Generic ammo [Archive] - Eidos Forums

F3nyx

11-09-2003, 11:21 AM

who wants to run out of ammo for their rifle cos they just fired a couple of rockets?That's what I dislike the most about the new system. I can see the good points of it, but I like being able to use a lot of one kind of ammo - say, the 7.62mm Assault Rifle ammo - and still have plenty of another kind, like the pistol ammo, left over, because usually 7.62mm was much more abundant than 10mm.

Maybe it was a bit masochistic of me, but I savored having to conserve some of my more valuable ammo, especially Sabot and 30.06 rounds, for when I really needed it, and having loads of throw-away ammo for mowing down grunts.

There've been a lot of threads lately about pretty minor stuff, which would probably only be significant to a real fan of the first game. Before people start saying it's so, I doubt anyone thinks universal ammo could ruin the game. However, these things aren't without impact on the game, and are (IMO) worth discussing.

SK Denton

11-09-2003, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by TehFreak
it really wasn't that hard to cope with different ammo in different guns
and who wants to run out of ammo for their rifle cos they just fired a couple of rockets?

Most of the things were not "hard to cope with" in Deus Ex. In fact they are what made the game so great, but the Xbox stole Warren's heart away and now we have universal ammo among other simplified garbage.

TehFreak

11-09-2003, 01:49 PM

yeah, that was kinda my point
it's going off topic, but the health system is another example of this, with the separate body zones, which they took away cos they decided that going into a subscreen was too difficult or something. i liked going to that screen and targetting where my medkits should go. now all that's gone and we just get a meaningless boost on the health bar. :mad:

Varamyr

11-09-2003, 02:00 PM

Er, SK Denton, what exactly does the Xbox have to do with generic ammo? Have multiple ammo types suddenly become too complex for Xbox users?

Lawnboy360

11-09-2003, 02:51 PM

BTW, the rocket/rifle example is probably false. There won't be only one type of ammunition. The rocket launcher and the boltcaster, as stated on the website, use "matter clips". I expect there will be another type of ammunition for weapons doing "ballistic" damage (website) like the pistol, shotgun, sniper, and rifle.

Viking

11-09-2003, 03:00 PM

Er, SK Denton, what exactly does the Xbox have to do with generic ammo? Have multiple ammo types suddenly become too complex for Xbox users?

Well, in DX1, you sometimes had to go to the inventory screen and fiddle around with the ammo, choosing the one you wanted. I think that's what he's talking about. Now, we've got ourselves this "simplified" version. :mad: piece of... Anyway, I agree with SK Denton, though he may sound a bit TOO extreme on this.

sachfigura

11-09-2003, 03:05 PM

In DX1 you could hot-key the change ammo command. I, also, found it enjoyable to have to conserve the more valuable ammo types. But let's see how it works in DXII. I don't know about you all, but I plan on playing it through again and again to try it without any guns all the way up to blowing all the enemies away.

Finellach

11-09-2003, 03:06 PM

Well as much as I liked the complexity of Deus Ex I think that simplification is good, in fact I think it is realistic since the game's story is further in future and I believe that in future there will be just few types of ammo unlike today.

SK Denton

11-09-2003, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by Varamyr
Er, SK Denton, what exactly does the Xbox have to do with generic ammo? Have multiple ammo types suddenly become too complex for Xbox users?

Ask Warren Spector. He's the one dumbing the game down - not me.

Random

11-09-2003, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by Viking
Well, in DX1, you sometimes had to go to the inventory screen and fiddle around with the ammo, choosing the one you wanted.

No you didn't. The weapons would automatically switch to whatever ammo type it used, and some weapons had a clumsy secondary fire by switching ammo types. It just meant you collected piles and piles of ammunition for weapons that you never used.

How many times in DX1 did you spend a few seconds bashing open a crate only to find it contained useless shotgun shells? A unified system eliminates all the useless extra stuff because any ammo you find will help.

I have a feeling that another reason why this system is being used is because of the non-linear nature of the game. One of the previews said you visit anywhere from 3 to 13 of the Lower Seattle maps depending on the choices you make. Imagine how hard it would be to balance all the different ammo types. They'd have to accommodate all the pistol users, all the shotgun users, all the rocket users, all the prod users, all the SMG users, all the sniper rifle users. That would mean each map would be littered with useless ammo.

Interestingly, that means a unified ammo system is being used because the gameplay is more complicated, not because Xboxers, for some reason, find it hard to let the game automatically switch ammo for them.

Finellach

11-09-2003, 03:39 PM

I totally agree, well said. Different ammo was nice but if you are going to have 10 different types of ammo you need a gigantic balancing as Random already mentioned. I too was sometimes annoyed by the stocks of ammo lying around the street, especially for a pistol wich I used very little.

Sylvester Ink

11-09-2003, 03:47 PM

SK Denton

11-09-2003, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Random
No you didn't. The weapons would automatically switch to whatever ammo type it used, and some weapons had a clumsy secondary fire by switching ammo types. It just meant you collected piles and piles of ammunition for weapons that you never used.

How many times in DX1 did you spend a few seconds bashing open a crate only to find it contained useless shotgun shells? A unified system eliminates all the useless extra stuff because any ammo you find will help.

I have a feeling that another reason why this system is being used is because of the non-linear nature of the game. One of the previews said you visit anywhere from 3 to 13 of the Lower Seattle maps depending on the choices you make. Imagine how hard it would be to balance all the different ammo types. They'd have to accommodate all the pistol users, all the shotgun users, all the rocket users, all the prod users, all the SMG users, all the sniper rifle users. That would mean each map would be littered with useless ammo.

Interestingly, that means a unified ammo system is being used because the gameplay is more complicated, not because Xboxers, for some reason, find it hard to let the game automatically switch ammo for them.

First of all ammo is only useless if you don't need it. Saying that shotgun ammo in general is useless is wrong and uninformed. I am sure all of the people out there who used shotguns didn't think it was useless (like myself).

Not to mention the whole point of having different types of ammo was to give us (the player), more gameplay choices. The fact that you say it is useless shows how you had to make a choice not to use it thus you think it is useless, but at least you had that choice to make, but now since all the ammo is the same there is no choice.

More choices = Good
Less choices (simplification ie, dumbing down) = Bad

With more choices players could tailer their play style more to their liking, but now we have to put up with the simplistic, cookie cutter model for your average fps (as far as choices are concerned).

Varamyr

11-09-2003, 04:13 PM

If only I were a troll, I'm sure I would be able to understand how allowing the player to use whichever weapon they want gives them fewer choices.

Lawnboy360

11-09-2003, 04:17 PM

First of all ammo is only useless if you don't need it. Saying that shotgun ammo in general is useless is wrong and uninformed. I am sure all of the people out there who used shotguns didn't think it was useless (like myself).

I think you missed Random's point. It did suck to make a complicated jumping puzzle or spending a bunch of multitools or lockpicks to find a whole bunch of rockets, when you're using the assault rifle and sniper, and it only caused the player to reload to save lockpicks/multitools. It would have been very hard to make sure there is just the right amount of ammunition for every weapon, for every possible way through the game.

Picasso

11-09-2003, 04:23 PM

The fact that you say it is useless shows how you had to make a choice not to use it thus you think it is useless, but at least you had that choice to make, but now since all the ammo is the same there is no choice.

Suppose I ignore those shotgun shells because I prefer my sniper rifle. Was this a choice? Yes. Did it add to gameplay? Not really. So why bother?

By your logic, Ion Storm should add a few dozen more ammo types, that are all really weak and pointless. Sure, they'll be useless, but at least we'll have the choice to not use them. And that's what matters, isn't it?

And I will ask you again to define "dumbing down".

leadfoot

11-09-2003, 04:25 PM

I'm pretty happy with this system- it means your favorite weapon doesn't run out of ammo nearly as quickly. The sniper rifle was great, but sometimes there wasn't a whole lot of 30.06 ammo available, so you could easily run out. Nothing else is nearly as good at long range (rocket launcher is about as subtle as a shotgun).
Maybe I won't need to use 60 weapons- I may only need a few. In that case, all the ammo I find helps me use each weapon more often.
This is a GREAT thing: it means you won't run out of ammo in a firefight nearly as quick.

