Deus Ex 3

[Hell Kitty]

If expressing your character results in no significant changes from the gameworld does that expression have value?

 

In the video of Harvey Smith talking about where he went wrong with IW, the example he uses is that in DX you've got a swimming aug, a swimming tool, and a swimming skill, but in IW all that functionality is combined into one mod. He realised later though that people like having more choices because it gives them more options in defining their character, they like making their JC a "swimming guy" even if those extra choices don't really amount to much in the game.

 

Like playing dressup in Fallout 3, people like that sort of stuff even if it has no real effect in the game.

 

But it will not be a stepping stone to the genre as the first one was either.

 

Sadly DX wasn't really a stepping stone to anything either, it never started an "immersive sim" craze. Even Thief had a greater impact on the gaming world, what with Splinter Cell completely ripping off it's shadow stealth system.

 

I can give some examples: 1) You can build up a barricade in case of Manderlay attacking you, or any other NPC for that matter. 2) You can use them to hide from guards or bots. 3) You can build a bridge out of 'stupid stuff' in order to cross a passage that was too wide before.

 

I was thinking more what could you do with those particular items pictured that you couldn't do with the veritable forest of crates that appears to be in the sequel. Previews have already mentioned using items in the sequel as cover, like the photocopier in the Detroit police station. What was unique about flags and plants and pots and vases? The answer is nothing. If DX features 3 types of interactive plant but HR only features 1, nothing of value will be lost.

 

As Raithe mentions they are improving on aspects of the original, they just don't agree with you on the importance of being able to pick up everything you come across.

 

DX had little significant reactivity to player choice.

 

Yeah, it was really more like Thief, which had a completely linear story. The missions themselves gave you enough freedom to complete your objectives as you see fit.

[Slowtrain]

If expressing your character results in no significant changes from the gameworld does that expression have value?

 

In the video of Harvey Smith talking about where he went wrong with IW, the example he uses is that in DX you've got a swimming aug, a swimming tool, and a swimming skill, but in IW all that functionality is combined into one mod. He realised later though that people like having more choices because it gives them more options in defining their character, they like making their JC a "swimming guy" even if those extra choices don't really amount to much in the game.

 

Like playing dressup in Fallout 3, people like that sort of stuff even if it has no real effect in the game.

 

 

So, if a game like Deus Ex all ready allows you to express your character by combining, augs, skills, items and mods, which I agree it does, then is adding choices that have no significant impact in the game really neccessary for expression?

 

DX, as an example, is a game that is programmed to respond pretty well to your choices of augs, mods, skills, and items. Isn't adding false choices that the game isn't programmed to respond to just kind of a waste of time that could be spent elsewhere?

 

edit: And if Harvey SMith had actually added in the C&C that he said was going to the strength of IW, he probably would have been able to get away with dropping the skills and whatnot becasue there would have been other ways for gamers to express their character.

 

I'm not disagreeing that gamers want to express their characters in the gameplay, I'm just wondering if false choices like in DX really are a good way to do it.

Edited March 23, 2011 by Slowtrain

[Hell Kitty]

So, if a game like Deus Ex all ready allows you to express your character by combining, augs, skills, items and mods, which I agree it does, then is adding choices that have no significant impact in the game really neccessary for expression?

It's not necessary, but people like it.

 

Isn't adding false choices that the game isn't programmed to respond to just kind of a waste of time that could be spent elsewhere?

Possibly. People do love customising their character's appearance in RPGs.

[Tale]

Here's my perspective. When I play an RPG, or even an open world game, I do not suffer murderers. I will not play a character that turns a blind eye to Anna attempting to kill the man in the airplane. Anna must die. I frankly don't care if he dies anyway. Or if he doesn't show up later. In Red Dead Redemption, I do not suffer the bandits who execute people on the side of the road. Or the corrupt Mexican soldiers who do the same. I don't care if my net reward is 2 pieces of ammo. Call it a false choice if you want, but being forced to render implicit permission against my character's ethics is obnoxious in the worst way. The fact that the game doesn't change in any appreciable way is secondary to whether or not the game allows me to have basic control over my own character's outrage. Vulpes Inculta barely gets away from the first encounter without a bullet in his head simply on the basis that his victims were no better than him. And I do mean barely. I let it rest on assuring myself I'll do it later.

