Deus Ex 3

[Malcador]

Elitism and Entitlement get used a lot because they are seen a lot.

 

Or people just think they see it. Mostly entitlement, though, especially here re: any complaint or displeasure with a design choice. Although I guess I am elitist in thinking those that put the time and effort in are indeed better than those that don't

[Nepenthe]

Elitism and Entitlement get used a lot because they are seen a lot.

 

Or people just think they see it. Mostly entitlement, though, especially here re: any complaint or displeasure with a design choice. Although I guess I am elitist in thinking those that put the time and effort in are indeed better than those that don't

 

I haven't used it or seen it used in that context. The feeling of superiority towards console gamers is palpable, in fact I don't think anybody (else) would even try to dispute it.

[Tale]

The feeling of superiority towards console gamers is palpable,

Totally. I'm palping it right now.

[Malcador]

I haven't used it or seen it used in that context. The feeling of superiority towards console gamers is palpable, in fact I don't think anybody (else) would even try to dispute it.

 

That's not a feeling, it's simply an acceptance of reality.

[Raithe]

It's more of a hold-over from the fact that the "hard-core" gamers who liked in-depth games were the ones that played on the pc.. the console market was geared towards the casual gamer, the "simple" platform jumping / button-mashing fight games type of thing that you could jump in, play 15 minutes or so, then leave without worrying about saving...

 

That's evolving over the past few years.. but I'd say that's where the viewpoint comes from.... I mean, it's still a rarity for a game that was designed for the console takes more then 10 hours to play through once.. while it used to be a rarity for a pc game that fell under that time..

 

length of gameplay, levels of complexity.. that's what's been shifting of late. That, and precisely what makes up a "casual" gamer compared to a "hard-core" one...

[Oner]

certain aspects being more streamlined (i.e. basic combat mechanic)

Torso damage, you die. Leg damage, you crawl. Arm damage, your aim worsens. Head = you die faster.

And they streamlined that?

 

 

I could finish the demo no problem when I was like ~11. If others really found it overwhelming... *cough* I don't see how that's elitism.

[TheHarlequin]

Ah I love the rampant elitism of some gamers.

 

Because games like Megaman and Mario Brothers were far and away infinitely more complex than the drivel we play now.

 

 

*shrug*

 

If wanting games that engage me and keep me interested is elitist, then so be it. I'm an ultra uber elitist gamer.

 

Like I said, I accept the way it is, but I find the ongoing developer/publisher denial of "we're not dumbing down, we're streallining" uterlly laughable..

 

Every time I see it, I think of the scene in Full Metal Jacket where Joker's CO at Stars and Stripes instructing all his reporters to subsitute the phrase "sweep and clear" for "search and destroy". lol. Like that changes anything.

 

You sir are my new personal hero. Well said!

[entrerix]

i could see some streamlining for deus ex, having to constantly toggle your augs on and off to conserve energy etc was a pain, i wish there was an option to set some of those to "low power" which provided a smaller boost but had no drain on your energy.

 

does that make me a mouth-breather because I hated the constant toggling? maybe. but I still finished the game despite that annoyance (silent sniper rifle = king)

 

Now I don't know what other kinds of streamlining they have in mind, I just pointed this out as an example of something that I can imagine being improved for the new game that perhaps is a "dumbing down" but is something that I, an original fan, would enjoy.

 

(I call myself an "original fan" because I bought the game on day 1, have beaten it 6+ times since then, and consider it my 3rd favorite game of all time)

[Purkake]

You could totally have something like Crysis' suit system for the augs. Have a bunch of passive ones that take up energy when used(jumping, getting hit, punching people, etc.) and others that drain energy when active. Then have the energy regenerate when you're not using any and make the challenge finding the most effective combination for a given situation instead of micromanaging a bunch of energy cells and worrying about using your flashlight too much.

 

Then you could have a efficiency vs power upgrade path for each, leading to either a slow strategic approach or a fast and aggressive one.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Purkake

[Thorton_AP]

Ah I love the rampant elitism of some gamers.

 

Because games like Megaman and Mario Brothers were far and away infinitely more complex than the drivel we play now.

So because not all games were more complex before, that means no games were more complex before, is that what you're saying?

 

There's still a lot of games that are very complex. They're just not the glitzy AAA titles because of the increased cost of game development. The problem that I see is the same people that bitch about things being dumbed down are the same people that still demand the latest in cutting edge graphics, marketing, and content. Because high budget games need a high volume of sales, their accessibility is very important. They want their super complex game to still have the same complex art, cinematics, and graphics of the other games. In other words, they want their cake and want to eat it too. I'm not any different. If a game came out with Fallout 1/2 style graphics today, there's a very good chance that I'd take a flyer on it and be hesitant, even though Fallout 1/2 was a no brainer purchase for me back in the day.

 

And what are you referring to as elitism? The fact that not everyone want every game to be accessible by everyone? Chess is not accessible to everyone. It has quite complex rules and you have to learn the movement pattern of all the pieces. Should they "streamline" it so everyone can enjoy chess? Make it so there's only one type of chess piece, with one movement pattern. Would you still consider it chess if they did? Are everyone who wants to play chess the way it is now elitists?

 

You'll notice that there's no AAA chess games that get released on multimillion dollar budgets.

 

The elitism comes from people sitting pompously asserting that the people that don't have the same interests in games as he does must be drooling morons. On a final note, I learned chess as a 4 year old (played with my Dad and brother all the time, and I loved me some Sargon and Battle Chess on the Apple II). Once you get the hang of those strange moving knights, learning how pieces move isn't really that difficult. Chess is a game that's easy to learn, hard to master. So your point is actually rather invalid since chess is not an overly complex game. The only one that will blow people's minds is en passant. Maybe castling (though I loved to do it as a 4 year old simply because it looked cool. Especially the Queen-Rook castle.

