Deux Ex 3: Inflammatory Hit-Chasing Quote Special

By Kieron Gillen on October 23rd, 2008 at 1:17 pm.


Well, everyone else is doing it, we probably should too.

The forthcoming issue of videogame bible Edge has a large feature on Eidos Montreal’s development of Deus Ex 3. To tease it, Edge Online runs a short story with the headline “Deus Ex was “Kinda Slow” Says Deus Ex 3 Dev” before offering a quote from Lead Designer Jean-Francois Dugas: “There weren’t enough exciting, memorable moments. It was aimed more towards a simulation rather than a game experience.”. Internet explodes.

It is only part of the story. In a literal sense.

Because it’s a self-stated teaser of a much larger feature in the magazine, which shows much more light and shade. Hell, there’s material enough to be inflamatory in completely the opposite away. Edit the following quote down and you have a “Deus Ex 3 Lead Designer calls out Warren Spector and Harvey Smith quote”…

“They tried to console-ise it, but their way of doing this was to drop a lot of stuff and cut out a lot of the tactical management of the game…

In fact, even later in the tiny snippet, they include the bit that folllows that quote: “At this point we don’t know exactly which platforms we’re going to be out on. The PC, we’ll be there for sure. But for us, console-isation isn’t about dumbing down features. If we’re to go console we will want to keep the complexity alive. We want the menu interface and controller to feel simple without risking any of their potential”.

But no-one’s picked up on that bit, partially because it’s a bit fluffy, but mainly because of the title line being so deliberately inflammatory to immediately turn the calmest gentlefolk into Angry Internet Men before they even think of looking at the second paragraph.

Of course, these end up kicking up a storm at the DX3 forum, where Community-chap René Valen tries to calm people down…

The overall feeling I get is that people are worried DX3 is more IW/GoW than DX1. This is is not true. DX3 is more DX1 than anything. I’ve said this before but it bears repeating.

First off, yes some things are changing:

-Auto health regen (although we haven’t been told exactly how this will work…)
-Stealth to line-of-sight and sound instead of darkness
-Contextual third person elements

Maybe even just a slight change to one of these is a deal-breaker for you and I can’t change that so I’m sorry. However, if you think DX1 is much more than these three elements, then you will be happy:

-Different ways to solve any objective depending on your play style (social, hacking, stealth, or action)
-Customization of your character (augmentations) and weapons
-Deep story with a strong consipracy
-Lots of social interaction with numerous characters
-Consequences to your actions that affect things down the line
-A near future (Cyberpunk) setting
-Open levels with limited load times (think DX1 not IW)
-Random explorable elements with earned experience points
-Global travel
-More stuff I’m forgetting

His first reaction is more telling where he notes “Looks to me like a sensationalist headline to get site traffic. I can’t blame them I guess but I really wish people did a little research rather than jumping to conclusions.”

I disagree with the second point, but agree with the former totally. One of the current devices which almost all the major sites use is teasing a forthcoming feature piece with a news story, taking a quote out of context. The concept simple – they get two bites at the hits, one with one of the best quotes which may get linked by itself, the other of the feature is proper.

It’s possible to make this work – think simple confirmations of formats or features – but, in all too many cases, it’s games journalism of the lowest, most sickening order. The problem is that you sacrifice complexity and truth in order to actually get the cheapest hits. You’re deliberately distorting truth, muddying the waters and actively betraying your readers (whose fears you’re whipping into a frenzy) and the developers (Who you’re painting in the worst light you can).

This case is particularly sad. Edge is a bastion for journalism – like it or not, it’s probably the best we’ve got. The feature itself, while it includes more than enough elements to make you worry or believe in Deus Ex 3, is a complete and fair entity. The teaser isn’t. The feature shows balance and evenhandedness. The only question the teaser asks is how much outrage it can cause with the material it has available.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, it’s a product of two different cultures. Magazine staff and the web staff across most publishing companies are completely separate. When it’s a case of the latter actively undermining Edge’s hard-won brand-equity, you have to question the priorities.

There’s an irony here. The real dumbing down in this Deus Ex story? It’s not from the developers. It’s from the journalists.

__________________

« | »

, , .