 

Dragon Age 2 did this, forcing me to let a warmonger and murderer waltz right by while I flipped off my computer monitor. It will be a negative element that stays with me long after all my good memories of it have faded.

Edited March 23, 2011 by Tale

[Slowtrain]

Call it a false choice if you want, but being forced to render implicit permission against my character's ethics is obnoxious in the worst way. The fact that the game doesn't change in any appreciable way is secondary to whether or not the game allows me to have basic control over my own character's outrage.

 

 

Interesting.

 

What if Anna was unkillable at that point in the game, much like Gunther is when he captures JC at the BAttery Park subway station. You were given the choice to kill Lebedev or not kill him. Either way he dies, either by JC or Anna. How would you respond to that as a choice?

 

It's not the killing or not killing of Lebedev that I would consider a false choice. He's removed from the game either way and your version of JC gets to make moral stand. Not that the moral stand has any effect on gameplay, but at least you get the satisfaction of doing would you feel is right for JC to do.

 

I always felt the entire slaughter them all vs prod them in the back moral choice that is presented throughout the game was somewhat under utilized in any meaningful way.

[Tale]

Call it a false choice if you want, but being forced to render implicit permission against my character's ethics is obnoxious in the worst way. The fact that the game doesn't change in any appreciable way is secondary to whether or not the game allows me to have basic control over my own character's outrage.

 

 

Interesting.

 

What if Anna was unkillable at that point in the game, much like Gunther is when he captures JC at the BAttery Park subway station. You were given the choice to kill Lebedev or not kill him. Either way he dies, either by JC or Anna. How would you respond to that as a choice?

Success is not a choice. Success is an outcome. A choice is the ability to try. Anna can be as unkillable as she wants to be. I still need to be allowed to make the attempt.

 

Gunther at Battery Park is similar. You are given the choice to resist.

[entrerix]

i don't think I have ever killed gunther at battery park, what happens if you do?

[Purkake]

He's invincible there from what I remember.

[Oner]

Yep, he's unkillable there.

[entrerix]

oh, no wonder i never killed him

[Meshugger]

Sadly DX wasn't really a stepping stone to anything either, it never started an "immersive sim" craze. Even Thief had a greater impact on the gaming world, what with Splinter Cell completely ripping off it's shadow stealth system.

 

I can give some examples: 1) You can build up a barricade in case of Manderlay attacking you, or any other NPC for that matter. 2) You can use them to hide from guards or bots. 3) You can build a bridge out of 'stupid stuff' in order to cross a passage that was too wide before.

 

I was thinking more what could you do with those particular items pictured that you couldn't do with the veritable forest of crates that appears to be in the sequel. Previews have already mentioned using items in the sequel as cover, like the photocopier in the Detroit police station. What was unique about flags and plants and pots and vases? The answer is nothing. If DX features 3 types of interactive plant but HR only features 1, nothing of value will be lost.

 

As Raithe mentions they are improving on aspects of the original, they just don't agree with you on the importance of being able to pick up everything you come across.

 

I am trying to reach you but you aren't anwering. Are we speaking the same language?

[Hell Kitty]

I am trying to reach you but you aren't anwering. Are we speaking the same language?

 

Answering what?

[Tigranes]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/03/23...oped-by-nixxes/

 

DX3 PC developed "sort of in-house but also with outside studio"

 

Obviously if you pre-order the PC version you're a moron. Let's see if the port is horrible or merely adequate.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/03/23...oped-by-nixxes/

 

DX3 PC developed "sort of in-house but also with outside studio"

 

Obviously if you pre-order the PC version you're a moron. Let's see if the port is horrible or merely adequate.

I still believe!

 

... seriously, stop crushing my hopes like this.

[Tale]

Obviously if you pre-order the PC version you're a moron. Let's see if the port is horrible or merely adequate.

It's Nixxes. Their ports have been solid.

