A Question of Faithfulness (To The Original)

[Crane]

One of the big gripes I see people on this forum having with Human Revolution is a lack of faithfulness to the original. It's my personal opinion that in almost all the areas that really matter, Human Revolution appears to be faithful to the first game, but I can agree that some decisions such as regenerating health and third-person cover are a wide departure from the original. Regardless of this however, my question is this:

Why are some of you so desperate for such a level of fidelity? Deus Ex was a great game, in my opinion one of the best ever made, but it doesn't follow that a sequel must cleave to its formula slavishly in order to be great.

I can understand the fears that some of the changes have been made solely in order to appeal to a modern market, but firstly, we don't know that that is the case. Indeed, the developers have said many times that the decisions they made were what they believe best for the gameplay. Secondly, even if they were made primarily with that motive in mind, it doesn't guarantee that the game will be worse for them.

Some of you, I know, will counter this with "No, but it's a worse Deus Ex sequel!".

I can't agree with this. A sequel to Deus Ex will be a good Deus Ex sequel if we play it and acclaim it as another game of the same quality. It doesn't have to be faithful for that.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

Well, put it this way: we might like Human Revolution's changes. On the other hand, we know we like things (by and large) the way Deus Ex did it. I think that's where the friction lies, that sense of uncertainty.

It would not be a problem if we knew that each change was geared towards what Dugas so condescendingly calls "the hardcore community". Sadly, many changes (not all, of course) are not. By their own admission, changes like third person cinematic cameras and crash-bang-wallop-ish stuff are designed more for the modern-day stereotypical console market, which is a polite way of saying teenagers. This is not a demographic many of us fall into, and as such we don't necessarily approve of some of the changes.

I hope that's not been patronising, but please try and understand that a lot of us have been asking for "Deus Ex Squared", as it were. Some people are just a little concerned that we may end up with, to take the metaphor further "Root Deus Ex"

[Zakka]

As long as it's faithull to the main strength's of the first title. Which is exactly what EM is doing under my impression. Could be wrong though, final product will have my final judgement.

[Kodaemon]

That's the thing, what are Deus Ex' "main strengths"? EM would probably say they're the "four pillars", which is their own personal invention. But is that true?

[K^2]

It's not about the "formula". Throw that notion out. It's about the core gameplay and the way you experience the world.

First, there is customization. You must make critical choices in your equipment, augmentation selection, and experience point distribution that properly complement your play style. HR appears to have gotten most of this one. It's going to be different, but it might still work. The inventory system is right, the augmentations do require you to commit to certain choices, and so on.

Then there is resource management. Player has to balance health, ammo, and bio-electric energy, as well as related items in the inventory. Granted, this bit wasn't perfect in DX, either, but it was there, and for the most part worked. You had limb damage and overall health. You had multiple resources that could be used to heal yourself. You could gain access to med-bots. You could expend medpacks. You could install regen augmentation and expend bio energy. Or you could have expended any number of other resources to not get hurt in the first place.

HR significantly cripples this option with regenerating health. If your option is to conserve health or conserve ammo, you go for the later one, because your health will always regenerate. This is a major change in how you approach a challenge. In DX, most challenges still carried a resource cost with them. Almost nothing was given completely for free. In HR, most challenges are free. If you die, you reload. If you don't die, you regenerate.

Finally, there is immersion. First person might not be important to everyone, but to these to whom it is, it's not just because it's the way DX did it. We view it as a sim, at least on some level. A 3rd person switch ruins that. And it's not just about having a new stealth technique. You really don't have to use it. But it's about the fact that no matter what you do, switches to 3rd person are going to be unavoidable. Stealth switches to 3rd person. Take-downs switch to 3rd person. Ladders switch to 3rd person. It's no longer an option. It's forced on the player for absolutely no good reason.

For HR to be faithful to the original, it wouldn't need to do everything the same way. Health system in DX needed fixing. It's the truth. AI was almost a joke in some places. Many of the augmentations were poorly balanced. Combat can use an update, especially close combat, and so on. There are many changes that majority, if not everyone, would get behind. All EM would have needed to do is analyze the original, see what made it work, and try to build up from the same fundamental principles. In fact, they wouldn't even need to do all the work, since there have been plenty written on why DX worked and how it was designed.

Instead, EM analyzed DX, figured out what made it work, and then decided to make something that looks similar, but also appeals to the ME crowd. Granted, in places where it wasn't a marketing decision on how to sell it to a bigger demographic, it does seem like it was done the way it is supposed to be done. But where the two came into conflict, the choice is never in favor of the original design concepts. And this is why it's not faithful to the original.

[Crane]

[...] HR significantly cripples this option with regenerating health. If your option is to conserve health or conserve ammo, you go for the later one, because your health will always regenerate. This is a major change in how you approach a challenge. In DX, most challenges still carried a resource cost with them. Almost nothing was given completely for free. In HR, most challenges are free. If you die, you reload. If you don't die, you regenerate.

This is an especially good point, actually, and one I'd not really thought through thoroughly (what a triplet).
Worst of all about that is that it's directly contrary to realistic tactics, because IRL you'd far rather empty three clips in order to not get shot just once.

There is a counterpoint, however: in the original game, if you took too much damage, you might wind up reloading anyway, even if you didn't die, because progressing with the amount of health you had left and no healing items could become impossible. There's no argument that can really support regeneration not being optional, but even so, I think it is worth noting that it might not be quite as crippling a change as people think...

[...] Instead, EM analyzed DX, figured out what made it work, and then decided to make something that looks similar, but also appeals to the ME crowd. Granted, in places where it wasn't a marketing decision on how to sell it to a bigger demographic, it does seem like it was done the way it is supposed to be done. But where the two came into conflict, the choice is never in favor of the original design concepts. And this is why it's not faithful to the original.

Accepted. However, my original question remains: why is such faithfulness so important?

[Irate Iguana]

However, my original question remains: why is such faithfulness so important?

Because it is a new installment in a series. People loved things about the gameplay and setting from DX and they want more. Just paying homage to it isn't the same thing as making a prequel. If you claim to make a prequel it should be logical that you advance that which people loved about the series.

[K^2]

Accepted. However, my original question remains: why is such faithfulness so important?
It's not, strictly speaking. I mean, we all liked Deus Ex. We will all like another game made based on the same principles. It can be a completely new IP made by completely different people. However, such games are extremely scarce. So when we see a developer pick up the IP, we expect that developer to try to make a game that people who enjoyed the original would like. When it turns out that they are making a completely different game and just using the IP for notoriety, it's upsetting.

[Ashpolt]

Accepted. However, my original question remains: why is such faithfulness so important?

As K^2 has explained so wonderfully why DX:HR is unfaithful, I'll jump in to answer the above question.

Faithfulness is important because the fact that we liked Deus Ex as it was is the reason we're all on this forum in the first place, and the reason we're interested in this title. A hell of a lot of us jumped on here as soon as the game was announced, or very shortly thereafter - why? Because we enjoyed Deus Ex, and a sequel is a chance to get more of that delicious pie we liked so much first time round. We didn't go "Oh man, The Smiths are releasing a new album, I love their style of music but I hope their next album is thumping techno" - because that would be ridiculous. Deus Ex set a template that we enjoyed, and we liked the game for the game, not simply for the name: so making a new game that's called Deus Ex but is unfaithful to its predecessors won't fulfil the very basic reason we're interested in it in the first place.

If I want a game that's not Deus Ex, there are quite literally hundreds of thousands of games out there that can scratch that itch. But by calling this Deus Ex, they've got my interest purely on the basis that what they create gives an experience faithful to the original. It doesn't have to be identical - as K^2 said, even the most hardcore of us will admit that there's stuff that needed to be fixed - but it has to be aiming for the same kind of experience, something DXHR clearly isn't doing with its shift towards the cinematic.

[mad825]

Human Revolution appears to be faithful to the first game.
have you been keeping-up with the interviews? if so you would've ran into this interview with David Anfossi (http://www.vg247.com/2010/07/13/interview-deus-ex-human-revolutions-david-anfossi/) (July 13th, 2010)
Would you say that it’s your goal to surpass the original Deus Ex?

This is not the purpose of this game. For us, it’s kind of a reboot. We respect the universe, but we’ve got a new character, a new conspiracy and a new timeline. So, this is kind of a reboot, and it’s a standalone title.
Jean-Francois said a very similar thing at E3 as well.

[K^2]

That's just story-wise, though. I don't think too many people were disappointed with HR for not keeping the continuity. I might be wrong, but I haven't seen too many serious complaints about it.

[Crane]

People loved things about the gameplay and setting from DX and they want more. [...] it should be logical that you advance that which people loved about the series.

We will all like another game made based on the same principles [...] we expect that developer to try to make a game that people who enjoyed the original would like. When it turns out that they are making a completely different game and just using the IP for notoriety, it's upsetting.

[...] we enjoyed Deus Ex, and a sequel is a chance to get more of that delicious pie we liked so much first time round [...] making a new game that's called Deus Ex but is unfaithful to its predecessors won't fulfil the very basic reason we're interested in it in the first place [...] by calling this Deus Ex, they've got my interest purely on the basis that what they create gives an experience faithful to the original. It doesn't have to be identical - as K^2 said, even the most hardcore of us will admit that there's stuff that needed to be fixed - but it has to be aiming for the same kind of experience, something DXHR clearly isn't doing with its shift towards the cinematic.

I entirely agree with your perspectives here, and I'd be on your side... if I felt that HR wasn't continuing what I loved about the series, if I felt it was a completely different game, if I felt it weren't aiming for the same kind of experience.

The changes I'm aware of don't compromise any of the things I loved about the first game. There's nothing shown that makes me feel I won't be able to approach tasks as I wish, nothing that makes me think I won't be able to attach mines to a wheelie bin and shove it into a group of enemies, nothing that makes me think I won't be able to keep guards away from alarm buttons by fire-extinguishing their faces. The joy of Deus Ex, for me, was in pulling the most absurd plans out of my hat, and succeeding by the skin of my teeth - and I don't see anything that proves that's gone.

[K^2]

I entirely agree with your perspectives here, and I'd be on your side... if I felt that HR wasn't continuing what I loved about the series, if I felt it was a completely different game, if I felt it weren't aiming for the same kind of experience.

The changes I'm aware of don't compromise any of the things I loved about the first game. There's nothing shown that makes me feel I won't be able to approach tasks as I wish, nothing that makes me think I won't be able to attach mines to a wheelie bin and shove it into a group of enemies, nothing that makes me think I won't be able to keep guards away from alarm buttons by fire-extinguishing their faces. The joy of Deus Ex, for me, was in pulling the most absurd plans out of my hat, and succeeding by the skin of my teeth - and I don't see anything that proves that's gone.
So if they changed things that you don't care about, then people who come in and post that these things were important to them must be idiots, right? Their opinion is unimportant and wrong. Since EM is making the game that you would be happy with, everybody else must be talking nonsense.