92 Comments »

  1. Larington says:

    Word of warning for everyone:

    Copy what you’ve just typed before posting, I just lost my post to a 405 page error.

  2. Oktember says:

    Inflammatory or otherwise, I guess Edge’s choice of headline is getting people to talk about the game. And by talk I mean idly speculate.

    I can’t really see much method in their madness though. The casual gamer has no idea what Deus Ex is, let alone played it. At best, from their perspective, Deus Ex 3 is just another shitty sequel to some shitty Xbox game. The only people who care enough to tell the internet what they think are the hardcore PC gamers, for whom no game can possibly mirror the perfection of the original, but they would be saying as much in Deus Ex 3 threads regardless of Edge’s piece.

  3. Gorgeras says:

    Pags, staying to fight and save your brother was what few did, because it was a HARD choice with an unforeseen worthwhile reward.

    The demi-godness of health regeneration at that stage of the game would have made the the harder choice so much more desirable. Fighting UNATCO would have become an impulse, not an enaction of will. In Bioshock, 2K foolishly gave a very obvious incentive to do the right thing and almost no temptation towards evil. It presented a very thin illusion of choice, dispelled as soon as either action was chosen. It even somewhat harmed the narrative and made the killing or rescue of a Little Sister no big deal.

    False choices didn’t used to be in games due to deadlines and budget considerations meaning it wasn’t worth putting anything in a game unless it had been carefully thought through. Now we have games where you can choose path A or B, oh but A has a diamond-encrusted rocket-skateboard at the start and a pimp cup at the end. B has squat, but you have to play it a certain way to get past hundreds of instant-death situations. It caters for people that want reward for little effort and for people who like frugal challenges. But who in their right mind would choose B when A is even on offer?

    No, great games don’t give you what you want; they give you what you always wanted but didn’t know it.

  4. Larington says:

    Right, try again.

    I’m really not happy with Edge at the moment, not that I’m interested in multi-platform magazines anyway (though the interview article about out-sourcing was an interesting read).
    I found myself having to buy the magazine not out of desire to see what they’d uncovered, but to clarify for myself confusion created by the teaser for the preview, thats not a good way to create reader loyalty.

    People are waaaay too quick to forget that DX:IW was NOT a bad game, yes, it was very different from the original and there was certainly an issue of severe discomfort with the disparity… To be sure.

    But it wasn’t a bad game.

    I do honestly believe that DX3 will be close enough to the roots of the original to be genuinely enjoyable, but distant enough to not repeat its mistakes (DX1 is NOT perfect, awesome yes, but not perfect)… Sure it’ll make whole new mistakes along the way, but, I think I’ll get to enjoy discovering them, rather than fearing them.

  5. Erlam says:

    “I really don’t see what all the fuss is about. This system is no more or less realistic or immersion breaking than the use of medikits or any other form of health power up.”

    Because it’s fucking lazy design. It means they don’t have to actually balance enemies, and can simply put things to hide behind every so often. It also takes away from sneaking, as you can simply sneak get seen/shot, run, come back…

    But yes, ‘lazy’ would be my problem with it.

  6. StalinsGhost says:

    I couldn’t agree more KG. The biggest threat to gaming these days is the elitist AIM and the vast majority of journalists totally failing to pick up on a games credentials when covering them. It’s funny how many people’s perception of something is decided through buzz-words or titles these days.

    Auto-Regen for example. Granted, I was mortified when I read it at first. That’s not important. The important bit is whether you choose to stop and think about it, or just instantly cement your initial impression in your mind. This is how I see most people as doing things. The AIM will read something, and that forever becomes his impression. He’ll adamently defend it to the grave, defend himself as being a “cynic” (while clearly misunderstanding the nature of cynicism) and attack anyone who actually offers a genuine critical analysis.

    As an example, check out my detailed commentary on what Auto-Regen could potentially mean…

    http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=80942

    Remarkable really. I’m actually surprised I got a whole page of useful commentary before the AIM’s descended, destroying all hope of genuine discussion.

    As I said in that thread… you’d have though fans of an intelligent game would have some vestiges of intelligence of their own. Evidently not.