If you're in a fight with bots, those crossbow rounds are absolutely worthless- you might as well be trying to knife or knock it unconscious.
On the other hand, if all your ammo is one type, you now have a lot more explosive and EMP rounds to deal with the threat.

Example:
Situation with non-unified ammo types
You're in a huge firefight, and you're down to your last clip for the assault rifle. When that's spent, the enemies better have died, because you're in bad shape otherwise.

With the unified ammo types:
Ammo can be freely shared among all of your weapons: if you're in the firefight, you're not limited to just 7.62mm rounds- you can use everything if you have to.

Sylvester Ink

11-09-2003, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by Lawnboy360
I think you missed Random's point. It did suck to make a complicated jumping puzzle or spending a bunch of multitools or lockpicks to find a whole bunch of rockets, when you're using the assault rifle and sniper, and it only caused the player to reload to save lockpicks/multitools. It would have been very hard to make sure there is just the right amount of ammunition for every weapon, for every possible way through the game.

Yeah, and anything that involves having to reload, or quickload in a game is bad for gameplay. Saving is really there so that you can come back to your game after doing something important, like sleeping, eating, etc. It's not there to wipe away your mistakes. A good game will allow you to take your mistakes and turn them into advantages.

In DX1, lockpicking for something you didn't need was a mistake, since lockpicks were valuable. But there was no way to fix your mistake. Admittedly it's realistic, but then you would reload the game and know not to pick that lock. That's not realistic. You can't reload in real life, and a simulation game like DXIW should give you a way to turn this to your advantage, like in real life, in order to keep you from having to reload. And that's what it appears to be doing . . .

Lawnboy360

11-09-2003, 04:35 PM

Yeah, and anything that involves having to reload, or quickload in a game is bad for gameplay. Saving is really there so that you can come back to your game after doing something important, like sleeping, eating, etc. It's not there to wipe away your mistakes. A good game will allow you to take your mistakes and turn them into advantages.

Agreed; Prince of Persia's way to deal with this is to give the player the control of time. Missed a jumping puzzle? Instead of quickloading, you just rewind a few seconds back. Sounds good to me.

F3nyx

11-09-2003, 06:16 PM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They'd have to accommodate all the pistol users, all the shotgun users, all the rocket users, all the prod users, all the SMG users, all the sniper rifle users. That would mean each map would be littered with useless ammo.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, if they simply didn't change the ammo distribution, players would be forced to use the ammunition available in a given area - like most people did in the first game. I.e., if you're in a facility where all the guards use 7.62mm ammo, use that ammo because you can be fairly certain you won't run out. The game environment doesn't have to provide pistol ammo for you just because you want to use a pistol - you may have to adapt to what the location supplies. Makes sense to me, and I enjoy the challenge.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I will ask you again to define "dumbing down"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oversimplification of gameplay and interface for a less sophisticated platform. That's not trolling, just stating fact - it can't be denied that an Xbox is simpler than a PC, and that's not always a bad thing (for instance, I'm completely in love with the new HUD); it just means that Xbox games are usually built with a different interface style in mind than PC games, or a lower-resolution screen or whatever. However, this does present problems for many "multiplatform" games, because often there are restrictions unnecessary for the PC, but necessary for a console - and thank god that they're giving the PC crowd higher-res textures.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm pretty happy with this system- it means your favorite weapon doesn't run out of ammo nearly as quickly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think it's necessarily better to make firefights easier...

DX's ammo system had problems. It allowed you to carry a ridiculous amount of ammunition - loads of rockets and other explosives, hundreds of shotgun shells, hundreds of rounds of pistol and rifle ammo.

I think there's a good compromise option, though - put a limit on the total amount of ammo people can carry. So, for instance, each ammo type has a certain "bulkiness" per unit - one rocket has 100 units of bulk, while a single bullet has 1 unit, and a shotgun shell has maybe 4 units. Now, say that Alex can carry 600 units of bulk (I'm making up numbers here) - so you could choose to carry 3 rockets and 300 rounds of ammo, or whatever. (I'd kind of like this system to be implemented for inventory in general, but that's another topic)

This way, the player is forced to make intelligent decisions about what kind of ammo they want to carry, rather than simply loading up on matter clips. This is the simplification people are talking about - nullifying the decision, making the choice for the player. I would much rather have to think about the situation and decide rather rockets, or bullets, or some of each would be best for the situation.

Random

11-09-2003, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by F3nyx
Actually, if they simply didn't change the ammo distribution, players would be forced to use the ammunition available in a given area - like most people did in the first game. I.e., if you're in a facility where all the guards use 7.62mm ammo, use that ammo because you can be fairly certain you won't run out. The game environment doesn't have to provide pistol ammo for you just because you want to use a pistol - you may have to adapt to what the location supplies. Makes sense to me, and I enjoy the challenge.

That just restricts player choice. It forces you to use what the developers have given you, rather than what you want to use.

Picasso

11-09-2003, 07:08 PM

I.e., if you're in a facility where all the guards use 7.62mm ammo, use that ammo because you can be fairly certain you won't run out. The game environment doesn't have to provide pistol ammo for you just because you want to use a pistol - you may have to adapt to what the location supplies. Makes sense to me, and I enjoy the challenge.

If I want to be a stealthy, silenced-pistol-wielding badass, but I have to carry a shotgun because that's the only ammo I can find, then I'm not really a stealthy badass anymore. This makes the game less fun for me (I can't play it how I want).

Oversimplification of gameplay and interface for a less sophisticated platform.

I don't mean to be rude, but I was asking SK Denton; he was the one throwing the term around instead of an actual argument.

I think there's a good compromise option, though - put a limit on the total amount of ammo people can carry.

I believe that Ion Storm had this system at some point in DX1's development (in some old screens you can see boxes of pistol ammo in the inventory). I'd imagine they dropped it because, really, would you rather spend time dragging it around on a screen, or shooting people with it?

I think DX's ammo system was a little ridiculous too, and I think the unified system sounds much more elegant.

This way, the player is forced to make intelligent decisions about what kind of ammo they want to carry, rather than simply loading up on matter clips.

The real choice isn't what ammo to carry, it's what weapon to use. If I've already chosen to be a silenced-pistol-wielding badass, then dropping all that shotgun ammo isn't a fun gameplay choice, it's a chore.

F3nyx

11-09-2003, 07:35 PM

Originally posted by Random
That just restricts player choice. It forces you to use what the developers have given you, rather than what you want to use. I don't mind restrictions as long as they're realistic restrictions. I mean, seriously - did it bother you that you couldn't beat all of Deus Ex with the GEP gun only, or that sniper ammo was a limited commodity? I think it's pretty damn cool to have to make use of what's available, instead of "eh, more matter clips."

Doubtless I'll be taken down by somebody who has beaten the game with only the GEP gun, but hopefully at least my point will be heard :p

I'd imagine they dropped it because, really, would you rather spend time dragging it around on a screen, or shooting people with it? ... If I've already chosen to be a silenced-pistol-wielding badass, then dropping all that shotgun ammo isn't a fun gameplay choice, it's a chore.I'm hoping for an inventory system so slick it wouldn't be a chore. What I'm envisioning is you point at a body or whatever, hold down the use key to search it. While the key is held down, the ammo/inventory you can get is displayed, and you can click on any of it to snag it - that way you won't get burdened down with stuff you don't want. And if you need to stop searching instantly, just release the use button, no pesky point-and-click needed. And no dragging around needed, either, if you use the bulk-units system I was talking about - all the ammo you get just uses up a certain number of bulk points.

I used to get pissed off sometimes at DX's search function, because it would remove from bodies stuff you already have - so if you searched a body and picked up an assault rifle you already had, it would disappear and you couldn't get it later if you ditched the first assault rifle. Where'd it go? The deep mysteries of the DX universe...

AlteredGlyph

11-09-2003, 08:00 PM

About your search funstion, you'll actually have to looka t the bodies, and grab the pistol from the holster, the multitool from their belt, their gun from where they dropped it, etc. Thats what I heard in an interview somewheres, I can't remember where though.