[Hell Kitty]

Obviously if you pre-order the PC version you're a moron. Let's see if the port is horrible or merely adequate.

It's Nixxes. Their ports have been solid.

 

Yeah, as the article mentions. Nixxes, the team who have created faithful PC ports for the recent Lara Croft & The Guardian Of Light, and the superb Tomb Raider: Underworld.

 

But only morons bother to read the articles.

Edited March 24, 2011 by Hell Kitty

[Tigranes]

I read the article. Doesn't matter what the team is, though, when you are looking at a lower-priority port with a third party developer involved on such a complex game it makes every sense to pass on it Day 1 and hear some user reports.

 

Since you know, worst case scenario is you pick it up Day 1 and this was the one they buggered up. Not so 'moronic', I'd think.

[Majek]

Obviously if you pre-order the PC version you're a moron. Let's see if the port is horrible or merely adequate.

It's Nixxes. Their ports have been solid.

 

and very buggy !

[WorstUsernameEver]

Obviously if you pre-order the PC version you're a moron. Let's see if the port is horrible or merely adequate.

It's Nixxes. Their ports have been solid.

 

and very buggy !

 

And had ****ed up control from what I could play of Lara Croft.

Definitely not a good sign.

[HoonDing]

Will there be Aim Assist?

 

As far as I'm concerned "Press START to continue" already means a failed port.

Edited March 24, 2011 by virumor

[Hell Kitty]

I read the article. Doesn't matter what the team is, though, when you are looking at a lower-priority port with a third party developer involved on such a complex game it makes every sense to pass on it Day 1 and hear some user reports.

 

Since you know, worst case scenario is you pick it up Day 1 and this was the one they buggered up. Not so 'moronic', I'd think.

 

If those who get the PC version without first hearing user reports are morons, then whose opinions are you relying on? What a dilemma.

[Malcador]

Yeah, as the article mentions. Nixxes, the team who have created faithful PC ports for the recent Lara Croft & The Guardian Of Light, and the superb Tomb Raider: Underworld.

 

But only morons bother to read the articles.

 

Well he's right, only idiots pre-order a game, so easy there. Never played any of their ports, but still is funny to read they're outsourcing the PC version, sort of. Anything that increses the pessimism is good though

 

 

If those who get the PC version without first hearing user reports are morons, then whose opinions are you relying on? What a dilemma.

 

Stupid people can still be used.

Edited March 24, 2011 by Malcador

[Hell Kitty]

Yeah, it was pretty idiotic of all those people who pre-ordered DA2, getting stuff for free that smart people pay for.

[Malcador]

Yeah, it was pretty idiotic of all those people who pre-ordered DA2, getting stuff for free that smart people pay for.

 

Well yes it was, they got suckered in by that free stuff. Not that paying for it after is smart, either. It's just a wiser move to just wait for a game to come up, generate enough volume of feedback. Even wiser to just wait for the GOTY Edition being on sale for $30.

[Raithe]

Well yes it was, they got suckered in by that free stuff. Not that paying for it after is smart, either. It's just a wiser move to just wait for a game to come up, generate enough volume of feedback. Even wiser to just wait for the GOTY Edition being on sale for $30.

 

If you're interesting in something, and enthusiastic about something.. is it wise to wait a year for a cheap version of it to come out?

 

Is it worthwhile waiting to see what other people think of it? Will their perceptions match yours? Does waiting 6-8-12 months for a game make it better just because you might end up spending $10-30 less?

 

C'mon, going by that rationale I should never have picked up Alpha Protocol, because pretty much the majority of reviewers slammed it and people who gave the most voice complained about it. While to me, a lot of the complaints made weren't really an issue compared to the fun I had with the game, and expect to have more enjoyment when I go back and replay it again in the future.

 

There are a heap of games that have got raved reviews, that people have talked about.. that I've then found to be a total waste of money regardless of whether I picked them up during the initial release or a few years on when they were in the bargain bin.

 

It comes down to this, if you think you're going to have fun with a game, and you're excited by the ideas that are supposed to be in a game.. You're willing to take the risk on your own cognizance. It's not bad, it's not good. It's your perspetive.