Look, obviously different people will like different things about games. They'll play them differently too. And these people will have different responses to how EM makes HR. You happy with HR? Fine. Be happy. Why did you feel a need to start a thread asking why other people are unhappy and then post that you don't care?

[Crane]

So if they changed things that you don't care about, then people who come in and post that these things were important to them must be idiots, right? Their opinion is unimportant and wrong. Since EM is making the game that you would be happy with, everybody else must be talking nonsense.

No, now you're just putting words in my mouth. Please calm down.

Look, obviously different people will like different things about games. They'll play them differently too. And these people will have different responses to how EM makes HR. You happy with HR? Fine. Be happy. Why did you feel a need to start a thread asking why other people are unhappy and then post that you don't care?

It's not that I don't care, it's that I don't understand. I can't follow why people feel (for example) that the introduction of third-person cover is such a grievous departure from the original as to ruin the game in their eyes. I don't see it making a large enough difference to be such a contentious issue, and I don't seem to see people explaining very well why they think it spoils things so much.

The big argument is that it's unfaithful to the original. Then I ask why unfaithfulness is bad, and the answer boils down to 'I believe the lack of faithfulness makes the game something I like less', and it all seems to be a circular argument.

[Brock]

It's not that I don't care, it's that I don't understand. I can't follow why people feel (for example) that the introduction of third-person cover is such a grievous departure from the original as to ruin the game in their eyes. I don't see it making a large enough difference to be such a contentious issue, and I don't seem to see people explaining very well why they think it spoils things so much.

Is there any game genre that actually you don 't like or you just don 't want to play because that doesn 't appeal to you? Now imagine that they add that to Deus Ex and say that it will be good? Will youl agree and accept it without any comments and will you be happy that they added something you don 't really like to the game.
Well, there is a lot of people who don 't play third person shooters, there is a lot of people who don 't play strategy games, driving games etc. So Why do they have to like that developer add something they don 't like to play to the game series they like? That's why they say that EM is ruining the game for them.

[mentalkase]

I just came to a fairly obvious but for some reason up until now hidden (to me) realisation. I've been thinking that there was some sort of great division between those who are basically positive about HR and those that are critical that it deviates too much from the formula, or feeling, or however you want to term it, of the original.

The truth is that we're all in exactly the same boat. We're all big friggin fans of DX and we all want a new DX game that will provide us with the experience we had with the first one. Some of us think that this new version will give us what we loved about the first one, some of us don't.

It's as simple as that, there was something for everyone in the old one, and the changes affect some more than others. I just need to stop grinding my teeth in frustration at overstatements such as 'because it doesn't contain X or they've altered X it's no longer DX but something else entirely'. Oh well, if they see it that way that's their prerogative.

[K^2]

The changes I'm aware of don't compromise any of the things I loved about the first game.
It's not that I don't care, it's that I don't understand. I can't follow why people feel (for example) that the introduction of third-person cover is such a grievous departure from the original as to ruin the game in their eyes. I don't see it making a large enough difference to be such a contentious issue, and I don't seem to see people explaining very well why they think it spoils things so much.

The big argument is that it's unfaithful to the original. Then I ask why unfaithfulness is bad, and the answer boils down to 'I believe the lack of faithfulness makes the game something I like less', and it all seems to be a circular argument.
These are two entirely different questions. It's only when you clump them into one that it starts to feel like circular argument.

First, why it's unfaithful. It will depend on which parts are important to you. If you cared about story and cool mods, you probably won't see anything wrong with HR. If you cared about deep immersion and complicated tactical decisions, you'll be deeply annoyed. You're in the former camp. You're not going to understand the later. But I don't see why you should try. I don't like peanut butter, but I don't stand next to the peanut butter isle and ask people why they like it. They do, leave it at that.

Second part is why people expected it to be the same. And there is no logical reason there. As I pointed out, all we really want is the game that will feel like another Deus Ex to us, at least on some level. It doesn't have to be a remake. It doesn't have to share a story, even. It needs to be based on the same design choices. And why people felt that this is what EM should do, because EM picked up an IP, and that gave people hope. And then that hope was crushed. And now these people are upset. Is that part so difficult to understand?

[Ashpolt]

It's not that I don't care, it's that I don't understand. I can't follow why people feel (for example) that the introduction of third-person cover is such a grievous departure from the original as to ruin the game in their eyes. I don't see it making a large enough difference to be such a contentious issue, and I don't seem to see people explaining very well why they think it spoils things so much.

These things have been explained out in great detail many, many, many times on this forum, to the point where people are getting sick of repeating the same things again and again every time a new member comes on and makes a post saying "Why don't you like these things? I don't see anyone explaining it in the three threads I've read so obviously you don't have reasons and are just complaining for the sake of it."

To give you a very, very, very brief overview: people dislike third person because it spoils immersion by frequently jumping between one perspective and another. It makes stealth too easy because you can see enemies when they can't see you, and it gives combat a particular feel not befitting of a Deus Ex game - in my opinion. Also, it's a symptom of Eidos Montreal's slide towards the cinematic, which is the exact opposite philosophy that Warren Spector and his team held for Deus Ex. In their own words, Deus Ex was an "immersive simulator." It was designed to draw you into the world through your own actions, not through pre-scripted cutscenes and "cool moves."

Health regeneration: well for one, it's removing an option. The original Deus Ex had both, and you chose, so in what way is a single forced option an improvement? Secondly, it removes a branch of resource management - something which has also been damaged by the removal of lockpicks and multitools. Thirdly, it removes consequences for messing up - as K^2 said, if you go into combat, either you do and reload or you get through and are back to full health. There's none of those wonderful "I got through, but I'm crippled, which is going to make me have to approach the next area in a completely different way." Which brings me on to the last and, for me, most important complaint: it removes localised damage. I loved that in Deus Ex, and for me, it was one of the things that made the game, because it led to situations like the above.

You're probably frantically hitting the reply key already, but please bear this in mind: this is only a high level overview, and these things have been discussed on here almost non-stop for nearly 3 years. Any thing you say will have been said and countered before. For that reason, I'm not going to respond to any counterpoints you have to the above points so please save your own time and don't bother posting them. This may sound pig-headed, but like I say, these discussions have been had so many times that, barring some magnificent new insight into previously unknown factors from the developers, there is nothing new to say about them.

[Crane]

If you cared about story and cool mods, you probably won't see anything wrong with HR. If you cared about deep immersion and complicated tactical decisions, you'll be deeply annoyed. You're in the former camp. You're not going to understand the later.

There's nothing shown that makes me feel I won't be able to approach tasks as I wish, nothing that makes me think I won't be able to attach mines to a wheelie bin and shove it into a group of enemies, nothing that makes me think I won't be able to keep guards away from alarm buttons by fire-extinguishing their faces. The joy of Deus Ex, for me, was in pulling the most absurd plans out of my hat, and succeeding by the skin of my teeth - and I don't see anything that proves that's gone.

You're quite wrong about which 'camp' I'm in, I'm afraid. I enjoyed the immersion and the tactical decisions, and though I can understand the argument that the forced perceptive switching is somewhat immersion jarring, I don't think that the alterations they've made have killed any chance of making complex and interesting tactical decisions.

people dislike third person because it spoils immersion by frequently jumping between one perspective and another. It makes stealth too easy because you can see enemies when they can't see you, and it gives combat a particular feel not befitting of a Deus Ex game - in my opinion.

I agree that it damages immersion, but I don't feel that it wholly precludes it. I think it adds an unneccesary barrier to immersion, but that doesn't mean the game won't be immersive, it simply means the other aspects will have to compensate. As for making stealth too easy, I cannot agree. The Metal Gear Solid and Splinter Cell games show that it's perfectly possible to have challenging stealth in a third-person perspective.

Moreover, I never found stealth in DX1 to be remotely challenging - guards were so deaf and blind that you could run right in front of them and duck out of sight, and they'd then disregard you. If third-person makes stealth easier, I would imagine that will be more than compensated for by an improvement to the AI.

As for its impact on the feel of the combat... I can see your point there. Certainly it will be a large departure from the feel of combat in the original, but I'm not convinced it will be worse.

Health regeneration: well for one, it's removing an option. The original Deus Ex had both, and you chose, so in what way is a single forced option an improvement? Secondly, it removes a branch of resource management - something which has also been damaged by the removal of lockpicks and multitools. Thirdly, it removes consequences for messing up [...] it removes localised damage. I loved that in Deus Ex, and for me, it was one of the things that made the game

Regarding health regeneration, and specifically the loss of localised damage, I agree with you almost entirely. It is a wide departure from the original, and I still believe it was unneccesary. I'm not sure it's neccessarily going to make the game vastly worse, but I don't think it is a positive change.

As for the removal of lockpicks and multitools - I find the existance of the AUD in one of the pre-order bonuses suggestive. I sincerely doubt that they'd go to the trouble of creating code and art assets for a one-use item, of which you only get one, and only if you pre-order. I'm almost positive that that at least, is something that's in every copy of the game and is merely a little something extra for pre-orders, much like the 10000 credits with the other package. Granted, the removal of multitools, and merging of hacking with these mechanics is a dubious choice, but I don't think their removal is quite as clear cut as all that....

Any thing you say will have been said and countered before. For that reason, I'm not going to respond to any counterpoints you have to the above points so please save your own time and don't bother posting them. This may sound pig-headed, but like I say, these discussions have been had so many times that, barring some magnificent new insight into previously unknown factors from the developers, there is nothing new to say about them.

That's your choice, of course. Mark me though, my arguments here aren't in an effort to assert "You're all wrong!", but merely in an effort to understand a point of view that - from my perspective - appeared to be based almost soley on galloping pessimism. I appreciate your replies to this topic, and moreover the explanations of your viewpoint.

My issue now lies with the fact that ultimately, the disagreements appear to be based largely on a matter of opinion, and that there appear to be a vocal portion of the forums who are making broad, sweeping and conclusive statements about how Human Revolution will be a terrible game because it isn't to their taste.

Not liking something doesn't make it bad - I can't stand the Final Fantasy series, but I'd never claim they were bad games.

[Ashpolt]

As for the removal of lockpicks and multitools - I find the existance of the AUD in one of the pre-order bonuses suggestive. I sincerely doubt that they'd go to the trouble of creating code and art assets for a one-use item, of which you only get one, and only if you pre-order. I'm almost positive that that at least, is something that's in every copy of the game and is merely a little something extra for pre-orders, much like the 10000 credits with the other package. Granted, the removal of multitools, and merging of hacking with these mechanics is a dubious choice, but I don't think their removal is quite as clear cut as all that....