Viking

11-09-2003, 10:14 PM

Ok, SK Denton, you really, really need to stop complaining to this degree. Warren Spector does not eat children, he's not a manical psycopath out to get you, and he hasn't deliberately murdered the game. Chill the hell out! You're making the rest of us "complainers", people who are concerned about the game, but not obsessed with what MAY be its flaws, look bad. I don't blame some people in this forum for being completely pissed at people who complain, and for being intolerant of them. If you think there's something wrong with the game, put forth your opinions with a certain degree of intelligence, and not like some brainwashed anti-Spector cult person. Be open to ideas, and accept the fact that you may, just MAY be wrong, or at least that everyone else in the world is not wrong. Please, and thank you.

Sylvester Ink

11-09-2003, 10:36 PM

Anyone with doubts about the unified ammo system, please read the following before you go on to complain. (As well as some of the previous posts, like Random's) Perhaps it will change your views on the matter.

The more I read about unified ammo, the more I am liking it. Random, your post hit the main point. It's all about the choice you make.

I remember that after playing DX1, I played No One Lives Forever. For each mission, they suggested weapons to take along. 99.99% of the time, I wanted to take my sniper rifle, cause that's just the kind of player I am. But in many of the game levels, there was little or no ammo for sniper rifles. Not that I didn't have fun adapting to use the other weapons, but I REALLY would have liked to see what I could have done using my sniper rifle.

And not only that, but it limits replayability, because instead of using different weapons/strategy each time through, you have to use the same because that's what ammo is provided.

If the developers made the levels to accomodate everyone with all the ammo, then not only would it be more designing and testing to make sure it was all balanced (which they most likely wouldn't be, especially with a release deadline), but as I have mentioned before, the rewards system would be flawed:
You would find a little out of the way apartment in Seattle that would be hard to get to, but provided you with a ton of rocket ammo. Awesome! Unless you happen to be playing as a (guess what!) sniper. Then why bother exploring there at all. Well, too late you already looked there out of curiosity. And not only that, but you spent some of your hard-earned lockpicks on a useless venture. What's left to do but quick-load. And in case you didn't read my earlier post, quick-loading is a BAD thing when it comes to gameplay.

And that's all I have to say about that . . .

Viking

11-09-2003, 10:39 PM

Ah, generic ammo. Along with the box art, the tagline, Alex's appearance, the "dumbing down" effect from the xbox, and the multitool, this is one of the hottest topics for people to complain about around here. I myself don't really like, and I am sure many others don't seeing as how currently, the poll is showing that those against generic ammo are beating those who are with it 2:1. The reason for me disliking it is that it just seems to me that it's a bit far-fetched. Yes, I know, if nanotechnology can make a person look through walls and lift tons of weight, it can do anything. However, it's just beginning to feel like Star Trek or one of those other really futuristic shows and movies: too far in the future and too far from today's reality to have any relevance to us (No offense to any Star Trek fans. A fight about that is really NOT what we need in this forum). I believe someone else used this argument, but I think they're using that whole "nanotechnology is like magic" idea, and it's getting tired and old, IMO. Let's not forget that this generic ammo was made only 20 years after Deus Ex 1, when ammo was pretty much the same as it is today. Plus, I think that it was better to have different ammo for each weapon, because it would really be stupid to shoot some guy with a sniper rifle and then run out of ammo for your crossbow or something (I believe someone else has also had a comment like this, I would quote them but I don't remember who it is).

Sylvester Ink

11-09-2003, 10:42 PM

Sigh . . .
Did you miss the previous post? ;)

thegrue

11-09-2003, 11:22 PM

Sylvester,

First, I am admittedly biased against sniping as a gameplay style. The way it is implemented in virtually all games is wholly unrealistic and presents an excessively simple solution to gameplay obstacles. Playing any game from the Windows Entertainment Pack constitutes more of a challenge than the point 'n click "gameplay" of sniping, especially when you consider just how incredibly difficult it would be to replicate the same "skills" in real life. Neither bullet drop or leading a target are accounted for in games, to say nothing of the setup and breathing required to get a steady shot. I can't help but laugh when CounterStrike players proceed to bunny hop halfway across the map, then immediately opon landing, squeeze off a perfect shot. DX1 was only slightly better in its simulation of controlled breathing.

So long as games continue to make sniping such a laughably simple affair, I don't think I'll ever see it as a valid approach to playing, let alone a full-fledged style of play. The fact that you seem to want to only snipe strikes me as odd. How do you handle CQB, or situations with more than one hostile, for that matter? But I digress.

Games are ABOUT constraints, not about removing them entirely, which is what you seem to advocate. They give you situations that you have to solve given various methods - sometimes with only a few being valid. That's life.

Don't mistake Warren's philosophy about open-ended gameplay about being "solve X using any method you choose". It's more like "Instead of us only forcing you to use method Y like we did in the last game, we've at least given you a choice between Y and Z." Of course, it will probably be more than 2 for any given situation, but you have to understand that there will be some areas where some methods will not work at all.

They still have to design a game here. There have to be constraints, or there wouldn't be any challenges even remotely similar to real life. I already have my reservations about DX:IW's gameplay quality BECAUSE there are fewer constraints - if you remove too many, you end up with Morrowind - a good simulation, but largely empty of complex plotlines because - simply - so many things are possible.

Sylvester Ink

11-09-2003, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by thegrue
Sylvester,

First, I am admittedly biased against sniping as a gameplay style. The way it is implemented in virtually all games is wholly unrealistic and presents an excessively simple solution to gameplay obstacles. Playing any game from the Windows Entertainment Pack constitutes more of a challenge than the point 'n click "gameplay" of sniping, especially when you consider just how incredibly difficult it would be to replicate the same "skills" in real life. Neither bullet drop or leading a target are accounted for in games, to say nothing of the setup and breathing required to get a steady shot. I can't help but laugh when CounterStrike players proceed to bunny hop halfway across the map, then immediately opon landing, squeeze off a perfect shot. DX1 was only slightly better in its simulation of controlled breathing.

So long as games continue to make sniping such a laughably simple affair, I don't think I'll ever see it as a valid approach to playing, let alone a full-fledged style of play. The fact that you seem to want to only snipe strikes me as odd. How do you handle CQB, or situations with more than one hostile, for that matter? But I digress.

Games are ABOUT constraints, not about removing them entirely, which is what you seem to advocate. They give you situations that you have to solve given various methods - sometimes with only a few being valid. That's life.

Don't mistake Warren's philosophy about open-ended gameplay about being "solve X using any method you choose". It's more like "Instead of us only forcing you to use method Y like we did in the last game, we've at least given you a choice between Y and Z." Of course, it will probably be more than 2 for any given situation, but you have to understand that there will be some areas where some methods will not work at all.

They still have to design a game here. There have to be constraints, or there wouldn't be any challenges even remotely similar to real life. I already have my reservations about DX:IW's gameplay quality BECAUSE there are fewer constraints - if you remove too many, you end up with Morrowind - a good simulation, but largely empty of complex plotlines because - simply - so many things are possible.
.
.
.
.
Excuse me? Was I not clear enough? I was using sniping as an EXAMPLE here. And its just the way I happen to play the game. Just because Deus Ex isn't a perfect sniping simulator, doesn't mean that a player should snipe at all. I would LOVE if the game took into account how wind, gravity, and moving targets affected your shots, but it doesn't. Yet. Do note that DX1 was above all the others, because when you tried to snipe, your muscle jitters affected your shot. It was the first game to simulate that too. And certainly games in the future will have the ability to include such details, but is it a good idea? Probably not, because it may just become too complex for the player to enjoy. And believe me, I of all people know about the physics of sniping . . .

But I digress. First off, the point I was trying to make is that unified ammo can be a very good thing. Second off, I believe that we have been informed that there are still constraints in DXIW, but only enough. The storyline is still there, but it's much more massive because there are more like 5 of them. From what I have heard, the plotline for DXIW surpasses that of DX1. If that isn't complex, I don't know what is.

crimson_stallion

11-10-2003, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by Random
No you didn't. The weapons would automatically switch to whatever ammo type it used, and some weapons had a clumsy secondary fire by switching ammo types. It just meant you collected piles and piles of ammunition for weapons that you never used.

How many times in DX1 did you spend a few seconds bashing open a crate only to find it contained useless shotgun shells? A unified system eliminates all the useless extra stuff because any ammo you find will help.