  7. Larington says:

    Well, there was a fair amount of good discussion in that thread at first, its just unfortunate that when Angry Internet Men do descend, they tend to flood the communication channels with their hyperbole and in the process, replace communication with white noise.
    Its a major weakness of the Internet in the sense that this happens so easily and readily, basically, whenever you encounter an issue which people feel they have to defend to the grave, when really, a bit of genuine patience, wisdom, perception and thought can prevent a heart attack over, frankly, very little.

  8. Larington says:

    Worse still, when an Angry Internet Man does enter a forum thread and starts spewing white noise, he then refuses to leave even with warnings from moderators who have learned the difference between people who communicate and people who refuse to allow a viewpoint to bend in anyway.
    To the point where eventually, a moderator is forced to use the suspend/ban hammer just to bring some semblence of real communication back to the forum.

  9. Qabal says:

    DX: IW wasn’t a bad game in it’s own right. Everyone hates it because it pales to the original in every conceivable way. If it hadn’t been a sequel to DX, it would have been a decent game. Not great, but decent.

    As for health regen, I think Riddick did it right. You were able to regen up to 25% of your health (less at later levels), and no more. It kept the challenge up while not being screwed with 3% health left after a scrap and needing to reload.

  10. Okami says:

    @Erlam: No it’s not lazy. You can be just as lazy with a pickup based health system. Just drop health pick ups after every fight – same effect.

    Good level design is good level design and good combat design is good combat design – no matter what kind of health system you use.

    In a way a good auto regen system will make for more interesting, better balanced fighting scenes, since it gives the level designer one less unknown variable he has to worry about.

    In the end, it’s about the skills of the designers involved, no matter which system you use. The same is true for cover systems and any other gameplay mechanic.

  11. Dr_demento says:

    Alas, R6:V and R6:V2 are hurt by their own love for superpowered, hyperaccurate guns. My friend and I played through the campaign in the first using nothing but the USP, the weakest pistol we could find. That did force you to be tactical though….

    The best system for DX3 would be to use Riddick’s segmental regeneration, but instead of arbitrary squares they could use limbs. So if your arm was damaged but not removed it would heal, but once totally broken you’d be looking for a medibot.

  12. FhnuZoag says:

    Meh, I’m pro-regen. For the example of get shot, run and come back, I think that’s infinitely preferable to get shot, reload a quicksave, and come back.

    The problem is that people think regen is connected to challenge. It isn’t. With regen can be just as hard as without, provided that encounters are tuned correctly. (Fighting UNATCO could be *more* daunting with regen, since it’s a small room with little cover and ton of people charging into it at once, while it could be perfectly survivable with little skill if you had a stack of med kits to go through.) What regen means is that players don’t have to contend with entering encounters with resources that they were supposed to have, so the game is precisely as hard as it is supposed to be. And what’s wrong with that?

  13. Gorgeras says:

    Riddick did it right. Didn’t play it, but it sounds right.

    Why can’t we be prejudiced? What is so wrong about it? We’re all prejudiced about gravity; our minds are not so open that we overcome our prejudices and walk off tall places.

    Prejudice is fine when it is informed. I just so happen to believe my prejudice about health regen is informed, even though some say ‘informed’ and ‘prejudice’ by definition complete opposites. Instead of dismissing my Angry Internet Man rant and the way I do it. Critically consider and assess my position.

    Is health regen good, neutral or corrosive to direct action sequences? Why so?

    Is health regen good, neutral or corrosive to indirect combat where there is a choice to avoid targets completely?Why so?

    I think Assassin’s Creed provides a good example. Health regen only worked out of combat. But the designers were obviously still in the health regen mindset and gave you a ridiculous amount of health and power to beat enemies. Whilst this discouraged you from large direct combat, it encouraged you to have lots of direct combat, rather than reward you for avoiding it at all.

    I never completed Deus Ex 2. I stopped and uninstalled after encountering my second random, disconnected street crime in no time at all inside the supposedly Orwellian WTC Enclave at the beginning. This was a very console-ey game attempting to appeal to a console owner that can’t go 15 minutes without a combat sequence, no matter how contrived. Health regen would only make it worse.

    Fable would have been a game where health regen really would have helped. Damn.

  14. Surgeon says:

    I read about some of this this morning in PCG.
    The more flesh like prosthetic based augmentation sounds really smart, and the concept drawings were really cool.