This is actually a new one - obviously, as the AUD was only revealed a couple of days ago! - so I'll respond to this.

I totally agree that the AUD won't just be a one off thing - though on the other hand, I doubt they'll be very frequent in the game either, because if they are then giving away one of them with the collector's edition / pre-orders is not very special at all. Imagine getting one multitool as a special bonus for pre-ordering DX1! (Yes, I realise there's other stuff as well, but the point is, something so small wouldn't be worth adding if it wasn't rare.)

Even if we assume they are directly equivalent to multitools though, there's still no resource management involved, because if you haven't got one of the AUDs you'll still be able to open that door, you'll just have to play the hacking minigame instead. There are also items that restore your health / speed up your regen - but again, because you know that even without them you'll get back up to full health, they don't actually add any aspect of resource management.

My issue now lies with the fact that ultimately, the disagreements appear to be based largely on a matter of opinion, and that there appear to be a vocal portion of the forums who are making broad, sweeping and conclusive statements about how Human Revolution will be a terrible game because it isn't to their taste.

You may want to read a bit harder into what people are saying. Most of the hardcore dissenters aren't saying they expect DXHR to be a terrible game, just a poor Deus Ex game - there's a world of difference. And while what makes a "good" game is almost wholly subjective, what makes a Deus Ex game is far less so - I think we can all agree that if they turned it into an RTS it wouldn't be a Deus Ex game any more, even if it had a great storyline totally fitting with existing canon. People may argue that certain elements that have been changed aren't important to them - that's totally subjective, of course - but what they can't argue is that they're a step away from the Deus Ex formula.

[K^2]

You're quite wrong about which 'camp' I'm in, I'm afraid.
Then I feel you'll be greatly disappointed.

[Jerion]

Even if we assume they are directly equivalent to multitools though, there's still no resource management involved, because if you haven't got one of the AUDs you'll still be able to open that door, you'll just have to play the hacking minigame instead.

Not quite true. Damn NDAs.

[nomotog]

One of the big gripes I see people on this forum having with Human Revolution is a lack of faithfulness to the original. It's my personal opinion that in almost all the areas that really matter, Human Revolution appears to be faithful to the first game, but I can agree that some decisions such as regenerating health and third-person cover are a wide departure from the original. Regardless of this however, my question is this:

Why are some of you so desperate for such a level of fidelity? Deus Ex was a great game, in my opinion one of the best ever made, but it doesn't follow that a sequel must cleave to its formula slavishly in order to be great.

I can understand the fears that some of the changes have been made solely in order to appeal to a modern market, but firstly, we don't know that that is the case. Indeed, the developers have said many times that the decisions they made were what they believe best for the gameplay. Secondly, even if they were made primarily with that motive in mind, it doesn't guarantee that the game will be worse for them.

Some of you, I know, will counter this with "No, but it's a worse Deus Ex sequel!".

I can't agree with this. A sequel to Deus Ex will be a good Deus Ex sequel if we play it and acclaim it as another game of the same quality. It doesn't have to be faithful for that.

DX1 was a good game. This is the one thing we all seem to agree on. That and we really want to see another game like it.

[lithos]

Look, the only reason "Deus Ex" is in the game's title is brand recognition.

[Ashpolt]

Not quite true. Damn NDAs.

As a guess, I will assume hacking requires energy, being that it's an aug. But I know you can't answer.

[Dead-Eye]

Accepted. However, my original question remains: why is such faithfulness so important?
Well, I have been calling Deus Ex the Citizen Kain of video games for years now. I would imagine faithfulness is impotent because Deus Ex raised the bar and the world never realized it.

I just came to a fairly obvious but for some reason up until now hidden (to me) realisation. I've been thinking that there was some sort of great division between those who are basically positive about HR and those that are critical that it deviates too much from the formula, or feeling, or however you want to term it, of the original.

The truth is that we're all in exactly the same boat. We're all big friggin fans of DX and we all want a new DX game that will provide us with the experience we had with the first one. Some of us think that this new version will give us what we loved about the first one, some of us don't.

It's as simple as that, there was something for everyone in the old one, and the changes affect some more than others. I just need to stop grinding my teeth in frustration at overstatements such as 'because it doesn't contain X or they've altered X it's no longer DX but something else entirely'. Oh well, if they see it that way that's their prerogative.
Damn, that is so true. Warren once said something about meeting two DX fans at a bar. One thought the game was too liberal and the other thought it was too conservative. Needless to say, Warren didn't even need to talk.

I'm starting to have second thoughts again as to weather or not Deus Ex 3 is faithful to the original. I feel that Eidos is more faithful to the original then I did when I saw the leaked footage. And here is why:

They said that the health system has some types of hypos that give you temporary boosts to regain and maximum health. Assuming that, at lest on Deus Ex difficulty, combat is daunting without these hypos, then they are almost essentially indistinguishable from med packs. Just implemented in a way that I actually would say is an improvement over the original. I'm thinking how it works is, when we use them, the game turns into COD, but only for a few minutes and then it goes back to Deus Ex. It's actually something that keeps the resource management of the original while, at the same time, opening the door more for Johnny Halo to play the way he wants to. It's just too bad about locational damage (I.E. Injury penalties) but this seems like a compromise I can live with.

Takedowns, however, are still an area that I believe EM failed in. Not only did they remove melee combat altogether, but they replaced them with a system that looks slow and unimpressive. I'm willing to accept a few imperfections, and the amount of cool guns available dose make up for this imperfection to some degree. I just wish EM didn't fallow this common trend of replacing core game mechanics. I would be fine with takedowns if they were ether more player controlled or you could use melee weapons instead, but as it's implemented now, I don't think this aspect is going to wow me.

Finally the cover system isn't something I'm up in arms about. Sure it takes away from the immersion sim design logic, but this game feels more like a decent spin off rather then a true sequel. It looks like it's more of an extension of the gameplay rather then something that defines it. If they implement lean keys for the PC version I will be more then happy with this.

Overall I'm starting to get this feeling like, what the devs started with was rainbow six vagas. However over time, making tweaks to the gameplay, they are turning rainbow six into Deus Ex. This feels somewhat evident when you look at the first leaked gameplay footage and then take a look at the more recent footage, in particular the Eye-Infinity trailer which looked the most like Deus Ex of anything we have seen thus far.

I think I will enjoy this game. (The same way I enjoyed fallout 3 no doubt) But I still feel that the devs should do the best they can to please everyone and that means making it as close to the original as possible. Maybe in time, we will see more changes that make it look less like Rainbow Six and more and more like Deus Ex. It's entirely possible that melee weapons are in the game, they haven't said anything, and maybe they did implement some type of injury system that penalizes the player for taking too much damage. Only time will tell.

[Rindill the Red]

Not quite true. Damn NDAs.

So what? Hacking takes energy? Take downs take energy? Augmentation powers take energy?

What doesn't take energy? And why don't these things have separate pools.

[Dead-Eye]

So what? Hacking takes energy? Take downs take energy? Augmentation powers take energy?

What doesn't take energy? And why don't these things have separate pools.

I think lifting stuff doesn't take energy. One thing from invisible war that was a good idea to bring over.

So if worst comes to worst, you can just run around with a box and throw it at people to kill them.

[Irate Iguana]

Not quite true. Damn NDAs.

Some doors require higher than level 1 hacking?

[Ashpolt]

Some doors require higher than level 1 hacking?

Actually, this has been confirmed, so might be what he was talking about. Or it could be both this and that hacking requires energy.

[Irate Iguana]

Actually, this has been confirmed, so might be what he was talking about. Or it could be both this and that hacking requires energy.

First pip regenerates. So unless hacking is super expensive, BE wise, it would be a moot point.

[Happy]

Actually, this has been confirmed, so might be what he was talking about. Or it could be both this and that hacking requires energy.

If Adam is using his fingers to access a touch screen computer to hack - why would he use energy? That makes no sense to me...

Unless he is hacking like R2D2 did in star wars (yes, I'm a nerd for mentioning start wars, but I don't care) - there should be no energy used since his brain is not linked to the puter... right?

[Ashpolt]

First pip regenerates. So unless hacking is super expensive, BE wise, it would be a moot point.

DERP at me for forgetting that.

If Adam is using his fingers to access a touch screen computer to hack - why would he use energy? That makes no sense to me...

Unless he is hacking like R2D2 did in star wars (yes, I'm a nerd for mentioning start wars, but I don't care) - there should be no energy used since his brain is not linked to the puter... right?

Takedowns use energy, and one of the takedowns is simply punching a guy in the jaw. "Sense" is not exactly a watchword here.

But we know there are aug upgrades that give you better hacking ability, so I guess the explanation would be that using those augs (even if they're just essentially a CPU grafted onto your brain) uses energy.

[Happy]

DERP at me for forgetting that.



Takedowns use energy, and one of the takedowns is simply punching a guy in the jaw. "Sense" is not exactly a watchword here.

But we know there are aug upgrades that give you better hacking ability, so I guess the explanation would be that using those augs (even if they're just essentially a CPU grafted onto your brain) uses energy.

Ahh - ok, so an integrated cpu in your brain that uses energy - I could live with that explanation - thanks.

Here's a new one for you to explain though - if lifting a crate and "running around with it" doesn't use energy, who does punching someone in the jaw...?

[Crane]

[...] Even if we assume [AUDs] are directly equivalent to multitools though, there's still no resource management involved, because if you haven't got one of the AUDs you'll still be able to open that door, you'll just have to play the hacking minigame instead. There are also items that restore your health / speed up your regen - but again, because you know that even without them you'll get back up to full health, they don't actually add any aspect of resource management.

They said that the health system has some types of hypos that give you temporary boosts to regain and maximum health. Assuming that, at lest on Deus Ex difficulty, combat is daunting without these hypos, then they are almost essentially indistinguishable from med packs. Just implemented in a way that I actually would say is an improvement over the original. I'm thinking how it works is, when we use them, the game turns into COD, but only for a few minutes and then it goes back to Deus Ex. It's actually something that keeps the resource management of the original while, at the same time, opening the door more for Johnny Halo to play the way he wants to. It's just too bad about locational damage (I.E. Injury penalties) but this seems like a compromise I can live with.

This is what I'm hoping, as well.

I'm gravely concerned that it won't be the case, but I think that there are potential scenarios involving the mechanics we know of that aren't going to wreck the game by dumbing it down.

Takedowns, however, are still an area that I believe EM failed in. Not only did they remove melee combat altogether [...] I would be fine with takedowns if they were ether more player controlled or you could use melee weapons instead, but as it's implemented now, I don't think this aspect is going to wow me.

I'm of two minds about this... I certainly feel that forcing players to switch to third person for this is almost unjustifiable, but I really don't feel that melee combat in the original was exactly something to aspire to. On realistic, it was entirely possible to charge directly towards an NSF trooper from almost any angle except directly in front, and kill him instantly with one strike from a sword/incapacitate him with one prod.