 

Ridiculous arguments.

You're right, your arguments are ridiculous. A game with simple gameplay mechanics as chess is just boggling.

 

 

 

Explain the elitism being expressed here, please?

 

Sure:

"Your making games that are less complex than they once were simply so they can be understood by people who drool on themslves when they talk"

 

Guy's casually dismissing these people as being stupid and drooling morons because they don't like the games that he does. Might as well be sitting on a chair with his legs crossed, wearing a monocle, while drinking some Cognac as he makes this statement.

 

If anyone wishes to assert his intellectual superiority based upon what types of games he prefers to play, then he's being elitist as far as I'm concerned. Sounds mostly like sour grapes to me.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Thorton_AP

[entrerix]

why do people always talk about elitism like its bad?

 

some people really are smarter than others, it doesn't mean the inferior person has less rights, just less ability.

[RPGmasterBoo]

What is called streamlining is nothing but standardization of difficulty and gameplay (even thematic) elements to appeal to a wider audience. Military style shooters are a prime example.

 

Since the "wider audience" has little experience with games, bringing a game to their level makes it seem retarded to someone to whom gaming is a lifestyle.

 

So streamlining is dumbing down and that has nothing to do with elitism - its a financial strategy.

[mkreku]

They want their super complex game to still have the same complex art, cinematics, and graphics of the other games.

Since when are good graphics and good gameplay mutually exclusive? Newsflash: they're not. Flawed argument.

 

So your point is actually rather invalid since chess is not an overly complex game.

Way to miss the point. I chose chess because, yes, it is a pretty simple game, yet it would be possible to "streamline" it. Get it? This is what streamlining means! You take something that wasn't overly complicated from the beginning and enjoyed by many, then streamline it further to catch those people who think Fable's one button combat is the height of accessibility. In the process you ruin the experience for the people who now think chess has become Halo. It is not elitist to think the original chess was better than the console generation chess now, is it?

 

A game with simple gameplay mechanics as chess is just boggling.

I don't even know what this sentence is supposed to mean, but now your arguments are not only ridiculous, they're flawed too.

[HoonDing]

why do people always talk about elitism like its bad?

 

some people really are smarter than others, it doesn't mean the inferior person has less rights, just less ability.

Being smart has nothing to do with gaming. People that gamed in the 80s or beginning of the 90s aren't generally smarter than people that game nowadays.

[mkreku]

But you must admit it makes you feel a little bit clever when you see people like Kaftan fawn over games like Black Ops

[Nepenthe]

Being smart has nothing to do with gaming.

Thank you. Also what AP wrote on the last page.

[Malcador]

Being smart has nothing to do with gaming. People that gamed in the 80s or beginning of the 90s aren't generally smarter than people that game nowadays.

 

No, but giving up on a game immediately because it's 'too hard' for you is pretty stupid behaviour when all it needs is time and persistence, after all. Dugas' little spiel there touched on people quitting Deus Ex based on Liberty Island, although I highly doubt people can be that feeble.

 

 

"Your making games that are less complex than they once were simply so they can be understood by people who drool on themslves when they talk"

 

You're reading that quote the wrong way. Saying they dumb it down so any idiot can play it, isn't saying people that like the games are stupid. The bar is very low, that's all, heh. I'd like to see an example of inaccessible game - that is, one a player simply cannot play, other than physical disability. So pushing that bar lower isn't needed and in the long end it's not beneficial to players (easier things are, you sort of suffer from a form of atrophy).

 

What is wrong with elitism, anyway ? You end up thinking one group is scum, they think you're a jerkbag. Pretty much a normal situation, really.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Malcador

[Purkake]

What is wrong with elitism, anyway ? You end up thinking one group is scum, they think you're a jerkbag. Pretty much a normal situation, really.

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Morgoth]

No matter how much Eidos tries to push DX:HR as something "witty" and special, it just doesn't work. They're not exactly flooding us with gameplay videos either, and that little bit I've seen is a bit underwhelming. Art direction is really cool, but that hide and cover mechanism should have no place in a real FPS.

[Purkake]

That's why it goes to third person mode for that

[Malcador]

Allowing you to conveniently see exactly where the guys you're out of LOS from are.

 

Woo, no coffee leads to typos.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Malcador

[Purkake]

The horror!

[Malcador]

Aside, one game that had a neat way of handling cover in FP was Viet Cong. You'd go behind an object or whatever, but would be covered to other players, using your iron sights would raise you up over or to the side of the cover so you could shoot. Was neat, but wasn't as much of a cheat as the system done by ME2, etc. Or at least I remember it like that.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Malcador

[Slowtrain]

Sure:

"Your making games that are less complex than they once were simply so they can be understood by people who drool on themslves when they talk"

 

Guy's casually dismissing these people as being stupid and drooling morons because they don't like the games that he does. Might as well be sitting on a chair with his legs crossed, wearing a monocle, while drinking some Cognac as he makes this statement.

 

If anyone wishes to assert his intellectual superiority based upon what types of games he prefers to play, then he's being elitist as far as I'm concerned. Sounds mostly like sour grapes to me.

 

 

ANybody who didn't understand the gameplay mechanics of Deus Ex or found them overwhelming is an idiot. It wasn't rocket science.

 

Sure, if you had never played a game before, maybe you'd have to read a manual and spend some time getting used to everything.

 

But games are now being designed with the goal of the stupidest person on the planet finding it copmpletely accessible without even reading the directions.

 

WHen you lower your sights to that level, you're going to turn out mediocre drivel. At best. ANd probably not even that.

[Slowtrain]

Being smart has nothing to do with gaming.

 

 

Exactly, its learned knowledge. Just like anything else worth doing.