However, it might have been fixed in the meantime as that was from pre-alpha footage.

[Happy]

What bothered me was that it looked like both of Adam's hands were on the gun as he dragged the body. Or am I remembering incorrectly?

The real question is why a person with augmented arms capable of punching through cinderblock, cannot pick up and carry a body but is foreced to drag it...

[chickenbrothel]

Imagine a boss battle
you control your character in the area, and look the whole area through the boss' eyes
And see a crosshair trying to get you, and you have to avoid it if you don't want to get damaged.

This is second person


Anybody remember Battletoads? There was a scene just like this where you see from the boss's viewpoint and try to jump around avoiding the crosshairs as it shoots at you. Anyone remember this?

[Esnuk]

Indeed. However, it might have been fixed in the meantime as that was from pre-alpha footage.

Let's hope you're right. :o

[The Youth Counselor]

The real question is why a person with augmented arms capable of punching through cinderblock, cannot pick up and carry a body but is foreced to drag it...

Any of one us here can probably lift up a shopping cart, a hand wagon, or dolly. Yet most of us will choose to lift and drag them instead.

In regards to what I previously brought up with Adam dragging a body despite his hands being occupied, it might not be a mistake after all. The game is being produced by a Japanese company and Adam does have many of his appendages replaced by prosthetics. Perhaps he has a tentacle augmentation.

[Laputin Man]

Any of one us here can probably lift up a shopping cart, a hand wagon, or dolly. Yet most of us will choose to lift and drag them instead.

In regards to what I previously brought up with Adam dragging a body despite his hands being occupied, it might not be a mistake after all. The game is being produced by a Japanese company and Adam does have many of his appendages replaced by prosthetics. Perhaps he has a tentacle augmentation.


..... but those all have wheels. How many people drag a bag of dog food into the house instead of carrying it? Or a sack of potatoes, etc?

[Donvermicelli]

Shadowrunner;1510736']In DXMP/DX1 a body that was not bleeding, if picked up and dropped, will start bleeding. Lies, unconscious 'bodies' did not bleed.

[Mindmute]

Lies, unconscious 'bodies' did not bleed.

Nor drown, even if placed face down on the water :rolleyes:

[IOOI]

I used to drop bodies on the water just for the fun - I did it to erase any trail of my "work". :D

Lies, unconscious 'bodies' did not bleed.

I don't know if he's talking about unconscious bodies (as tranquilized) but it's true that someone shotdown by a lethal weapon would sometimes (?) not bleed. But if you picked up the body and placed it down again it would start bleeding. Try it. :)

[The Youth Counselor]

..... but those all have wheels. How many people drag a bag of dog food into the house instead of carrying it? Or a sack of potatoes, etc?

Maybe it's because I'm just that lazy, but I do both of that, but I don't drag dog food since I have no dog, but had a cat.