As far as we know, takedowns only work if enemies are at least somewhat surprised by your presence, and as far as I'm concerned, the difference between sneaking up to someone and pressing one button to watch a prod swing and sneaking up to someone and pressing one button to watch Jensen club them over the head is fairly minor.

I agree with the point that taking the player into third person for these takedowns is rather gratuitous and somewhat jarring, but from a gameplay perspective I really don't think it makes a great deal of difference.

[Dead-Eye]

I really don't feel that melee combat in the original was exactly something to aspire to.
That is probably true, but the problem as I see is that instead of saying, hay, let's give the player the option to choice between these two, they just removed one and replaced it with the other. It's a sure fire way to alienate someone.

On top of that, I don't feel like takedowns are in anyway an improvement over the older system. I mean if they have already committed to replacing the melee system, why not put something in that's a bit more innovative. Batman:AA comes to mind with it's vary fun brawling system, why not do something along those lines just with Adam's arm blades. Takedowns are just so boring.


As far as we know, takedowns only work if enemies are at least somewhat surprised by your presence...

I'm fairly sure they work so long as you're close to the target. In fact I'm dead sure.

[subtlesnake]

There are also items that restore your health / speed up your regen - but again, because you know that even without them you'll get back up to full health, they don't actually add any aspect of resource management.
If those items are needed then it sugests that the regeneration rate is too slow to allow the player to easily recover mid-combat, so the resource management consists in the management of your current health pool + additional consumables, in each combat encounter. I can imagine a situation where you go into an encounter without any health consumables, your health is reduced to near zero, and you find it very difficult to escape alive.

[Fluffis]

If those items are needed then it sugests that the regeneration rate is too slow to allow the player to easily recover mid-combat, so the resource management consists in the management of your current health pool + additional consumables, in each combat encounter. I can imagine a situation where you go into an encounter without any health consumables, your health is reduced to near zero, and you find it very difficult to escape alive.

I don't recall seeing any mention of them being "needed". It just been said that they are included for those who wish to speed up the process, didn't it?

[Shralla]

"Needed" could mean a lot of things. What if you're caught in an area and you can't backtrack? We've been told the AI will try to sniff you out if you're just hiding waiting for your health to regen.

[Happy]

How does health regeneration work? What will trigger it, how fast is it going to be, will it use energy?

From EDIOS "When you take damage your health goes down. If you have being hit for "x" seconds, than it starts to regenerate somewhat slowly. It's not as quick as games like Halo or CoD. You really need to stay out of the firing zone otherwise you won't last long. When in trouble, you can use consumables (if you have any) to replenish it faster or to boost your health when it's already full."

[Irate Iguana]

If those items are needed then it sugests that the regeneration rate is too slow to allow the player to easily recover mid-combat, so the resource management consists in the management of your current health pool + additional consumables, in each combat encounter. I can imagine a situation where you go into an encounter without any health consumables, your health is reduced to near zero, and you find it very difficult to escape alive.

That would mean that consuming foodstuffs during combat is not only possible, but also reasonably fast and that the regen they provide is also very fast. That would make them exactly the same as the medkits in DX.

[JCpie]

"Sense" is not exactly a watchword here.

I guess that's one of the faithful things EM has carried over.

[Daedalus Ciarán]

That would mean that consuming foodstuffs during combat is not only possible, but also reasonably fast and that the regen they provide is also very fast. That would make them exactly the same as the medkits in DX.

Which has me massively confused to be honest. Unless EM are too scared, or even embarrassed, to say they were wrong about everything they said about Medkits, then these health boosts are going to be either so rare or useless as to be pointless. Because otherwise EM are just going back on what they've clearly stated several times about their imagined 'back tracking'.

Though, slightly off topic here, I still find it funny that EM's biggest defence of RH was/is back tracking for medkits when things go wrong, and the supporters of their actions in the forum use the the massive amount of medkits in DX as evidence that DX was essentially RH to begin with.

But back on topic, yes, confused by EM's health system and why they're seemingly making a dodgy medkit/RH system.

[Red]

Deus ex was kinda slow.

[MaxxQ1]

Deus ex was kinda slow.

:thumb: I see what you did there...

[rashal]

Hey Crane,

have you ever played Metro 2033? Now imagine playing it in TP. Same goes for DX. Nothing can compensate for the loss of immersion.

[oscarMike]

As far as we know, takedowns only work if enemies are at least somewhat surprised by your presence, and as far as I'm concerned, the difference between sneaking up to someone and pressing one button to watch a prod swing and sneaking up to someone and pressing one button to watch Jensen club them over the head is fairly minor.

Actually, in gameplay in which Adam search for explosives we see in one scene clearly how Adam storms frontally toward the guard and performs "cinematic takedown", and in the latest trailer we see how Adam jumps near one of the guard and perform a takedown implying that stealth might not even be necessary for takedown, but more of a "if you're close enough to the guard, it's a done deal" situation!!! And from what we've seen, these DX:HR takedowns also imply that one button triggers them which means that there is no possibility of fail or penalty of any kind! That was not the case in DX1!!!

I agree with the point that taking the player into third person for these takedowns is rather gratuitous and somewhat jarring, but from a gameplay perspective I really don't think it makes a great deal of difference.

While in third person view, simply by swinging the mouse it is allowed for player to see all the things Adam couldn't possibly see behind the wall or in real world!!!In DX1 player had to rely on sneaking, creeping, leaning, eavesdropping, shadows and sounds! So, as you can see, it makes EVERY difference in gameplay!!!

[Crane]

Actually, in gameplay in which Adam search for explosives we see in one scene clearly how Adam storms frontally toward the guard and performs "cinematic takedown"

For this, I assume you're talking about this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM1gzCr5xCE&feature=player_embedded#!) leaked E3 demo footage?

If you mean the one around 4:02 against the two guards, then he approaches perpendicular to their sightline, which just means they have awful peripheral vision like the first game, and weren't yet aware of him. If you mean the one around 5:48, then he was cloaked, and thus they weren't alerted.

and in the latest trailer we see how Adam jumps near one of the guard and perform a takedown implying that stealth might not even be necessary for takedown, but more of a "if you're close enough to the guard, it's a done deal" situation!!!

That guard is staggering when Adam performs the takedown, most likely because he just performed an Icarus Landing next to him. Not stealth, I'll grant you, but not just walking up to his face either.

And from what we've seen, these DX:HR takedowns also imply that one button triggers them which means that there is no possibility of fail or penalty of any kind! That was not the case in DX1!!!

This would appear to be true, however:
It appears you still have to make it into melee range either undetected or with your target stunned. Once you are within melee range, yes, it's a case of pressing one button to take the enemy down.
That said, the only way you could fail in DX1 once you were in melee range undetected was by somehow missing while trying to wang someone over the head with a crowbar/baton/riot prod from three feet away, which really should be basically impossible anyway.

While in third person view, simply by swinging the mouse it is allowed for player to see all the things Adam couldn't possibly see behind the wall or in real world!!!In DX1 player had to rely on sneaking, creeping, leaning, eavesdropping, shadows and sounds! So, as you can see, it makes EVERY difference in gameplay!!!

So, third person view eliminates the need to eavesdrop, eh! Good to know I'll never again want to know what my enemies are planning or if they have any holes in their security set-up!

More seriously, you are correct in that it changes the exact form of the stealth gameplay, but it's far too early to say what impact that has on the validity of stealth as a tactic overall, and thus on the gameplay of the game as a whole. The handicapped AI of the first Deus Ex made stealth trivially easy ninety-nine percent of the time, and I doubt that's going to be quite so prevalent in Human Revolution.

[Bluey71]

It appears you still have to make it into melee range either undetected or with your target stunned. Once you are within melee range, yes, it's a case of pressing one button to take the enemy down.

Getting into range won't be much of a problem - look at the game play footage.

And in addition to that - you can see around walls... And in addition to that as well, later in the game you can also see through walls if you choose that augment path.


That said, the only way you could fail in DX1 once you were in melee range undetected was by somehow missing while trying to wang someone over the head with a crowbar/baton/riot prod from three feet away, which really should be basically impossible anyway.

This isn't true.

MIB were very difficult to stun, often taking more than one charge - sometimes 2 even when you were undetected.



So, third person view eliminates the need to eavesdrop, eh! Good to know I'll never again want to know what my enemies are planning or if they have any holes in their security set-up!

You don't need to hear what the plan is when you can see around and through walls - unless it's a scripted event in which case it won't matter anyway.

More seriously, you are correct in that it changes the exact form of the stealth gameplay, but it's far too early to say what impact that has on the validity of stealth as a tactic overall, and thus on the gameplay of the game as a whole.

Possibly.

But I think everyone here knows how this is going to end - most have seen it before with too many games to mention.


The handicapped AI of the first Deus Ex made stealth trivially easy ninety-nine percent of the time, and I doubt that's going to be quite so prevalent in Human Revolution.

Trivial for today perhaps yes, but lets not forget that the culmination of all parts of DX1 is what gave the first game over 35 GOTY awards. So not so trivial, huh?

[Fluffis]

The handicapped AI of the first Deus Ex made stealth trivially easy ninety-nine percent of the time, and I doubt that's going to be quite so prevalent in Human Revolution.

Here's hoping, but like you yourself wrote:


If you mean the one around 4:02 against the two guards, then he approaches perpendicular to their sightline, which just means they have awful peripheral vision like the first game,


it does look like they have, at least, sucky peripheral vision. That's almost as indicative of trivially easy stealth, as bad AI. If we add the situational awareness of Third Person to that premiss, we may get an overpowered stealth system.

[Crane]

And in addition to that - you can see around walls...

You could lean around walls in DX1 for pretty much the same effect - and don't tell me the risk of being seen doing so made a massive difference: it was always clear when a guard was about to be alerted, and you just had to duck back for them to completely forget they saw you.

later in the game you can also see through walls if you choose that augment path.

Oh, the same as in DX1? Wow, Eidos really messed up there!


MIB were very difficult to stun, often taking more than one charge - sometimes 2 even when you were undetected.

Not quite true. They sometimes took more than one charge to knock out, however the first tap of the prod would always stun them and render them unable to do anytning.


Trivial for today perhaps yes, but lets not forget that the culmination of all parts of DX1 is what gave the first game over 35 GOTY awards. So not so trivial, huh?

I beg your pardon, but how does the fact that Deus Ex was a great game prove that the stealth in it wasn't easy?

Here's hoping, but like you yourself wrote: [...]
it does look like they have, at least, sucky peripheral vision. That's almost as indicative of trivially easy stealth, as bad AI. If we add the situational awareness of Third Person to that premiss, we may get an overpowered stealth system.