I have a feeling that another reason why this system is being used is because of the non-linear nature of the game. One of the previews said you visit anywhere from 3 to 13 of the Lower Seattle maps depending on the choices you make. Imagine how hard it would be to balance all the different ammo types. They'd have to accommodate all the pistol users, all the shotgun users, all the rocket users, all the prod users, all the SMG users, all the sniper rifle users. That would mean each map would be littered with useless ammo.

Interestingly, that means a unified ammo system is being used because the gameplay is more complicated, not because Xboxers, for some reason, find it hard to let the game automatically switch ammo for them.

But but...how can a shotgun, a prod, a sniper rifle, a rocket launcher, and a pistol POSSIBLY have the same ammo types? shotgun buckshot shells spread when fired, try using those with a sniper rifle...or try firing them out of a pistol for that matter, no doubt youd have some nice recoil there :). Then, rockets are explosive.. shotgun/pistol/sniper rounds arent. Prods use electric charge, the others dont.

I cant imagine how using the same ammo for every weapon could possibly make sense. What im thinking is they may share ammo with some weapons (i.e. assault rifle, sniper rifle, pistol may use same ammo, flame thrower and prod may both run oh some type of bio-electric cells, etc).

If you could have the same ammo for everything, you wouldh ave to have a $hiteload of ammo around, and carry like 1000 rounds at a time. Why? because an assault rifle will chew through ammo like mad, and if you have 1000 rounds for a sniper rifle or rocket launcher, they will be to powerful. Similarily, they cant make all ammo scarce for that reason, or else youll never have pistol or rifle ammo. If they distribute ammo for an assault rifle as if its for a pistol, youll run out of pisto ammo in 10 seconds.

WeaselDX

11-10-2003, 04:17 AM

Originally posted by crimson_stallion
But but...how can a shotgun, a prod, a sniper rifle, a rocket launcher, and a pistol POSSIBLY have the same ammo types? shotgun buckshot shells spread when fired, try using those with a sniper rifle...or try firing them out of a pistol for that matter, no doubt youd have some nice recoil there :). Then, rockets are explosive.. shotgun/pistol/sniper rounds arent. Prods use electric charge, the others dont.

I cant imagine how using the same ammo for every weapon could possibly make sense. What im thinking is they may share ammo with some weapons (i.e. assault rifle, sniper rifle, pistol may use same ammo, flame thrower and prod may both run oh some type of bio-electric cells, etc).

If you could have the same ammo for everything, you wouldh ave to have a $hiteload of ammo around, and carry like 1000 rounds at a time. Why? because an assault rifle will chew through ammo like mad, and if you have 1000 rounds for a sniper rifle or rocket launcher, they will be to powerful. Similarily, they cant make all ammo scarce for that reason, or else youll never have pistol or rifle ammo. If they distribute ammo for an assault rifle as if its for a pistol, youll run out of pisto ammo in 10 seconds.

Originally posted by crimson_stallion
But but...how can a shotgun, a prod, a sniper rifle, a rocket launcher, and a pistol POSSIBLY have the same ammo types?

The simple answer to that is...they don't. If you look in the DXIW website or that recent weapons feature in Gamespy, by some of the weapons are Ammo Types: Matter Clip(2), Matter Clip(1), etc. Supposedly, each matter clip type has a different formation of chemicals, allowing it to form a certain type of ammo. Hypothetical example: A matter clip for a pistol will work for a rifle because their bullets are similar, but work work for a rocket launcher.

The harder answer is that the nanites in the matter clip form it into a bullet. As is, the unformed clip is a glob of chemicals and metals. When needed for shooting, nanites in the clip rearrange the clip to make the needed bullet.

This also answers your second statement. If rockets are powerful, it would only make sense that their type of matter clip would be rare. And, I don't know if I read this or not, what if a bigger gun takes up more matter to create a bullet. Example: a pistol bullet costs 1 matter clip to make, but a sniper rifle bullet costs 3 matter clips. That way, pistol people get lots of ammo for each shot, and sniper people don't have loads of extra clips.

El Padrino

11-10-2003, 04:46 AM

What I want to know is why some people automatically equate simplification with "subtracting from the fun factor," or all the things that made the first Deus Ex a great game. How is simplification and streamlining inherently bad?

And so what if a PC can do more complicated things than a console (I don't mean in terms of gameplay). Big fricking deal. All that means is designers are given more leeway for dealing with various issues that might come up. It doesn't automatically translate into greater fun to be had in games. Added complexity may, in some non-crucial, relatively unimportant cases, benefit a game (maybe), but "more complex" isn't necessarily better than "less complex."

I don't have an X-Box, or any of the current generation consoles for that matter, but I have yet to hear of one crucial, make or break element that a PC can accomodate for Invisible War, but the X-Box can't. And maybe I'm missing something, but a lot of (though not all) the arguments against simplification basically amount to "it's simplification."

F3nyx

I think there's a good compromise option, though - put a limit on the total amount of ammo people can carry. So, for instance, each ammo type has a certain "bulkiness" per unit - one rocket has 100 units of bulk, while a single bullet has 1 unit, and a shotgun shell has maybe 4 units. Now, say that Alex can carry 600 units of bulk (I'm making up numbers here) - so you could choose to carry 3 rockets and 300 rounds of ammo, or whatever. (I'd kind of like this system to be implemented for inventory in general, but that's another topic)

This way, the player is forced to make intelligent decisions about what kind of ammo they want to carry, rather than simply loading up on matter clips. This is the simplification people are talking about - nullifying the decision, making the choice for the player. I would much rather have to think about the situation and decide rather rockets, or bullets, or some of each would be best for the situation.

Considering a matter clip is "used up" at a different rate between weapons that use them (i.e. 1 clip for 8 pistol rounds and 2 for six shotgun shells -- an "exchange rate" I've made up for clarity's sake, and because it's 3AM and I want to get some sleep soon), the compromise you suggest is, in a way, there. The only real difference is that you don't have to sit around, deciding what specific ammo to take along at the expense of others, something anyone can do no matter how competent. It isn't hard or thought provoking, just time consuming.

Taking the time to decide what to carry around doesn't, even a little, make anyone smarter than the guy having non-ammo management fun with whatever game he's playing. I've spent my fair share of time with meticulous inventory management, and never did I think "wow, this is as much fun or challanging as actually playing the game."

The unified ammo simply saves time. You still have to decide if you want to blow them all off on shotgun shells or assault rifle rounds, after all. And if you ever change your mind about what you want to use, you won't have to run halfway across the map or whatever to where you dumped your last bit of ammunition you've decided to now use. I don't see how something like that would make the game any better than if you just dealt with matter clips being expended at a different rate. It doesn't in the least make the game more complex in a good way, just more complex in a different way; a way that is time consuming for "intelligent" people and incompetants alike.

And hey, I'm sure they'll make it so that you can't carry every weapon at the same time. That's basically the same kind of decision making, just streamlined so you don't have to get nit picky with the ammo that goes along with it. There really isn't any way I can think of that makes dumping or picking up both a specific kind of ammo and weapon more fun than just dumping or picking up a weapon and not touching the unified ammo that has a different "exchange rate."

thegrue

11-10-2003, 09:35 AM

First, there is a marked difference between quantity and quality - just because there are more options available doesn't mean any one of them is going to approach the quality of a single "forced" path. I'm not sure what kind of logic you're using that tells you "more" leads to "greater complexity".

If anything, given equal time and development effort, more choices will result in the same complexity of gameplay (at best!) - only with each choice having less overall effort put into it.

Coupled with what appears to be an intentional watering down of the original DX gameplay experience, I can only hope emergent gameplay is enough to save this title from being another Morrowind - but I worry that that's exactly what they're going to emphasize when people start pointing out how weak or mundane the subquests are almost certain to be.

The gut feeling I've had for awhile is that Warren is already trying to spin this game as having certain specific features, but completely avoiding talking about the very complexity issues we're concerned about. What worries me most is that he really does have something to hide, and it's not something the original DX community is going to enjoy.

Lawnboy360

11-10-2003, 09:46 AM

when people start pointing out how weak or mundane the subquests are almost certain to be.

"almost certain to be."

http://www.hecares4u.com/smiley/roll-eyes2.gif

thegrue

11-10-2003, 10:21 AM

Given the dilution necessary to support 4 different affiliations rather than just one, it's reasonable to assume - given the logic you obviously ignored - subquests will probably tend to be closer to "fed-ex delivery" than, well, anything else.