    The third person switch could work really well if it is implemented correctly. I’ve no qualms with it until I see it in action.

  15. M. P. says:

    This really is the only entertainment medium where previews take up so much of journalists’ (and readers’) time. In the cinema industry, “previews” are written when journalists are allowed in to watch a movie IN FULL about a week before release – not 2′ of it a year before release!

    I’m not sure if this trend began so publishers could get free extra press coverage and retain the notoriously limited attention span of us gamers for the protracted wait during development cycles, or so journalists could justify their salaries on months when they’ve no games to review, but I do know that I stopped buying gaming mags when I noticed that previews took up more space than all the other features in most of them.

  16. Ergates says:

    You seriously uninstalled it after 2 fights? To me that just screams “Anger Issues”. I suggest diazepam, it’s great.

    All this anger and shouting and no one has any inkling how any proposed health system would actually work. Or how ANY of the game mechanics will work. Or ANYTHING AT ALL of any use whatsoever. Therefore, trying to decide if it’ll have a positive or negative effect is completely and utterly pointless. There are just too many unknown variables.

    Anyone who is genuinely angry about this needs to seek help. Seriously, I’m not joking.

    And prejudice is, by definition, never informed.

  17. SteveHatesYou says:

    My only worry about the health-regen is that it will take away the limb damage system from the first game. Getting crippled in a fight and then having to compensate was one of those nice Deus Ex touches.

  18. Mister Yuck says:

    I liked Halo.

  19. JM_Zen says:

    I always found health packs annoying. Auto-regen is a welcome addition for me (if it’s handled well – a la R6 Vegas 2), because I tend to hoard health packs in case I ‘really need them’, and end up eating more soy crisps than anything. Then I beat the game, and I’ve got 56 health packs left over. :C

    Save me from myself, Eidos Montreal!

  20. Mr. President says:

    I have to bring up (the excellent) Riddick again. It included 3rd person elements, used when you were climbing or doing various activities (e.g. using a medical station).

    I thought what you’re talking about was the biggest annoyance in an otherwise good game.
    3rd person camera during dialogue or healing sequences is fine by me, you are not expecting to control your character’s movements during those, but the game insists on switching your perspective every goddamn time you get on a ladder or climb a crate, taking you out of character and leaving you a bit disoriented. Not to mention that there was no night vision in 3rd person, so half of the time those sequences were nothing more than 3 seconds of black screen interrupting your gameplay. Really obnoxious and unnecessary. The new Turok is guilty of this as well, but it’s less noticeable there.

  21. Flint says:

    I don’t mind regeneration itself but I dislike the current fad to take away good ol’ health counters/bars and replace them with regeneration and vision blur.

  22. AsubstanceD says:

    Personally I think as far as game mechanics is concerned DX IW was a bad game, the controls and interface were awful especially for PC users, without the patch it was unplayable. The ammo idea was awful, the locations were small and didn’t feel alive. The loss of skills took away so much (and it didn’t help that shooting felt like you were lowest skill based on its response level) and guns were a bit rubbish too, not to mention that head shots were random for killing.

    Don’t get me wrong I enjoyed it okay, the story characters and premises I enjoyed, but it was more a slog through bad gameplay for sake of that, rather than a well designed game.

  23. ape says:

    My good friend’s brother is a tester over at Eidos here in Montreal and from what I hear the staff on DE3 are all of the devout DE fan types.

    Of course this is unconfirmed, but apparently the 3rd person stuff is optional and for certain stealth activities and such. I was told that you can play it all in 1st person, this remains to be seen.

    In any case it’s DE, so I am eager if a bit skeptical.

  24. Larington says:

    As far as third person is concerned, as far as I can tell it only happens during special actions involving things like augmentation punching through walls and things like that.

    I guess we’ll know if they got the balance right once we get to play it.

  25. Dante says:

    I’m sure I heard somewhere they were talking about shifting into third person when you’re behind cover.

  26. UncleB00B says:

    What’s up with all the “Angry Internet Man” crap ?

    I don’t need to “wait and see” what happens. I’ve already done that since EA ate up Bullfrog, Maxis, Westwood and such.