A fair point.
I would say, however, that crippled peripheral vision is one of the more acceptable enemy-handicaps in stealth games - look at all the MGS games: the enemies in those practically have tunnel vision. I'm not saying there's no concern whatsoever, but I sincerely doubt the AI in HR will be as crippled as the one in DX1...

[Bluey71]

and don't tell me the risk of being seen doing so made a massive difference: it was always clear when a guard was about to be alerted, and you just had to duck back for them to completely forget they saw you.

Yes, it made a difference - now you are starting to 'get' it ;)



Oh, the same as in DX1? Wow, Eidos really messed up there!

Yes they have messed up. :)



Not quite true. They sometimes took more than one charge to knock out, however the first tap of the prod would always stun them and render them unable to do anything.

That is until they recovered and came right back at you again which is very much a problem if you only have one charge eh?



[COLOR="Orange"][SIZE="2"]I beg your pardon, but how does the fact that Deus Ex was a great game prove that the stealth in it wasn't easy?

Wasn't easy for the time. Unless you saying it was trivial at release - in which case I don't believe thats what you really thought at the time :)

[Zakka]

With the dragon tooth sword I could kill anything except from bots with 1 hit. You did not need the melee damage augmentation. Just trained melee skill (any more is overkill). I would also agree that deus ex is not really a challening game especially the stealth. The further you get in the game the easier it gets.

[Bluey71]

I didn't find it any easier at all.

[Crane]

Yes, it made a difference - now you are starting to 'get' it ;)

What difference? Do you honestly think that having to hold/let go of a button to look around corners is that crucial a gameplay element?

Yes they have messed up. :)

By being like the original, they messed up? Consistency!

That is until they recovered and came right back at you again which is very much a problem if you only have one charge eh?

A problem if you only carried the riot prod, perhaps.

Wasn't easy for the time. Unless you saying it was trivial at release - in which case I don't believe thats what you really thought at the time :)

I played the game some time after release; all I can say is that the first time I played it I found the stealth to be trivially easy. Certainly much easier than the third-person stealth in Metal Gear Solid, which was released two years earlier than Deus Ex.

[Zakka]

There is nothing hard about it. Just crouch behind an oponnent and hit him on his torso (not the legs).

[AlexOfSpades]

Or the butts, in the case of a MJ12 Commando.

Oddly enough...

[nordoM]

Not quite true. Damn NDAs.

I wanted to comment on this right when it was new but at the time I couldn't be arsed to register.
But since I have an account now and you mentioning it again gives me an excuse to rant about it i want to get this of my chest:

What is the point?
If I got this correctly you (and some other few selected people/the other moderators?) got invited to Eidos and got to play Deus Ex: HR for some time by yourself but are all now denied from talking about it by the NDA.
Not just denied from exposing any details but even any basic info, going so far as not to even be able to give yes/no/sometimes answers to questions from the community.
So why invite you at all?
Sure, at some point you'll be allowed to talk but I'll wager this will be at the point when most info is available through severeal previews and websites anyway. Or to put it differently, when the PR dep. as cleared said info alongside some new feature video or something like that making your "unique insider knowledge" useless again.
To me it looks like Eidos gets nothing out of your visit like this, no feedback (time played too short), no community hype, no "hands on" previews on certain gaming websites... I'm just really puzzled.
Did I miss some critical bit of information? Was the invite the prize of some contest I missed?

(sorry for posting offtopic stuff)

[[FGS]Shadowrunner]

The story is faithful, and that is what matters...
If the game hadn't advanced hacking, conversation or the gameplay I would have been disappointed.

Did you notice the Versalife textures in Hengsha?

It's not like IW, some complete random departure from anything likely.
The inception of UNATCO is a great idea and fits well into the DX1 story.
It adds a lot of poignancy to the character's words in Deus Ex.

[Fluffis]

Or the butts, in the case of a MJ12 Commando.

Oddly enough...

Well, as fun as that sounded, it's not really the butt, but the lower back (probably somewhere around the lumbar arch and the sacrum). With a human, the spine is a notoriously good place to put a prod if you intend to stun something. It's a highway to the brain, and all other bodily functions. With the MJ12 Commandos it's probably even better, since they most likely have a lot of electronics around that area.

[Dead-Eye]

(In Reference to the ability to see through walls.)
Oh, the same as in DX1? Wow, Eidos really messed up there!

Actually, in DX1 the aug that let you see through walls was almost useless because even at maximum level it had a range of 20 yards or so. The one in Human Revaluation is more like what Batman:AA did, where you can see everyone. Is this an improvement? Hard to say. I'm just glad that using this mode cost Bioelectrical Energy. Unlike in Batman where there was virtually no reason to turn it off.

About the cover system: At first I was up in arms about it because it took away from the hole immersive sim thing. However, they have also increased the AI's reactions times/intelligence. In the first game, JC was basically invisible for 3 seconds when spotted. Adam isn't so invisible. So when I look at the cover system now, I see it as a replacement for the gimping of the AI in the original. They just implemented it differently and honestly, I could see this as an improvement, or at the vary lest I don't think this takes anything away.

[Fluffis]

Actually, in DX1 the aug that let you see through walls was almost useless because even at maximum level it had a range of 20 yards or so.

Technically, you didn't "see" through walls. It was sonar imaging (visual representation of sound echoes, for those at home).

[biofuel]

For some reason, I actually kinda like the useless, redundant augmentations in Deus Ex 1. With hindsight, of course.

[Rindill the Red]

Technically, you didn't "see" through walls. It was sonar imaging (visual representation of sound echoes, for those at home).

I can attest to the fact that it's not just "see through walls"... sometimes it will highlight through walls quite far away, other times it doesn't.

[Senka]

Did anyone ever upgrade the light Aug?

[Fox89]

Did anyone ever upgrade the light Aug?

lol I wondered what everyone was on about :)

[Dead-Eye]

Invisible war had a better light Aug. You could have it on all the time and it didn't alert guards because it technically wasn't a light.

[Jehuty91]

Whilst the game looks fantastic, I got the impression from the gameplay footage that they're really forcing you to take an aggressive approach. Kill moves, ridiculous emp blaster gun thing, crazy shoot-through-wall laser gun. And as well as this, I read somewhere that there are bosses, which you'll have to kill. Now, unless they have to die for the sake of continuity with the other games, I really don't think you should have to kill them. I much rather the pacifist approach in both the previous games. It's much more rewarding and much more challenging. It seems like they might be pandering to the common denominator by imbuing the game with psychopathic hollywood action bull*****.

Also i'm pretty pissed about the removal of lockpicks and multitools. One of the greatest things about Deus Ex for me is the ability to tackle situations in multiple ways, and the absence of the aforementioned items seems to reduce the possibility of this, unless of course they've devised new systems / mechanics.

It annoys me because Warren Spector says he's still got a lot of Deus Ex stories he wants to tell. I'd love to know what those are. He's developing a title after Epic Mickey which apparently could be a Deus Ex related game...

Still though, I totally believe that this game will be good in its own way, and i'm just gonna try an take it for what it is. Like, I really am super excited for this game despite all the ostensible shortcomings.

[Jehuty91]

Did anyone ever upgrade the light Aug?

You can't upgrade the light in either game.

[Crane]

I read somewhere that there are bosses, which you'll have to kill. Now, unless they have to die for the sake of continuity with the other games, I really don't think you should have to kill them. I much rather the pacifist approach in both the previous games.

This is definitely false - developers have stated that you can finish the game without killing anyone, which is a one-up on the original DX. (Okay, you could avoid killing Navarre, but only through glitches.)

I believe you'll find that there are bosses you have to fight but you can take them down non-lethally.

[Anasumtj]

I'm pretty sure EM actually said you would kill bosses.

[Senka]

You can't upgrade the light in either game.
I can, but maybe that's because i'm using shifter. Has 3 upgrades that increases light distance apparently.

[Fluffis]

I can, but maybe that's because i'm using shifter. Has 3 upgrades that increases light distance apparently.

That's Shifter. No upgrade to light in vanilla.

[68_pie]

This is definitely false - developers have stated that you can finish the game without killing anyone, which is a one-up on the original DX. (Okay, you could avoid killing Navarre, but only through glitches.)

I believe you'll find that there are bosses you have to fight but you can take them down non-lethally.

You are mistaken, sir.

IGN AU: The first game allowed you to complete it without killing anyone. Is that still possible in Human Revolution?

Jean-Francois Dugas: Yes – minus the boss fights.

[IOOI]

I agree with the point that taking the player into third person for these takedowns is rather gratuitous and somewhat jarring, but from a gameplay perspective I really don't think it makes a great deal of difference.

Oh, yeah I understand what you're saying. Yes, we still have to hit the opponent, but the presentation is changed and that can break immersion for some, especially when expecting a sequel following the same Design philosophy - there goes the "up-close and personal" combat feel; -1 point for the First-Person Immersive Simulator.

I would rather see a combat system in FP similar to Riddick's. The way it's done now makes a great deal of a difference in terms of improving in the game in the same vein of DX.

These are the type of little things that accumulate and withdraw some people from seeing the game as good sequel.

With the dragon tooth sword I could kill anything except from bots with 1 hit. You did not need the melee damage augmentation. Just trained melee skill (any more is overkill).

Are you sure? I must check this.
Still weren't there other possible uses for the DT when combining melee damage augmentation with higher melee skill?

I would also agree that deus ex is not really a challening game especially the stealth. The further you get in the game the easier it gets.

If that's true, then why we hear saying that many people got stuck in the first level (Liberty Island)? Maybe they went guns blazing without understanding the game. I mean, they should have used stealth, it would have been much easier. ;)

Maybe you just were very good a stealth. :)

[Senka]

I know someone who showed a friend dx, and apparently when playing liberty island he played it like a shooter. "This game sucks, I can't even kill the first bot!" (trying to shoot through the bot.......)

[Dead-Eye]

I would also agree that deus ex is not really a challening game especially the stealth. The further you get in the game the easier it gets.
If that's true, then why we hear saying that many people got stuck in the first level (Liberty Island)? Maybe they went guns blazing without understanding the game. I mean, they should have used stealth, it would have been much easier. ;)

The first level is the hardest level in the game for most. After that it slowly get's easier as you upgrade skills, augmentations, etc.

They did do a good job of introducing harder enemy classes as the game went on, however with stealth it was always the same difficulty. So the more you got used to it, the easier it got.

[Rindill the Red]

The first level is the hardest level in the game for most. After that it slowly get's easier as you upgrade skills, augmentations, etc.

They did do a good job of introducing harder enemy classes as the game went on, however with stealth it was always the same difficulty. So the more you got used to it, the easier it got.

Stealth required patience. Silent running was very helpful for speeding the process up, and cloak allowed you to just bypass entire parts.