It's the most reasonable conclusion given what I've said. It might not be true - in fact, I'm really hoping it isn't. But sadly, spread the same amount of butter over bread that's 4 times the size, and you're obviously going to end up with weaker flavour per bite.

Tassadar5000

11-10-2003, 10:36 AM

Off topic: Whats "Oni"? :(

On topic: I'm neutral about this. I don't like it, but I don't dislike it either.

ChangelingJane

11-10-2003, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by thegrue
I can't help but laugh when CounterStrike players proceed to bunny hop halfway across the map, then immediately opon landing, squeeze off a perfect shot. DX1 was only slightly better in its simulation of controlled breathing.

If you want realistic sniper simulation, play Operation: Flashpoint. DX was never meant to approach the "sim" level of realism.

KTgrim

11-10-2003, 11:53 AM

What if they allow you to allocate ammo to different guns.Which would solve both problems.Ammo would be abundant for all weapons , and you woudent run out of ammo for your sniper rifle by unloading your assault rilfe. What I mean is you get the "Multi purpose ammo" and then you go into an inventory , click and drag ammo over certain weapons and it becomes uasable for that gun only.Exaple i pick up an ammo case and i clik and drag it over my sniper rifle , that commands the nano machines to make it sniper rifle ammo permanantly.This adds more strategic choices to the player as well as solving the problems above.

Sylvester Ink

11-10-2003, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by KTgrim
What if they allow you to allocate ammo to different guns.Which would solve both problems.Ammo would be abundant for all weapons , and you woudent run out of ammo for your sniper rifle by unloading your assault rilfe. What I mean is you get the "Multi purpose ammo" and then you go into an inventory , click and drag ammo over certain weapons and it becomes uasable for that gun only.Exaple i pick up an ammo case and i clik and drag it over my sniper rifle , that commands the nano machines to make it sniper rifle ammo permanantly.This adds more strategic choices to the player as well as solving the problems above.

An interesting idea! I'm sure there are some flaws here and there, but I can see a couple of major advantages:

1. The rewards system is still effective and easy for the designers to implement.

2. When you run out of ammo for one weapon, you still have some for another.

3. No useless ammo.

4. It's restrictive enough to keep gameplay fun.

Disadvantages would be that it slows the game down, takes inventory space, etc, but those wouldn't be too bad. And the benefits are greater.

We'll have to keep this in mind. Thanks KTGrim!

Tassadar5000

11-10-2003, 12:59 PM

Space doesnt HAVE to be an issue. Ion could simply create another square and dedicate it soley to ammo. It's like...the keyring in DX1. It had its own square! :D

Montial

11-10-2003, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by leadfoot
With the unified ammo types:
Ammo can be freely shared among all of your weapons: if you're in the firefight, you're not limited to just 7.62mm rounds- you can use everything if you have to.

Making the game boring. One thing i quite enjoyed about deus ex was the occasional lack of ammo I had to contend with. If I were in a firefight, and suddenly found myslf lacking the ammo required to kill those last twenty troopers, I'd be happy with the knoledge that I had another (albiet inferior) gun in my pocket, loaded up and ready to go.

If all my guns ran on the same type of ammo, and I ran out....

Originally posted by Random
That just restricts player choice. It forces you to use what the developers have given you, rather than what you want to use.

I dunno about you, but I want a decent challenge when i play deus ex 2. What you're talking about is a bit like cheating in Soldier of Fortune II, you know the crapload of guns you can get? Well playing the game becomes a bit boring when you have enough ammunition to bring down the Sky Tower with a pistol. You happen to be using a pistol because using your favourite weapon (say, the OICW) got boring: you had so much ammo you didnt have to stop firing at all, you took up the weakest weapon you had to make the game a little more challenging.

Originally psoted by F3nyx
I don't mind restrictions as long as they're realistic restrictions. I mean, seriously - did it bother you that you couldn't beat all of Deus Ex with the GEP gun only, or that sniper ammo was a limited commodity? I think it's pretty damn cool to have to make use of what's available, instead of "eh, more matter clips."

Bingo. It makes sense that the more powerful weapons would have a limited supply of ammunition, or you would use them all the time! Why go to the trouble of modeling and texturing all those 'inferior' weapons if you're never going to use them?

Dav1000

11-10-2003, 04:22 PM

We really don't know TOO much about the ammo system (unless I'm missing something...) but I expect there will be both matter and energy types. Having a prod and a pistol use the same ammo does seem to be stretching nanotechnology a bit far. Also, it's not as if the unified ammo means that there's no disadvantage to using the rocket launcher. Note that the rocket launcher takes (if I'm interpreting this right) 5 ammo, as opposed to 2 for the boltcaster. (I'm not sure if this is per-shot or per-clip...I'd guess per-clip but I don't really know of course.)

Huntress

11-10-2003, 06:24 PM

I didn't vote cause I didn't like the restricted choices but I will offer my comment on the ammo discussion. Personally I didn't have any problem finding ammo in DE1 for whatever weapon I was using with the exception of the alternate ammo for the GEP mainly..or on occasion for the Prod, however, that didn't compromise my ability to take care of business. I liked the ability to have selective type ammo for each weapon type...so I could use whatever I wanted to use with the choice of which type of weapon I was making in my choice of weapons to carry. I used just about every type there was to use at one time or another depending on the situation but also limiting myself to certain ones I carried/used the majority of time.

I don't think the limitation of a "generic" type will offer the same type of choices. Choice maybe but not the specific choice as offered in the first game. "Oh, I don't have many clips left for prod, so guess I better use crossbow with tranqs instead" as an example. I don't want to have to check how many "generic" type I have left to make that same type of decision..hope you can understand the type of difference I'm eluding to here...I don't want more simplistic choices, I want and liked the more difficult choices that DE1 forced you to make...that's what made the game such a terrific challenge IMHO! All aspects of the game not just this one issue of course..this is just a tip of the iceberg....Ta and Good Hunting!

F3nyx

11-10-2003, 06:37 PM

Sigh . . . Did you miss the previous post?You made some good points, especially the one about useless side quests and quickloading. Yes, that was a problem in DX, and I'm not sure I have a good refutation for that argument.

However, it's not as though it's the only relevant point in the argument. A lot of people are making arguments with a totally different focus.

Originally posted by El Padrino
Considering a matter clip is "used up" at a different rate between weapons that use them (i.e. 1 clip for 8 pistol rounds and 2 for six shotgun shells -- an "exchange rate" I've made up for clarity's sake, and because it's 3AM and I want to get some sleep soon), the compromise you suggest is, in a way, there. The only real difference is that you don't have to sit around, deciding what specific ammo to take along at the expense of others, something anyone can do no matter how competent. It isn't hard or thought provoking, just time consuming. Taking the time to decide what to carry around doesn't, even a little, make anyone smarter than the guy having non-ammo management fun with whatever game he's playing. I've spent my fair share of time with meticulous inventory management, and never did I think "wow, this is as much fun or challanging as actually playing the game."Actually, there's another big difference between my compromise and the generic ammo - your choices in what kind of ammo to take along have another impact on the way you play the game. That does add replayability - it can make a huge difference whether you load up on shotgun shells or bullets. Perhaps I just enjoyed the RPG aspect of Deus Ex more than others, even though it's the only RPG-style game I like.

And I did go into some detail about my own desire for a simple inventory system. Mixed ammo doesn't have to be a complex affair, with grids and whatnot. Don't want to carry it? Drop it, and the game will perform calculations to see if you have enough room to pick up other ammo, instead of making you play Tetris.

How is simplification and streamlining inherently bad?Elimination of player choice; I think this was covered earlier on.

what if a bigger gun takes up more matter to create a bullet. Example: a pistol bullet costs 1 matter clip to make, but a sniper rifle bullet costs 3 matter clips. That way, pistol people get lots of ammo for each shot, and sniper people don't have loads of extra clips. Note that the rocket launcher takes (if I'm interpreting this right) 5 ammo, as opposed to 2 for the boltcaster I'm sure they'll at least do that. Don't think that's what people are very worried about.

Why go to the trouble of modeling and texturing all those 'inferior' weapons if you're never going to use them?
You'd want to use them, if you were an ammo miser.

...I want and liked the more difficult choices that DE1 forced you to make...that's what made the game such a terrific challenge IMHO That's what I'm talking about. Somebody from the other side, please respond directly to this - I think it's the anti-generic side's best point.

