Philosophy & Intellectual Aspects of DX3 (UPDATE: Wrters Discussed)

[K^2]

IW's plot felt like someone telling you a joke, and immediately starting to explain it, because nobody laughed. Only, nobody laughed because the joke simply wasn't that great and a bit old to boot, not because anyone had trouble figuring it out.

And yeah, the central idea was fine. It had conspiracy, multiple factions that weren't what they were, etc. But the presentation was bad, and the whole suffered.

Note also that I did not say that I expect DX3's story to be a terrible flop. I simply recommended that people don't expect from it more than they got with IW's story. If you think that wasn't bad, then you'll probably be perfectly fine with DX3's story as well. It's just that a lot of people expected more from IW's story, and got disappointed.

And I do expect things to be more polished. I'm sure EM will put more effort into dialog, which is already more than Ion Storm has done.

Overall, all that I'm saying is that people shouldn't be expecting a real Deus Ex game. If instead of waiting for a new version of Deus Ex, you wait for a much improved prequel to Invisible War, you'll not only avoid disappointment, but will be pleasantly surprised in many ways. Think of it as a Deus Ex inspired game with someone else's artistic vision, and you'll have fun playing it. Try to spend too much time thinking of all the ways in which it isn't Deus Ex, and you'll probably end up hating it. And what good would that do?

[Sabretooth]

Originally Posted by K^2

Note also that I did not say that I expect DX3's story to be a terrible flop. I simply recommended that people don't expect from it more than they got with IW's story. If you think that wasn't bad, then you'll probably be perfectly fine with DX3's story as well. It's just that a lot of people expected more from IW's story, and got disappointed.

I think the reason would be that IW's story design was radically different from Deus Ex. Deus Ex was largely a linear storyline where certain events occurred in an ordered, but allowed decisions both insignificant and important to the player. Invisible War was more like a concentrated packet of the Elder Scrolls, it let you play with any faction you want, how you want. I think the story was good enough to do a concept like that justice.

Originally Posted by K^2

Overall, all that I'm saying is that people shouldn't be expecting a real Deus Ex game. If instead of waiting for a new version of Deus Ex, you wait for a much improved prequel to Invisible War, you'll not only avoid disappointment, but will be pleasantly surprised in many ways. Think of it as a Deus Ex inspired game with someone else's artistic vision, and you'll have fun playing it. Try to spend too much time thinking of all the ways in which it isn't Deus Ex, and you'll probably end up hating it. And what good would that do?

Good and all, but the reason so many people are hopeful is that EM has explicitly stated that they're learning from IW's mistakes and are making the game more like the original.

[K^2]

I don't doubt that they are learning from IW's mistakes, and they will probably be closer to original than IW was, because that isn't hard, but the goal is still not making another Deus Ex game. It is to make a marketable game inspired by Deus Ex' story.

[jamhaw]

Originally Posted by K^2

I don't doubt that they are learning from IW's mistakes, and they will probably be closer to original than IW was, because that isn't hard, but the goal is still not making another Deus Ex game. It is to make a marketable game inspired by Deus Ex' story.

Thats something at least. I was disapointed that Snowblind wasn't set in the Deus Ex universe.

[WhatsHisFace]

Originally Posted by K^2

IW's plot felt like someone telling you a joke, and immediately starting to explain it, because nobody laughed. Only, nobody laughed because the joke simply wasn't that great and a bit old to boot, not because anyone had trouble figuring it out.

The more I think about it, the more true that becomes. At the very least, Deus Ex: Invisible War provided organizations with clouded intentions and somewhat creepy agendas.

However, it was handled in a very bad way. Eventually everything falls under one of two umbrella corporations, making your previous choices pointless, and then there are a few more factions introduced just to keep things varied. But in the end it all feels like a waste.

[Wulflorne]

(Pardon, this is my first post... So, hello!) IW's factions felt distinctly 'typecast'; cliche dystopian fare, with two dimensional agendas (and one that's so downright extremist that you'd only pick their ending if you deliberately wanted to be an evil bastard.) That being said, choosing an ending in IW was as easy as deciding how altruistic or dirty you wanted your character to be, and less thought as to what you'd do. At least, that's how I felt; the first Deus Ex presented you with choices that were, essentially, personal questions pointed at the player; how would you handle it? They all were gray.

[K^2]

That's not entirely true. I often enjoy playing as an evil bastard, and I still couldn't find an ending that worked for me.

[Viktoria]

Originally Posted by Sabretooth

Good and all, but the reason so many people are hopeful is that EM has explicitly stated that they're learning from IW's mistakes and are making the game more like the original.

Agreed... and I believe they are doing exactly that.
We have an awesome writing team working on this game and I have every faith in DX3 being much closer to DX1 than DX:IW.

[gamer0004]

The problem is that in Deus Ex you unravelled the conspiracy, and even in the end you wasn't really sure whether you could trust the illuminati.
In IW there was nothing, and then *SLAM* in the face, they told you. What's the fun in that?

[Viktoria]

DX3 has a great story, with plenty of conspiracy and multiple endings. Fear not.

[K^2]

Originally Posted by MyImmortal

Fear not.

Famous last words.

[Viktoria]

Trust me.

(famous last words again? )

[gamer0004]

"Trust us" and "Fear not" were the famous last words of prime-minister Colijn just before the Germans crushed the Dutch forces in only five days in may 1940.

[K^2]

I think, most recently they were used in that context by the President of Georgia. He then chewed on his tie for a bit as Russian tanks rolled in.