Using the cloak was fun and plausible so I really didn't care how "easy" it made it.

You want a real stealth challenge? Go through the entire game without knock-outs, kills, being spotted, or setting off any alarms.

Also, there are ways to increase the difficulty using certain functions or settings.

It would have been interesting however, if they had included some special enemies that could see through cloaks or even walls.

[Rindill the Red]

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=114728

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=114745

Here are two write-ups on how Deus Ex: Human Revolution is faithful, and how it isn't.

Generally it boils down to this: DX:HR is faithful to Deus Ex's "heart" as it were, but not necessarily its "design philosophy", especially in regards to it's genre as an immersive sim.

[IOOI]

The first level is the hardest level in the game for most. After that it slowly get's easier as you upgrade skills, augmentations, etc.

The first time I played it, I didn't see it that way. I was very happy that a game allowed me to have so much freedom, so the fantasies built up in my head and I tried the first level from so many different ways - that was true emergent gameplay; what I was looking for in a game from a long time.

They did do a good job of introducing harder enemy classes as the game went on, however with stealth it was always the same difficulty. So the more you got used to it, the easier it got.

That's the point. They should've publicized the game more for its stealth part in order to lure new players, the same way HR is doing with its combat part.
Well, there was the training mission that gave you hints, but from what it seems many disregarded it has non-essential.

[Senka]

Silent running was very helpful for speeding the process up, and cloak allowed you to just bypass entire parts.
Speed Aug + Crouch > Silent running

[lithos]

Speed Aug + Crouch > Silent running

Ah, yes. Silent Running is probably the most useless aug in there. But, as Harvey Smith said, it let you role-play a bit more deeply. The "useless" crap all added something to the game world - the books, the newspapers, the emails that had more than just things like "Password to Comms Room: 2345."

[Senka]

The datapad from the dying mj12 trooper in the underwater base was pretty interesting actually, and yeah at least they tried not to make things too simple / obvious.

[Uzuki]

I think EM, and many game developers, can't help but want to try new stuff or improve on supposedly failed ideas and make them work. Call it pride, but I doubt any self-respecting game designer wants to follow a formula so closely that he's limiting his or her own creativity. In most cases, that doesn't mean the innovations will be better, but it'll be the developer's own rather than pure imitation.

I'm aware almost all the changes complained about are "borrowed" from other games, but that doesn't mean EM can't make them better for this game. Hey, it could happen. Ironically, many of the complaints about not changing something that's already good is a major part of the storyline: augmenting the human body. Wouldn't that be funny if EM was using their own forums' complaints about change to write lines for the game?

[Bluey71]

but I doubt any self-respecting game designer wants to follow a formula so closely that he's limiting his or her own creativity.

The irony is so thick in this sentence, you could cut it with a bread knife.

You must surely have seen the game play footage by now to know that this isn't the case.

[mad_red]

Ironically, many of the complaints about not changing something that's already good is a major part of the storyline: augmenting the human body. Wouldn't that be funny if EM was using their own forums' complaints about change to write lines for the game?

Why don't you personalize that?

You have only one girlfriend, like we have only only one Deus Ex: Human revaluation game.

Now your girfriend was having her... arm replaced. Wouldn't you like to know first whether the prosthetic... arm works? Wouldn't you be worried if past girlfriends who had the same model augmented arm simply lacked that.... loving touch? If they felt a bit cold, artificial and lifeless?

Is there a smiley for that kind of innuendo?

[Uzuki]

The irony is so thick in this sentence, you could cut it with a bread knife.

You must surely have seen the game play footage by now to know that this isn't the case.

Irony? If it's wrong, just say so, but I already admitted that possibility in my post.

[Crane]

You are mistaken, sir.

Or the developers are. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM1gzCr5xCE&feature=player_embedded#!)
Listen at about 4:15, where he clearly says you can play the entire game without killing anybody. Mixed messages, 'twould seem.

[Mindmute]

Or the developers are. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM1gzCr5xCE&feature=player_embedded#!)
Listen at about 4:15, where he clearly says you can play the entire game without killing anybody. Mixed messages, 'twould seem.


While I also hope that you can bypass the bosses and get past them by means other than combat, they had also mentioned a while back that 3rd person was completely optional. Judging from the gameplay videos where you go into 3rd person through taking cover, using a takedown, using some of the augs or climbing any ladder it's no wonder some people are suspicious.

[Dead-Eye]

Well, they admitted that they change a lot of stuff. So when they say stuff about the game at the time, that doesn't mean they wont change it later. (Fingers crossed)

Also there seems to be a lot of misinformation and lake of communication between team members. Kyle said they keep him in the dark so much he can't answer %10 of our questions. And that marketing guy came out and said there was only one difficulty setting that scaled with XP, which turned out to be totally wrong.

I think it's better to take Dugas' word on this over JJB, because Dugas is the only person who 'should' know everything.

[Irate Iguana]

And that marketing guy came out and said there was only one difficulty setting that scaled with XP, which turned out to be totally wrong.

Actually, that turned out partially wrong. They confirmed that there more difficulty settings, but they have not said a word on the level-scaling. As far as we know that could still be in the game.

[jd10013]

I know someone who showed a friend dx, and apparently when playing liberty island he played it like a shooter. "This game sucks, I can't even kill the first bot!" (trying to shoot through the bot.......)

first time I played I shot it with the GEP gun :D

[mahmoudd]

One of the big gripes I see people on this forum having with Human Revolution is a lack of faithfulness to the original. It's my personal opinion that in almost all the areas that really matter, Human Revolution appears to be faithful to the first game, but I can agree that some decisions such as regenerating health and third-person cover are a wide departure from the original. Regardless of this however, my question is this:

Why are some of you so desperate for such a level of fidelity? Deus Ex was a great game, in my opinion one of the best ever made, but it doesn't follow that a sequel must cleave to its formula slavishly in order to be great.

I can understand the fears that some of the changes have been made solely in order to appeal to a modern market, but firstly, we don't know that that is the case. Indeed, the developers have said many times that the decisions they made were what they believe best for the gameplay. Secondly, even if they were made primarily with that motive in mind, it doesn't guarantee that the game will be worse for them.

Some of you, I know, will counter this with "No, but it's a worse Deus Ex sequel!".

I can't agree with this. A sequel to Deus Ex will be a good Deus Ex sequel if we play it and acclaim it as another game of the same quality. It doesn't have to be faithful for that.

when you make a game with the words DEUS EX in the title, you can be assured that it will be compared to the great game that was deus ex 1

So far, my only problem is the health regen and how they are going to explain it within the game's story and lore.

[VectorM]

The same way they "explained" the health packs in the first one?

[Reven]

Whats the good word on restorative items anyway ?

[VectorM]

They have them in the game and they increase your regeneration rate, from what I understand.

[Irate Iguana]

They have them in the game and they increase your regeneration rate, from what I understand.

They are also the only way to gain any meaningful regeneration when you are in combat. The normal regen rate is useless for that (perhaps upgrading augs changes this) so you have to rely on these foodstuffs.

[mahmoudd]

The same way they "explained" the health packs in the first one?

There is a difference between a invisible, magical automatic health regen out of nowhere, and the necessity to use an item to restor health

Do you know that there needs to be a cause in order to have an effect?
Without health regen, in order to lose health you need to be hit, and to regain it you have to use items that restore health
With health regen, there isn't a need to have this item, this breaks immersion.

[Reven]

So we get a sort of medi kit and health regen ?

[ISpillMyDrink]

I am joining this discussion late, so I will not rehash the same arguments others have made. However, I want to provide a different perspective to this matter.

When a game franchise releases a new installment, I absolutely want it to have a similar atmosphere, story and largely the same great gameplay. At the same time, I want something new, fresh and original. That is one of the many reasons why DX was such a successful game/franchise to begin with. I started playing DX again yesterday and it feels like its the first time each time. And no matter how great something is/was, I want the new thing to give us something else and to build off its prior success.

Many of you are questioning the game design decisions and are angered by the fact the game is being marketed to a more "mainstream," "console-oriented" market. I am not a big fan of that myself. But given that the DX genre was all but dead over three years ago, is it such a loss? I for one would rather have a new DX game than to see the series simply die off for the sake of "purity." I am sure the fanboys out there would have a lot to say about that.

The sad truth of the matter is, franchise survive off the $$. It may be resurrected or temporarily boosted by fandom, cult followings, loyalty, etc., but in the long run, the only thing that sustains a franchise is revenue. There is a reason why the CoD franchise is in its eighth year of existence and shows no signs of slowing down - its a daggum cash cow! Other critically acclaimed franchises, such as System Shock, were not significant financial successes and subsequently died off, only to reemerge as spiritual successors. Point-and-click adventure games and combat flight simulators, once ubiquitous in the PC marketplace, are practically nonexistent these days. Use some common sense - why spend so much money and time making a game only a small segment of the population is willing to buy and play?

By making these seemingly abominous changes, the developers ensure that the franchise can survive in the long run. Ultimately, that is also what we want as fans, that the franchise we love so dearly can be experienced time after time.

[mahmoudd]

I am joining this discussion late, so I will not rehash the same arguments others have made. However, I want to provide a different perspective to this matter.

When a game franchise releases a new installment, I absolutely want it to have a similar atmosphere, story and largely the same great gameplay. At the same time, I want something new, fresh and original. That is one of the many reasons why DX was such a successful game/franchise to begin with. I started playing DX again yesterday and it feels like its the first time each time. And no matter how great something is/was, I want the new thing to give us something else and to build off its prior success.

Many of you are questioning the game design decisions and are angered by the fact the game is being marketed to a more "mainstream," "console-oriented" market. I am not a big fan of that myself. But given that the DX genre was all but dead over three years ago, is it such a loss? I for one would rather have a new DX game than to see the series simply die off for the sake of "purity." I am sure the fanboys out there would have a lot to say about that.

The sad truth of the matter is, franchise survive off the $$. It may be resurrected or temporarily boosted by fandom, cult followings, loyalty, etc., but in the long run, the only thing that sustains a franchise is revenue. There is a reason why the CoD franchise is in its eighth year of existence and shows no signs of slowing down - its a daggum cash cow! Other critically acclaimed franchises, such as System Shock, were not significant financial successes and subsequently died off, only to reemerge as spiritual successors. Point-and-click adventure games and combat flight simulators, once ubiquitous in the PC marketplace, are practically nonexistent these days. Use some common sense - why spend so much money and time making a game only a small segment of the population is willing to buy and play?

By making these seemingly abominous changes, the developers ensure that the franchise can survive in the long run. Ultimately, that is also what we want as fans, that the franchise we love so dearly can be experienced time after time.
The deus ex franchise can die, i wouldn't really care.

As long as the new ip's are as good, then it's fine.