What if they allow you to allocate ammo to different guns.Which would solve both problems.Ammo would be abundant for all weapons , and you woudent run out of ammo for your sniper rifle by unloading your assault rilfe. What I mean is you get the "Multi purpose ammo" and then you go into an inventory , click and drag ammo over certain weapons and it becomes uasable for that gun only.Exaple i pick up an ammo case and i clik and drag it over my sniper rifle , that commands the nano machines to make it sniper rifle ammo permanantly.This adds more strategic choices to the player as well as solving the problems above.I think this actually sounds like the best compromise yet - it forces decision-making (you have to allocate ammo before using it), but you're not stuck with whatever specific kind of ammo is lying around, and side quests become useful. Sounds like it might satisfy both camps - I know I like the idea. There might be some issues with looting ammo off guards, though, since chances would be that they'd already turned their matter clips into SMG bullets or whatever - but that seems like a minor issue.

I think I finally feel like this argument is getting somewhere...

Random

11-10-2003, 07:40 PM

F3nyx:
Elimination of player choice; I think this was covered earlier on.
Huntress:
I want and liked the more difficult choices that DE1 forced you to make...that's what made the game such a terrific challenge IMHO
F3nyx:
... That's what I'm talking about. Somebody from the other side, please respond directly to this - I think it's the anti-generic side's best point.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. You want player choice, and consider the elimination of it to be bad. But then you say you want the game to restrict your choices by forcing you to make tough decisions about which weapon to use.

I would like to choose which weapon to use, not have it dictated to me by which ammo types the level designers decided to include.

F3nyx

11-10-2003, 07:53 PM

If there's no tough decision about what kind of ammo is being chosen, that's one less choice. That choice is not there at all without generic ammo - therefore it's another choice the game allows you to make.

Since technicalities are becoming such an issue, let me try to rephrase: "Simplification is elimination of significant player choices and creative solutions in favor of one-size-fits-all solutions." It's not elegantly worded but I hope it'll suffice.

I would like to choose which weapon to use, not have it dictated to me by which ammo types the level designers decided to include.That's fair, and it would be a problem with the earlier solution I proposed. But KTgrim's idea solves that, I think - it forces you to make a significant decision that affects the course of the game, while allowing you to use whichever ammo you like. How is this a bad thing for you, Random, or for me?

Lawnboy360

11-10-2003, 08:03 PM

I think I finally feel like this argument is getting somewhere...

High expectations can lead to disappointment. ;)

Pdizzle

11-10-2003, 08:18 PM

Its like watching people who argue about abortion, or affirmative action...

Same arguements over, and over, and over again

Viking

11-10-2003, 09:45 PM

Ok, this is really getting boring. I personally don't give a rat's narrow behind about "choices", because I know that it will work out pretty well. Both kinds of ammo, generic or not, are good enough gameplay-wise, IMO. The thing is, generic ammo just isn't believable. Deus Ex is all about immersing the player, kind of like a novel or a really good movie. Heck, that's the way it was with me. I loved reading about the different conspiracies throughout the game in books and notes and such, and finding clues, and basically just taking in the magnificent Deus Ex world, which was in fact just a projection of our own world, and the way it may be in an x number of years. So, things have to be as believable as possible when it comes to the storyline. Now come on, someone else already said it, how, HOW can the same ammo blow away people to hundreds of different pieces with enough hits from a shotgun pick off someone 500 metres away with a sniper? Ridiculous. Now, before someone comes and uses the old cliche argument, "100 years ago, people thought moving pictures in boxes were also impossible": In any good novel, or movie, or whatever that deals with themes like Deus Ex, the reader/viewer/player has to have something in common with whatever they are reading/watching/playing. Sure, this kind of futuristic ammo MAY be one day a reality, but for now it's far-fetched and sounds more like something put in the game for convenience rather than to enrich the plot. I, for one, can't live with that. What about you guys?

Rooklin

11-10-2003, 09:50 PM

Even though generic ammo is unrealistic, it is also unrealistic for there to be ammo all over the place to accomodate everyone's playing style. It has to be one of these ways! Frankly, I'd rather have the same ammo for every weapon then to have clips and boxes lying around everytime I smash open a crate. It's been said before. That's just my 2 cents...

El Padrino

11-10-2003, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by F3nyx
Actually, there's another big difference between my compromise and the generic ammo - your choices in what kind of ammo to take along have another impact on the way you play the game. That does add replayability - it can make a huge difference whether you load up on shotgun shells or bullets.

I disagree. I don't see how just worring about the weapon(s) you carry is any different, let alone significantly different, than worrying about the weapon(s) you carry as well as its ammunition. The end result of both is the same, the difference being non-unified ammunition carries with it the burdeon of having to fiddle with more.

Unless I'm missing something, the results are the same; and only the work is different. "Player choice" isn't diminished (in a negative way) because the decisions are the same, there's just less of them to make. (I.e. deciding on the weapon and having the ammo choice automatically taken care of, instead of deciding on the weapon and then having to work with the ammunition. The only decision denied to you is the decision to carry the wrong kind of ammunition, which would have added nothing to the game, since upon realization of such a misunderstanding, all you'd do is run to where you last dumped the ammunition, or re-load the game. Either way, it's more work that doesn't, in my opinion, make the game anymore fun or challanging.)

Originally posted by F3nyx

And I did go into some detail about my own desire for a simple inventory system. Mixed ammo doesn't have to be a complex affair, with grids and whatnot. Don't want to carry it? Drop it, and the game will perform calculations to see if you have enough room to pick up other ammo, instead of making you play Tetris.

Oh, yes, the suggestion you provide doesn't have to be cumbersome and contain more work than is necessary. Without unified ammunition, I'd be perfectly happy if that's how the game handled things.

But in light of unified ammunition, I'm just saying it's more work that can be taken out of the picture with a different way of handling things. Work, I will again point out just in case someone decides to quote me out of context, that doesn't really add anything good to the game, and has the same result as the solution with less work.

Also,
KTgrim's idea, while good, is almost the same thing as unified ammunition. After all, if you're going to just use a sniper rile or pistol, then chances are you're just going to create sniper or pistol rounds. There really isn't any "tough decision" to make. In fact, rarely is a decision like this a tough one. Deciding to help the Omar or the Templars might be a tough decision, especially if they do a good job at pimping their ideals; but deciding what ammunition to make while carrying around your favorite weapon? I don't think so. It isn't tough for me, anyway. I'd be happy with it in the game, since, as I said, it's a good one, but not because it adds "more player choice" and forces me to make "tough decisions."

The only real difference I see between KTgrim's idea and the already implemented unified ammunition is that when you pick up the matter clips or whatever with KT's idea, you'll have to go through another menu or interface panel or whatever in order to decide what ammunition you want to make and then make it. With the unified ammo system, picking up the weapon you want to use involves the same decisions (if you want a shotgun, it logically follows that you'll want shotgun shells to go along with it) and amount of thinking, but is less time consuming and involves less buttons to press. Buttons, I will point out, that don't add anything to the game but more time between you and the characters that will get you to make the though decisions.

Random

11-11-2003, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by Viking
The thing is, generic ammo just isn't believable.

Is it believable to be able to jump 40 feet in the air, turn invisible or see through walls? If DX1 didn't have augmentations and DX:IW did, we would be having this same discussion about biomods.

Picasso

11-11-2003, 10:16 AM

it's far-fetched and sounds more like something put in the game for convenience rather than to enrich the plot.

It sounds like something put into the game to enrich the gameplay to me.

And why would different kinds of ammo be more helpful to the plot?