[Ashpolt]

Another problem with IW's story was that it didn't give you any motivation to do anything. In Deus Ex, you start as (essentially) a cop, so you've got a clear motivation: this is your job, these people are bad, here's your mission. You then move to the NSF when you discover there's something sinister behind UNATCO, and the rest of the game is spent trying to solve that particular problem.

In Invisible War, on the other hand, you escape the Tarsus Academy and...here's a city, go do what you will, not because you have any motivation, but just because you can. You're just aimless. I did missions not because I felt I needed to, or because I felt I was doing any good for the world by doing them, but because I needed to in order to get further in the game. On my second playthrough, I'm in Cairo and there's still nothing approaching motivation to do missions (except that I like the Omar, and so want to help them, but that's more of a personal thing!)

[K^2]

Originally Posted by Ashpolt

Another problem with IW's story was that it didn't give you any motivation to do anything. In Deus Ex, you start as (essentially) a cop...

And in DX3 you're essentially a rent-a-cop. So it's the same, really, only you do it for the money. It's starting to make sense already.

[jordan_a]

Games in which you do things for the money usually have a poor story, I don't think that will be the case with AJ.

[René]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

Mary DeMarle wrote Myst and Dungeon Siege II. If I'm just going by previous works here, she's my biggest concern. James Swallow writes a lot of steampunk, which isn't good. But I guess Sheldon Pacotti will keep them in check.

Aaron, buddy, come on man! That comment's way out of line! For example, you looooooove the story in Deus Ex 1, right? Not to knock Sheldon and DX1 because it was, of course, awesome, but what had he done before that? A game called Wishbone.

And what about other forms of popular media? For every Spielberg Saving Private Ryan you have a Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't write things off based off such a small sample size. I know for a fact that fans loved what DeMarle did with Myst IV and V and please tell me, if you can, what exactly regarding DX3's story you don't like? What the DX3 writing team has done with the story is fricking awesome. It's huge. It's Cyberpunk. It's multi layered. There's tonnes of interesting people to meet. Dialogue and acting are great. Not much has been revealed, there's a lot more to say, but from what has been released, you're "concerned"? You're welcome to be "concerned" but I don't see how.

[K^2]

Rene, you should know better than hotlinking like that.

[FrankCSIS]

I'm curious, how does one get recruited for writing duty on a game? Or from your point of view, how is the choice made?

[thomasaquinas]

Originally Posted by René

What the DX3 writing team has done with the story is fricking awesome

No offense intended, but "X is awesome!", with no actual supporting evidence provided, is a pretty meaningless statement. I mean, for starters it's just opinion, and is essentially rhetoric. Then it's opinion from someone who is, along with colleagues and friends, personally involved (and is therefore not impartial). And then it's also opinion from a member of a team attempting to market a product with a sales end-goal.

For example, Fallout 3 developers came out and told us how fantastic the "over 200 different endings" were. Of course there were only really 3 endings, and they weren't all that "different". The general consensus is actually that they were all quite mediocre...

If I remember, Invisible War developers told us how "awesome" the game was pre-release (developers seem to use the word "awesome" a lot), and then once the period of prospective sales diminished, admitted they actually thought it was a rather sub-par, unworthy sequel. I really mean no disrespect, but you have to understand that "the story is awesome!" is pretty hollow, at this time, from someone invloved. Even if, I understand, you're not actually allowed to provide evidence for your statement.

I suppose the point is that if saying that it's awesome is supposed to allay our fears - it doesn't. Design a game that actually has an "awesome" story, and all our fears will be gone by release day, when presumably the hype machine has been ramped up to full-power and evidence has been released.

[Viktoria]

In fairness, Rene is obviously describing the story from a personal point of view - because he can. He's just sharing his opinion on what he knows, I don't think it is intended to allay our fears (for those who have them) or an attempt to market a product. Give the guy some slack...

[K^2]

Immortal, have you ever participated in making of something big? Even if it isn't all that great, while you are working on it, it feels like it is the greatest thing ever. That feeling remains until some time passes after you have completed the project. Then you can look at it in retrospect and realize that it was really mediocre.

I don't think Rene is lying or trying to put a spin on things to make more sales. I'm sure he actually thinks that DX3 is great in every respect. But he's involved in the project. That makes him extremely unreliable as a witness to the project's quality. Same goes for everybody on the development team. So as thomas said, when Rene says that something is "awesome" it tells us very little.

[Viktoria]

No, I can't say that I have at a very personal level... but I understand what you are trying to say as I have studied the subject and I do work closely with RCA, Vector and Superstar Media management. So I get the gist of general marketing strategy, yes.

However, in this case, we should still give people like Rene the benefit of the doubt, no? We are not forced to believe him... that is up to each of us individually. But, at the same time, we don't need to dismiss his contributions outright as nothing more than a cheap sales pitch. I just think its a shame that everything he says is open for misinterpretation. Perhaps its because I'm getting that myself, so I'm understanding it and feeling super-sensitive, hehe.

I agree that his comments don't really offer up much by way of "guaranteed reliability", no disputing that; but I don't think that was his intention anyway. Perhaps it is better for him not to say anything in some respects. Seems like its a no-win situation...

[K^2]

I don't think you followed what I said. I specifically stated that I don't think it is a sales pitch, and that it has nothing to do with marketing.

A person cannot objectively evaluate quality of a project that he is an integral part of. It is nature of human psyche, and as much as he might try to be objective, he cannot be.