I feel like they don't really need to call human revolution "deus ex", i would be fine with a new IP.
But they decided to call it deus ex, and now it includes stuff from it's lore, and unfortunately it does not completely follow it.

Whatever; like you have said, this type of games have been dead for 3 or so years, what they are developing now is better than nothing

[Mindmute]

By making these seemingly abominous changes, the developers ensure that the franchise can survive in the long run. Ultimately, that is also what we want as fans, that the franchise we love so dearly can be experienced time after time.

Absolutely, but that's also why DX:HR should be changing things/concepts that were broken or lackluster on the original series and attempting to inovate on them, rather than copy whatever else the industry is making just because it sold on another game.
Making some aspects of DX:HR like Game X isn't going to sell that well in the long run when people can just buy Game X instead and have an experience that specifically caters to that.

[jd10013]

The deus ex franchise can die, i wouldn't really care.

As long as the new ip's are as good, then it's fine.

I feel like they don't really need to call human revolution "deus ex", i would be fine with a new IP.
But they decided to call it deus ex, and now it includes stuff from it's lore, and unfortunately it does not completely follow it.

Whatever; like you have said, this type of games have been dead for 3 or so years, what they are developing now is better than nothing


I'd have liked it better if they hadn't called it "deus ex", and I would rather they let the franchise R.I.P then bastardize it, if that's what happens. lets be honest, they're only doing it for two reason, to attract people who bought the first, and to generate a lot of talk in the industry and industry press. they knew that by trying to resuscitate the franchise that started with what most consider one of the 10 best games ever made would be all anybody in the business would talk about. they knew it would vault this game to the status of most anticipated just on the question of can they do it.

[jd10013]

By making these seemingly abominous changes, the developers ensure that the franchise can survive in the long run. Ultimately, that is also what we want as fans, that the franchise we love so dearly can be experienced time after time.

I disagree. fans want a particular type of game, not annual installments hoping the next time they make it more like what they wanted. what good is the franchise if it's full of games you don't care for?

and that's where the divide is. people don't want a game made for the mass market, a "haloized" DX simply so it will sell well. cause if that happens, then any chance of a real sequel will be gone forever. Right now there's little chance of that ever happening. if they COD it and that results in great sales, it will never happen. that's what some of us are concerned.

[Reven]

One problem i see here is that EM have wrote themselves into a corner here by making a prequel. if DXHR becomes the next gold standard then square enix will want more (they will anyway) then they are left with two options... a prequel to a prequel or moving on to the time of paul denton or a remake...begging the question- how far would they go to make Deus ex profittable ?.

[[FGS]Shadowrunner]

DXHR is about events "leading upto" the bombing of Liberty Island. That doesn't necessarily include the bombing or the "Fall" mentioned in DX1, also we have a Russian/Mexican alliance, a war and a pretty big earthquake. I don't think even the craziest of developers would try to fit it all into one chapter. I presume DX4 could be anything, Unatco early years, how Sam Carter got involved, how Jordan Shea left, Anna and Gunther at the academy etc.

I'm a PC gamer and a mapper, but I don't care if it is geared more for console players or boasts Japanese style ninja blade arms and takedowns, all in the DX1 community agree on one thing, we are buying it for storyline and because it looks like a good game. We are not purists at all. We are excited about DXHR. I don't know even one person from the mp community who has made even one purist comment. Most just hope it will feel more DX than IW did.

The purist argument has helped to destroy the DX1 community a little. The auggers generally fail to acknowledge the modding community and push hard for a game which is based on default maps and classic advanced deathmatch play. While I like both styles, custom and classic, it's pretty stupid to play classic for 10 years and expect new players to enjoy being bashed so much. I used to think otherwise, but more and more these days both the zero-aug and classic aug communities are selfishly annihilating what chances DXMP has of surviving another ten years. SDK is in the public domain and it should be anyone's right to mod the game and the augmentations how they see fit. Auggers used to argue that custom maps were simply not good enough and they had a point, but this is 2011 and there are plenty of great custom maps available, auggers simply don't want to accept the challenge. In custom aug mods, classic auggers don't usually dominate. They can only dominate in classic servers, where it's about fps, ping, keybinding and nothing at all to do with geography or strategy or anything actually that might constitute action RPG. At the other end of the spectrum is a crowd who love to host a map called Iceworld, it's one room, very bright, no pick-ups, no dx items at all, no vents, no shadows, nothing at all that could be said to be DX, it's a great map for 1 v 1, but otherwise again, the people obsessed with this map are destroying the experience for new players and so newcomers are far and few between. The lengths that people go to in order to impose their preferred gametype would astonish people. Russian and Slovenian police have been involved in the past, we've seen damaged hardware, DDOS attacks, all kinds of things, simply because people want to force a particular style of DX on everyone else.

[motsm]

My problems have nothing do with it not following the same formula as Deus Ex, I can deal with changes. My problems are simply that I'd dislike things like third person cover, health regeneration, cinematic single button take downs etc, if they were in any game. Human Revolution could be an entirely new IP for all I care, but the second I see features like that listed, I know I will hate the gameplay philosophy the designers are going for.

[Reven]

My only problem with the takedown system is that i feel it removes human skill and ability and replaces it with machine perfection. yes i dont have to use it if i didnt want to but it then limits my options. but still i could just walk up behind everyone and punch them i guess.

[dxb]

My only problem with the takedown system is that i feel it removes human skill and ability and replaces it with machine perfection. yes i dont have to use it if i didnt want to but it then limits my options. but still i could just walk up behind everyone and punch them i guess.

Actually, I don't think you can. There are no melee weapons or anything like that. Just the takedowns. :(

[Reven]

well a third person punch to the face is in the game so i guess i will be doing that alot.

[dxb]

You mean one of the non-lethal take downs? can you find me a link so i know what you're talking about?

[Reven]

You mean one of the non-lethal take downs? can you find me a link so i know what you're talking about?

iam not sure if its in any official gameplay vid but its in the shanghai footage when jensen go's to tongs office via the air duct. it happens just before that. but yes i thinks its a non lethal.

[Irate Iguana]

iam not sure if its in any official gameplay vid but its in the shanghai footage when jensen go's to tongs office via the air duct. it happens just before that. but yes i thinks its a non lethal.

That's one of those one-button takedowns. The animation is contextual and in that case it is a tap on the shoulder and a punch in the face. So, no, you aren't going to walk up behind anyone and just punch them. You'll do a takedown and the game decides what kind of animation you'll get and how long it will take. There are no melee weapons (unless you count thrown boxes) and there is no hth combat system.

[Red]

http://www.shrani.si/f/2D/Qh/4KKV4Z5G/takedown.gif

[Kodaemon]

The third person IS a punch to the face.

[Irate Iguana]

The third person IS a punch to the face.

http://rlv.zcache.com/i_see_what_you_did_there_poster-p228060760404242422t5wm_400.jpg

[mahmoudd]

That's one of those one-button takedowns. The animation is contextual and in that case it is a tap on the shoulder and a punch in the face. So, no, you aren't going to walk up behind anyone and just punch them. You'll do a takedown and the game decides what kind of animation you'll get and how long it will take. There are no melee weapons (unless you count thrown boxes) and there is no hth combat system.

oh man

would have been so cool to max out strength and just punch people...

[jd10013]

oh man

would have been so cool to max out strength and just punch people...


but the kids don't like that. not when you can have those uber cool animations.

[VectorM]

Kids wont like punching people in the face, what?

[Reven]

That's one of those one-button takedowns. The animation is contextual and in that case it is a tap on the shoulder and a punch in the face. So, no, you aren't going to walk up behind anyone and just punch them. You'll do a takedown and the game decides what kind of animation you'll get and how long it will take. There are no melee weapons (unless you count thrown boxes) and there is no hth combat system.

Well i have no problem with a this style of take down since i still have to use my own skill to get up close. i just dont like the idea of dropping down like the thumb of god to smite 10+ people and walk away feeling cheated.

[Ashpolt]

Well i have no problem with a this style of take down since i still have to use my own skill to get up close. i just dont like the idea of dropping down like the thumb of god to smite 10+ people and walk away feeling cheated.

That's what the Icarus Landing System / Claymore is for!

[dxb]

I don't REALLY mind the takedowns...but I mourn what I've lost. I played the original full stealth and non-lethal (usually), so I almost NEVER used guns. Just the good ol' baton, and a little bit of the stun prod...throw in a gas grenade and the mini-crossbow when stuff really gets hairy.

[jd10013]

Kids wont like punching people in the face, what?

nope, they prefer watching it in a cut-scene. that's the point. in HR you won't actually do it, you'll watch it get done.

[VectorM]

nope, they prefer watching it in a cut-scene. that's the point. in HR you won't actually do it, you'll watch it get done.

But it makes no sense as ridicule. Punching people in the face doesn't sound more intelligent to me, than watching a guy punch people in the face...

Also, if these take-downs do actually waste energy, like i've read in some articles, it could be this games version of DX1's lockpicking.

[Reven]

I don't REALLY mind the takedowns...but I mourn what I've lost. I played the original full stealth and non-lethal (usually), so I almost NEVER used guns. Just the good ol' baton, and a little bit of the stun prod...throw in a gas grenade and the mini-crossbow when stuff really gets hairy.



My play style as well, all my play throughs were stealth and stun prod with a box of TNT for M.I.B's if i needed it because i loved the challenge. making me worry about this opening sarif area were the previews say we are given a rifle and told to mop up...so we can play the game non lethal as long as we kill X people at the start ?. if stealth is a option i would love to hear it.

[VectorM]

You can sneak passed them, probably.

[jd10013]

But it makes no sense as ridicule. Punching people in the face doesn't sound more intelligent to me, than watching a guy punch people in the face...

Also, if these take-downs do actually waste energy, like i've read in some articles, it could be this games version of DX1's lockpicking.

it ridicule of the whole cut-scene auto take down system. it's not a matter of intelligence, but rather the possibility of failure. with the auto take-downs you wont. with the old fashioned do-it-yourself model that was always possible. I for one will miss those "oh ****" moments when you realize you weren't close enough, or or aimed wrong, were distracted or whatever and screwed up an now had and alerted guard that was heading for the alarm at warp speed. but I guess we should be happy we still get to aim the guns. the next installment may take that away too.

[Reven]

You can sneak passed them, probably.

but then we have a problem - we play the part of chief of security who in sneaking past terrorists fails to eliminate the threat to his company...

[VectorM]

but then we have a problem - we play the part of chief of security who in sneaking past terrorists fails to eliminate the threat to his company...

Which will have proper consequences ;)

I for one will miss those "oh " moments when you realize you weren't close enough, or or aimed wrong, were distracted or whatever and screwed up an now had and alerted guard that was heading for the alarm at warp speed.