Catman

11-11-2003, 10:37 AM

Consider the difference between these two passages:
<blockquote style="background-color : #edf; padding : 12px;">Alex grabbed the shotgun, slapped a clip of buckshot shells into the magazine, and blasted the bad guy to smithereens. Observing the buckshot-riddled bloody mess, Alex thought, "Thank goodness I had the sense to pick up that box of buckshot shells when I came across it."</blockquote>
<blockquote style="background-color : #edf; padding : 12px;">Alex grabbed the shotgun, slapped a clip of generic all-purpose ammunition into the magazine, and blasted the bad guy to smithereens. Observing the generic all-purpose ammunition riddled bloody mess, Alex thought, "Thank goodness I had the sense to pick up that box of generic all-purpose ammunition when I came across it."</blockquote>
Clearly the first has a more engaging and immersive plot. ;)

F3nyx

11-11-2003, 12:18 PM

Meh, I swear the distinction made more difference to me last night :rolleyes:

Sylvester Ink

11-12-2003, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by Catman
Consider the difference between these two passages:
<blockquote style="background-color : #edf; padding : 12px;">Alex grabbed the shotgun, slapped a clip of buckshot shells into the magazine, and blasted the bad guy to smithereens. Observing the buckshot-riddled bloody mess, Alex thought, "Thank goodness I had the sense to pick up that box of buckshot shells when I came across it."</blockquote>
<blockquote style="background-color : #edf; padding : 12px;">Alex grabbed the shotgun, slapped a clip of generic all-purpose ammunition into the magazine, and blasted the bad guy to smithereens. Observing the generic all-purpose ammunition riddled bloody mess, Alex thought, "Thank goodness I had the sense to pick up that box of generic all-purpose ammunition when I came across it."</blockquote>
Clearly the first has a more engaging and immersive plot. ;)

Thanks Catman!!!
That changes my views on this matter COMPLETELY! Down with generic ammo! Long live specific ammo! EVERYBODY DANCE!!!

Viking

11-12-2003, 01:27 AM

Yes, I know that augmentations aren't believable either, and they're at the core of the game. The problem is, augmentations may actually not be all that far in the future, while generic ammo... well, yeah, it should be quite a bit in the future. When it comes to augmentations, in maybe 20, 30 years they will most likely be possible. I'm not saying they'll be widespread, or common, or used by people in agencies like J.C., but they may be POSSIBLE. Heck, they might not even be the nanoaugmentation kind. The mechanical augmentations instead. Even those would be some pretty amazing science. However, you can't use nanotechnology like you would use magic. Why not make everyone fly around, shooting kamehamehas at people? Who cares, it's nanotechnology, we can do things even the dragonball z guys can't. Yes, I know the DBZ guys are using "energy" that is completely childish and unbelievable, but since we're using a more fancy word for it, nanotechnology, we can begin to push our luck and go from being stronger, faster, etc. to doing amazing things, like blowing rockets through a pistol. Or, teaching penhguins to speak Chinese. Hell, anything's possible with nanotechnology. :rolleyes:

Come on guys, if we use nanotechnology as a shield for everything, the plot goes to hell. Augmentations are one thing, because they're the core of the game, in a way. But generic ammo? Come on.

Fuzz

11-12-2003, 01:43 AM

AlteredGlyph

11-12-2003, 08:54 AM

Ion Storm will have figured out a way for it to work. I don't see anybody showing the spydrone as a completely unrealistic aug, because they had a good explanation for it. They will also have a good explanation for the generic ammo. If you have a beef with the ammo system, take it to Mako Ballistics.

F3nyx

11-12-2003, 02:25 PM

Not be ornery, but I actually did think the spy drone was terribly unrealistic and avoided it like, if not the plague, a severe cold.

Sylvester Ink

11-12-2003, 04:43 PM

And still the debate rages . . .
Even though we have been repeating things that have been said many times over . . .

F3nyx

11-12-2003, 06:29 PM

Aaaargh! Snarl! [brandishes sword at nobody in particular]

Raging enough for ya? :confused:

Viking

11-12-2003, 09:53 PM

They will also have a good explanation for the generic ammo.

Yeah. Like they had a good explanation for why a ballistic protection vest couldn't be worn for more than 15 mintues. What a crock of ****... Are you kidding me? How the hell COULD you have a good explanation for ballistic ammo? It's so completely unrealistic. Sure, for some people it's convenient (not me), but it still is as believable as flying elephants. Yeah, if you thought Dumbo was real, he's not. Sorry to disappoint you. And sorry to disappoint you if you actually thought generic ammo was believable.

MaxxQ

11-12-2003, 10:25 PM

Originally posted by Viking
Yeah. Like they had a good explanation for why a ballistic protection vest could be worn for more than 15 mintues. What a crock of ****... Are you kidding me?

Ummm...real cops wear ballistic armor all day long (or night, depending on what shift they're on). ;)

TheDerf

11-12-2003, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by Viking
Yeah. Like they had a good explanation for why a ballistic protection vest could be worn for more than 15 mintues. What a crock of ****... Are you kidding me? Ummm...real cops wear ballistic armor all day long (or night, depending on what shift they're on). I think he meant "couldn't".

MaxxQ

11-12-2003, 11:31 PM

Yep...that's why there's a "winkie" there

TheDerf

11-13-2003, 12:18 AM

So you're saying JC Denton isn't a "real cop"?

Montial

11-13-2003, 01:50 AM

Before this spirals out of control (its well on the way) into a 'change it before we get angry even though we dont really know whats going on' thread, I'd just like to point out that this thread had two purposes.

One. Find out the opinions of the regular joes out there.
Two. Find out the truth about the generic ammo system.

So, does ANYONE (ie, the devs) know exactly how the generic ammo system works? (Looks like its in, wether we like it or not). How do matter clips fit into the equation? What about the guns without matter clips? How do they operate? Are we even allowed to know this stuff yet? If we aren't, why not? Why do I own three pairs of green socks? Why is space black? Why does my auntie have a beard? Why!?!

Seriously though, if the forums are monitored by the devs, could one of them enlighten us as to the truth? The truth which Deus Ex was so based around?

I would say we need answers, but we don't. We just want them. ;)

Iron_Weasel

11-13-2003, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by Viking
Come on guys, if we use nanotechnology as a shield for everything, the plot goes to hell.

I agree. However, in all fairness, Nanotech is not being used to the degree that you describe (and yes, I know you were simply trying to make a point)

Augmentations are one thing, because they're the core of the game, in a way. But generic ammo? Come on.

I suppose one answer to that would be, is weapon-specific ammo at the core of Deus Ex gameplay? I don't think so; perhaps you disagree. But if ammo-management isn't at "the core of the game", then I can't see any reason the developers shold not take chances and try to make things more interesting.

Oh, and I wouldn't be so flippant about the applications of Nanotechnology, given how, at this very moment, Chinese-speaking penguins are attempting to infiltrate the very highest level of our government.

Cheers!

Iron "fear the penguins" Weasel

Black Knight6662000

11-13-2003, 09:08 AM

From what I read I still don't know exactly how the generic ammo system works. If I had more info I could say more but for now this is it.

(A funny thing I notcied)
Many people keep saying a game with several choices is great but you want to be a stealth guy that use a stealth pistol throughout the entire game and not have to choose anything else and without difficultly doing so.

To get things stated....So what if you ran out of ammo in a fight, thats cause you missed too much and depend on the luck of the accuracy of the gun fire to hit. There still has to be some skill when handling an asualt rifle. And I never came to a battle where I ran out of assault rifle ammo cause I blew 5 clips. There are never 20 guys and not enough ammo (except when hell's kitchen became under martial law, and even Jock suggests you lie low and avoid fighting). But even then, steal the dead's assualt ammo and kill the others with it. But then you say " But I want to snipe, I dont want to use or touch the assualt rifle", thats when you have to be smart and pick off guys you think will get in your way of the destination (of course if ur NOT trying to be stealthing). There are some ways you just cant play. You cant be a kill-all-humans-and-robots-sniper or a stealthy-sneaky-gep-gunner.

Now, for what I think is the best balance between gameplay and realism. DX1 had it on the right track, almost perfect. But there was a problem even though you could run out of ammo JC still carried an unreal amount of ammo. Think of DX1 interface (health, ammo, augs, etc.) and remember the ammo screen under inventory? Lets say JC can hold that amount, if he wanted a little of everything. Go to you ammo list and click a button "Drop all shotgun ammo" , now there is more room for other ammo (there would be a way to do this like a clip of pistol and a clip of sniper rifle take the same space, so if you dump 5 clips of pistol ammo you can carry 5 more clips of anything you want, like the sniper ammo; and maybe 2 rockets equals 1 pistol clip, these are just example ratios) Now you are thinking, I don' want to keep dropping ammo I don't want, well there can be a check box that says something like this "Do not pick up this ammo type" So when you search bodies you dont get ammo that could potentially be ammo that you want. This keeps the realsim but gameplay still smooth and adds some more choices that don't hinder but deeper the gameplay a step further

And again you CAN'T go through a game and do only GEP gun, thats just ridiculous. Plus guns arent supposed to be inferior or superior to eachother. If your familiar with Halo, the guns weren't better than the other, they were better then the other in different situations.

I do realize that there are people who want to snipe alot, assualt rifle a lot, etc; but the thing is that the game gives you choices to make BECAUSE of restrictions in the game environment. If you like shotguns but you are starting to run low on your ammo for it cause you have been killing assualt rifle-toting badies for the past 10 minutes perhaps you are going to have to adapt. So what, you will use some other weapon for a while.

Many people keep saying they want to choose what they want and have nothing to stop them from the choice, well thats just completely unrealistic. You have to have some decision making around some difficulties that come up. You are going to have to make even tougher decisions like using a gun that is similiar to your profession because you killed that last half of the game enemies with that ammo. This game was not meant to be Player-gun realationship; it was meant to be Player-gunclass realationship. If you like the shotgun, that means you will upgrade your rifle skill which means you should also use the assualt rifle and sniper rifle.

Wish I knew more about the generic ammo system, then this post would be even longer then it is.

Tenkahubu

11-13-2003, 01:31 PM

I was just thinking about the technology in the world of DXIW. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts about how it will work in terms of realism rather than gameplay.

I was thinking about the generic ammo.
I thought that each gun could hold a set of nanobot assemblers programmed to create the ammo required for the gun. However these assemblers should in theory be able to alter matter on an atomic level, much as with the nanite detonator in the video. Therefore they should be able to create ammo from any old matter. It could be that they are limited bots, which can only do simple molecular restructuring. This might mean that the clip contains certain key components such as steel and explosives. The limits of these nanite would make them more obtainable by soldiers etc. However, street thugs would probably not be able to get hold of them.
I think it would make sense for them to have regular (old) firearms, these might be usable by Alex in emergencies, but Alex would not be able or willing to carry vast amounts of conventional ammo around. It was never very realistic that all the guns in the US used the exact same ammo as those in France & Hongkong. It would be much easier to carry compacted ammo matter.

The other explanation might be that each gun uses ammo as normal, but Alex has a nanite operated device that deconstructs all the ammo, then reconstructs it to suit a particular gun. Alex might have a computer database, perhaps in the infolink thing, that holds blueprints for ammo for all major weapons. The deconstruction process might in itself provide enough information for later reconstruction.

I was also wondering about the old mechanical augmentations. I would expect that they would have become much more mainstream as they must have been mostly replaced by nano-biomods. It might be common to see 'mechs' in the street, even normal people might have some mods. It might become the fashion, and people unable or unwilling to aquire mechanical augs might have fake ones. I think this would have been quite interesting, taking the DX world even further into the future. It would certainly have made it easier for Alex to get away with those glowing eyes etc. From what I've seen though, people's appearances dont seem to have changed. Take NG Resonance- she looks like someone from today- which might of course mean that she has a retro style. I would find it a little odd if flying security drones became a common sight, yet the level of tech used by civilians did not change.

SATCOM

11-13-2003, 01:39 PM

Uh? :confused:
Too long of post
http://www.hecares4u.com/smiley/scratch.gif

Le`Sauveur`De`Ces`Dames

11-14-2003, 06:00 AM

well what bothers me is I don't know how to answer to your, post, I still don't understand if you think unified ammo is a good or a bad thing

(or if you don't care. well I don't either. as long as they give me a logical explanation)

FuriousNoob >:-(

11-14-2003, 06:20 AM

I think both sides on this have some really good points. I believe its going to come down to one thing and that's implementation. Even the best of gameplay ideas can fall apart if the devs implement them poorly, and even ideas that on the surface seem doomed to fail, can really be great if they are implemented well. So I guess we'll just have to play and see or wait for reviews (I prefer the former).

Scilent Bob

11-16-2003, 07:27 PM

I don't think that such a small subject could ruin a sequil to possibly the greatest game I have ever played. What ever the verdict on the generic ammo I will buy the game first day it is out.

- "I'm a man of few words...Any Questions?"

Mehrunes

11-16-2003, 07:46 PM

I think it'll turn out to be a good thing. Weapon choices should be based on what you're up against and what your trying to accomplish, not how much pistol ammo you found on the last level.

BMKane

11-16-2003, 08:17 PM

*walks in wearing asbestos armour*

In my experiance, arguments about a game getting dumbed down have a tendancy to become violent ;)

First off, it's perfectly understandable that Spector and Co. have simplified DX2 for the Xbox. Think about it, it has about 8 usable buttons. It's not exactly the control laden juggernaut that the PC keyboard/mouse combo is. On an Xbox, you can't be going into a massive inventory screen and struggling with the analog sticks to center the mouse cursor over a "Heal This Body Part" button. It's just unrealistic. The only solutions are to either dumb the game down, or make a second interface for the Xbox version. The latter's a pain in the ass, so they went with the former.

Second, does anyone remember System Shock 2? SS2 pulled off the multiple ammo system brilliantly, and it went a LOT deeper. It went deep to the point that healing yourself could affect your ammo. You drink alcohol and your HP increases, but your Psi decreases (Psi being ammo for using psionic powers, like fireballs or teleportation). If you collect a lot of nanites, and you're running around an area and discover that your precious assault rifle is running out of anti-personnel rounds, you can use the nanites to replicate a new clip. Or, you could use it to replicate a Psi hypo and restore your Psi points. Or you could replicate a pack of grenades. It managed to add both unified ammo AND seperate ammo in the same system. Heck, the AR had 3 kinds of ammo.

Sure, it sucks to find some shotgun ammo and not be able to use it since you spent everything on the "Blow **** Up w/ Rocket Launcher" skill, but it's part of the game. Maybe we could do it by triggers, like in Neverwinter Nights. You do a quest for an NPC, and when the quest is finished, the NPC automatically checks your skills, and gives you some credits and ammo for a random weapon that uses your highest weapons skill. Ie., you have Pistol skill maxed out, so it gives you a box of Tranq darts, or a pistol clip. You have Rifle maxed out, and you get a Sniper Rifle clip.

Oh yea, and, there's actually a couple different kinds of ammo in DX2. There's a Matter Clip, Plasma Clip, Energy Clip, and, I think, one other.

Oh, and, about firing a shotgun with ammo you use for a rifle... In Unreal II, the assault rifle can fuse together 5 bullets and fire them as one shot, making a shotgun like effect. They could always use that to explain it.

Five.Pointe.O

11-16-2003, 10:09 PM

CORRECTION: 16 buttons if you include Start. :rolleyes:

The Glome

11-17-2003, 11:01 AM

You can do a hell of a lot with 16 buttons; it's all up to the developer. I've played many complex Xbox games, and some of them didn't even use all the buttons on the controller.

Personally, the more I hear about the unified ammo, the more I like it. There are 4 different types of ammo, right? I think we should just wait and see, there's no point in arguing as the game has probably already gone into content lock by now.

9of9

11-17-2003, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by BMKane
Oh, and, about firing a shotgun with ammo you use for a rifle... In Unreal II, the assault rifle can fuse together 5 bullets and fire them as one shot, making a shotgun like effect. They could always use that to explain it.

You can do a lot with nanites - what it could be is just a pack of basic materials that each weapon automatically reconstructs into it's own ammunition type (now why do I start thinking Star Trek replicators here?).

coldblue

11-17-2003, 02:21 PM

I don't really understand how people think that unified ammo is "unrealistic" for DXIW. You're willing to say that a technology that can consume a city in seconds can't shape a canister of paste into whatever kind of ammo is needed?

You people need to read more SF, thats a large part of what DXIW's story is based on. There's one book I remember especially where some guys get their hands on "military grade nano." Its in these big cannisters. They go into a garage and spray down all the cars with the nano paste. Then they set up a transmitter to tell the paste what to do, and leave. When they come back 15 minutes later, there's a bunch of guns and heavily armed robots waiting for them to use. I think the book was "Slant" by Greg Bear, btw.

Anyways, this is exactly why nanotechnology is being researched. If it works it makes manufacturing things on the fly a piece of cake.

Come to think of it, DX1 already had this concept with the universal constructor.