Keep in mind, that you are probably not invulnerable during the take-downs, and the possibility of using energy to use them. Mix that with the info from some magazines, that resources were scares. So every take-down you make, might mean one less hack attempt, one secret path not found, since you didn't have enough energy to reach it with the jumping aug.

Imagine taking down every single guard you saw with this move, only to realize that you are not even half-way trough the level and now you have no energy. So now you have to either sneak passed everyone, or use up ammo, which is also scares, according to some gaming mags.

This is a best case scenario though.

[jd10013]

Which will have proper consequences ;)



Keep in mind, that you are probably not invulnerable during the take-downs, and the possibility of using energy to use them. Mix that with the info from some magazines, that resources were scares. So every take-down you make, might mean one less hack attempt, one secret path not found, since you didn't have enough energy to reach it with the jumping aug.

Imagine taking down every single guard you saw with this move, only to realize that you are not even half-way trough the level and now you have no energy. So now you have to either sneak passed everyone, or use up ammo, which is also scares, according to some gaming mags.

Lot's of "ifs" in this best case scenario of mine.


your making an awful lot of assumptions, most of which will probably not be true. the reason the take downs are there is precisely because people playing games today don't like to fail. it's why we get quest arrows, auto healing, infinite ammo and all the other trapping of today's games. they, for the most part, don't want that challenge of having to try something over and over again till they get it right. unless it's some kind online achievement. it's rush through the campaign to familiarize yourself with the maps, then on to online multiplayer.
I'm not necessarily knocking it, it is what it is. It's just a shame to see a game like DX heading down that road.

[CoDEllite]

they, for the most part, don't want that challenge of having to try something over and over again till they get it right.

cause trial and error gameplay is sooo fun right. and realy immerses u in the game. who would want the smooth cinematic single player experience for Deus Ex?

[ISpillMyDrink]

Shadowrunner;1570377']
The purist argument has helped to destroy the DX1 community a little.

Thank you. This idea that a game can't branch out and can't add onto itself is counterintuitive and prevents us from having new, exciting experiences.

[VectorM]

your making an awful lot of assumptions, most of which will probably not be true

All of this is based on info from articles and gaming mags. It was mentioned that take-downs will cost you energy. Hacking would also cost you energy. Don't know if there are passive augs that cost nothing though.

And recent gaming mags have also mentioned, that ammo is very scares throughout the levels, enemies drop only a few bullets and sometimes they even drop empty cases. '

So, IF all of this is true, then we have a pretty good thing going on. Every take-down will cost you. Use them too much and you have no energy left to hack, jump higher and whatever else requires energy to function.

And as I said, this is me being as optimistic as I can be, with the info we have right now.

[Ashpolt]

Thank you. This idea that a game can't branch out and can't add onto itself is counterintuitive and prevents us from having new, exciting experiences.

No-one is saying they can't add to the experience. No one-is complaining about them putting new things on top of what's there already. The changes people are complaining about are taking away choices. Examples:

-Health: In DX1 and IW, you had the choice between regenerating health (which used resources) or non-regenerating health. In DXHR, you only have regenerating health.

-Third person perspective: No-one's complaining about it being in there at all, but instead about the fact that they won't be able to play the game without using it, because lean keys have been removed and enemy AI will be tailored around players using cover.

-Takedowns: It's annoying that they go into third person, but people would be fine with these...except for the fact that EM have removed melee weapons as a side-effect. All melee combat will now be in the form of takedowns.

-Resource management: In DX, you had to manage health packs, ammo, lockpicks and multitools. In DXHR you only have to manage ammo.

If they had built on the DX framework, it'd be fine. Instead, they've chopped sections out and either replaced them wholesale or left nothing in their place.

[Irate Iguana]

Every take-down will cost you. Use them too much and you have no energy left to hack, jump higher and whatever else requires energy to function.

At which point you wait a while for your BE to regenerate. Because it does do that. At least the first pip and maybe more. So you are never more than a little wait away from some energy.

[dxb]

At which point you wait a while for your BE to regenerate. Because it does do that. At least the first pip and maybe more. So you are never more than a little wait away from some energy.

To be honest, I don't want the takedowns to steal my energy any more than I want said takedowns at all. One thing I loved about the original was, if I could get close enough to baton a guy, it was basically the ONLY thing in the game with no consequences (you lose nothing, and gain the knowledge that you're not gonna get a 9 to the face). It was rewarding to know I didn't have to use some mamby pamby firearm.

[Mindmute]

cause trial and error gameplay is sooo fun right. and realy immerses u in the game. who would want the smooth cinematic single player experience for Deus Ex?

Yes, because actual consequences to you failing an action completely fall onto "trial and error gameplay", rather than onto realistic gameplay where you have something to lose when your actions don't go the way you planned.

[Pinky_Powers]

To be honest, I don't want the takedowns to steal my energy any more than I want said takedowns at all. One thing I loved about the original was, if I could get close enough to baton a guy, it was basically the ONLY thing in the game with no consequences (you lose nothing, and gain the knowledge that you're not gonna get a 9 to the face). It was rewarding to know I didn't have to use some mamby pamby firearm.

I agree. Melee attacks - punching, choking, stabbing - should not cost bio-energy.

[jd10013]

cause trial and error gameplay is sooo fun right. and realy immerses u in the game. who would want the smooth cinematic single player experience for Deus Ex?

yes, cause having to think your way thorough it is better then the game saying "push this button now stupid"

if you want a smooth cinematic experience, rent a movie. they're doing some neat stuff with 3D now. or better yet, go to a cinema. do you want to watch the game, or play it?

[VectorM]

At which point you wait a while for your BE to regenerate. Because it does do that. At least the first pip and maybe more. So you are never more than a little wait away from some energy.

I haven't seen any articles that actually give any details about it, but yes, we might get this.

[Zakka]

Kids these days..

Dying a couple of times because of trial and error gameplay equals:

"Too frustrating"
"Controls suck"
"Not cinematic enough"

*facepalm*

Singleplayer shooters back in the days ( Doom, F.E.A.R, Far Cry) were about surviving. You would save those shotgun shells because they were rare, and you would need them for a certain type of enemy. Remember that? Remember actually having to explore or search for secret locations to get ammo or other upgrades?

Deus Ex 1 was way too easy by the way. It's kind off insane how great Deus Ex is while still having it's flaws. That's why I think and hope DEHR might actually surpass Deus Ex 1, because it looks like the game will be really challenging.

I also love the fact that takedowns cost energy. In Deus Ex, I nearly killed all my enemies with a melee attack in the back. Which also made it kind of easy. Now takedowns cost energy, the player will need to find different means to neutralize an enemy when low on energy. Which is great imo.

[xaduha]

There's at least one thing done right in IW - baton.

[mahmoudd]

the player will need to find different means to neutralize an enemy when low on energy. Which is great imo.

that's a good point
i still wish there was punching thought

you get a metal arm, but you can't manually punch? man that's not cool

i love the exploration in deus ex
you discover so many different ways to tackle an objective when you reload an earlier save, like when you failed and died, instead of reloading from a chokepoint, you reload that quick save
i hope they will add in manual saving for this game, chokepoints piss me off more than anything most of the time
checkpoint+manual saving is the best

[Pinky_Powers]

i hope they will add in manual saving for this game, chokepoints piss me off more than anything most of the time
checkpoint+manual saving is the best

The game is Save Anywhere. :)

[Reven]

I agree. Melee attacks - punching, choking, stabbing - should not cost bio-energy.

Agreed, a player in any sort of game is given a back up weapon. if i have no bio cells - bullets - batons then the game suddenly becomes impossible leaving me throwing crates at my enemys. iam sure everyone here who played dues ex carried a baton or knife or dragons tooth for times when resources became to precious to throw away.

[mahmoudd]

The game is Save Anywhere. :)

this is great
:thumb:

[Pinky_Powers]

Agreed, a player in any sort of game is given a back up weapon. if i have no bio cells - bullets - batons then the game suddenly becomes impossible leaving me throwing crates at my enemys. iam sure everyone here who played dues ex carried a baton or knife or dragons tooth for times when resources became to precious to throw away.

Your last Pip of energy recharges. So you'll never be completely without options.

[Reven]

Just no options until it recharges.

[Mindmute]

Just no options until it recharges.

Run and hide is always an option. A friend of mine made great use of that fact while playing FO:NV ;)

[Reven]

somehow i did 441 hours of FO:NV that never amounted to anything and iam STILL tired i dont think i will ever play it again.

[VectorM]

"Too frustrating"

*facepalm*

***
Singleplayer shooters back in the days were about surviving. .

Let me guess, you support quack saves, right? :rolleyes:

And F.E.A.R. was about surviving, seriously? F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 are the games that pop in mi mind, when I try to think of an FPS that was still uber easy without health regen.

[Zakka]

The first FEAR still has one of the best AI's out there and is really challenging on the highest difficulty setting. Maybe a little bit too much medpacks and ammo but still...

And let's not discuss quicksaving again...

[Reven]

i could never decide if far crys Ai was very smart or very stupid.

[Zakka]

Enemies were just really good at shooting and were bullet sponges ;p

[Reven]

And easy to trick sometime they spent forever camped behind rocks shouting orders to themselves. other times they seemed smart and worked in groups.

[jd10013]

Let me guess, you support quack saves, right? :rolleyes:

And F.E.A.R. was about surviving, seriously? F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 are the games that pop in mi mind, when I try to think of an FPS that was still uber easy without health regen.


FEAR did have an auto heal, sort of. it just didn't heal all the way up, 25 points if I remember correctly. I'd actually call that auto-healing done right.

[Donvermicelli]

One problem i see here is that EM have wrote themselves into a corner here by making a prequel. if DXHR becomes the next gold standard then square enix will want more (they will anyway) then they are left with two options... a prequel to a prequel or moving on to the time of paul denton or a remake...begging the question- how far would they go to make Deus ex profittable ?. Experiencing DeusEx through the eyes of Paul Denton would be a cool idea imo, this would also probably sell well. Point is that they have the make it far more true to the original mechanics than HR, meaning Localized health etc. (medbots/packs, lockpicks/multitools) you know the usual stuff.

[mahmoudd]

Let me guess, you support quack saves, right? :rolleyes:

And F.E.A.R. was about surviving, seriously? F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 are the games that pop in mi mind, when I try to think of an FPS that was still uber easy without health regen.

and you support choke points only it seems

why can't the developers, i don't know, give the player A CHOICE

[Jerion]

i could never decide if far crys Ai was very smart or very stupid.

This is how I feel about the AI in Crysis&Warhead. At times it seems just right, at times incredibly idiotic.

[Reven]

I think it has something to do with scaling, for set pieces they are smart but for the jungle they have the AI from duke nukem 3d.

[mahmoudd]

you're kind of a super soldier in crysis, so it's rather easy to take out simple men
but the AI of crysis isn't spectacular