    The argument pro-regeneration seems to come from people who just want to pop open a console and mindlessly kill crap.

    One guy upstairs said something along the lines of “today’s console kids don’t even know what Deus-Ex is”. Well, then, pardon my language, why the fock do they need to make “Deus-Ex-Three” and rape the franchise ? I would presume that a “Deus-Ex Sequel” is made for Deus-Ex fans. People who don’t know or care and just want some retarded, quick “fun” now and then can’t have any say in it. Don’t console people have a lot of “slimmed”/”dumbed” games to play? Can’t they make Gears of War 4,5,6… and leave these franchises to peace until someone who wants to make a GOOD GAME comes along, not just someone looking to sell a pixel-shaded, cookie-cutter clone to the largest possible market of pre-teens with x-boxes or ps3s or whatever ?

    It seems to me that you are the ones who have major problems with people that really love and care about games and shove them aside them as “fanatics”, “internet angry men” and worse! Apparently, not giving it into the EA-like idiotic, oversimplified games is considered “fanaticism”…

    For fock’s sake, look at X-COM. Try making something like that today. All those retards with MBA degrees and market studies will scream their asses out about “steep learning curve” and crap, yet I wasn’t much older that today’s brain-dead-a-dozen console players for whom, actually taking into account the player’s HEALTH is too complicated and kills the “fun”.

    Furthermore, there’s a deeper problem that comes out all too often these days: games are made such the player’s actions HAVE NO CONSEQUENCES. In the concrete example of auto-health, the message of the gameplay (note gameplay, not game) is that there’s nothing to worry about. No matter what you do, you can hind behind a rock and magically grow back to full strength. You’re not required to plan your actions, think about your immediate and future actions because you can’t die. Tough fight? No problem, until the next flock of generic enemies come your way you’ll be up to full strength so every “casual console kid” out there doesn’t break his neck on the “steep” learning curve of the game. According to sales people in these companies in order to make the maximum profit you need to cover most of “the market”. Why leave aside Deer Hunter Pro players and Mario Kart players? No,no… The learning curve has to be flat. Actually, fock flat, it has to be something of an inverse power function, you know, the longer you play, the stupider you get, so you will buy the next 5 sequels without much thought.

    Games used to be smarter and deeper in every possible way, from story, atmosphere, background, gameplay and so on for the simple reason that the people who made them were actually making games. These days some corporate investor piles gargantuan sums into a fancy 3d engine and massive marketing and sets the rules on what and how is made so he gets some x % ROI on his investments. StarCraft sold good? Make a RTS with 3 sides and abilities and crap. WoW sells good? Make a MMO, copy as much as WoW possible, make the graphics x times better.

    If Deus-Ex is “slow” in the opinion of these developers, than pick up a “fast”, dumb, mindless franchise, where you don’t trouble the player with these things and leave it alone.

    This is akin to some idiots geting a hold of Star-Wars and making a sequel with the Enterprise & Kirk in it (so they expand the market to Star Trek fans) with Transformers ships (because Transformers sold really well at the box office) and with big boobed babes because maybe they can sell it to NFL people… All this, of course, with 70% of the budget on FX, 25% on marketing and the rest on actual production…

    All that remains to bee seen is which RPG Remake will be the shittiest Fallout 3 or Deus-Ex 3. Ironically, they’re both 3s…

  27. Larington says:

    I think we just hit a nerve.

  28. toranaga says:

    they include the bit that folllows that quote: “At this point we don’t know exactly which platforms we’re going to be out on. The PC, we’ll be there for sure. But for us, console-isation isn’t about dumbing down features. If we’re to go console we will want to keep the complexity alive. We want the menu interface and controller to feel simple without risking any of their potential”.

    But no-one’s picked up on that bit,

    what a wonderful generalization, one might even say sensationalism. That’s not true at all that no one picked up on it, it’s been mentioned plenty of times in various forums.

    However those are empty words. Every game where something was “dumbed down” for consoles had developers say stuff like “we’re not dumbing it down, we’re streamlining/making more accessible/making the UI simpler but retaining all the complexity”. No developer obviously will EVER say they’re “dumbing down” their game, shooting yourself in the foot hurts. Interviews aren’t candid personal opinions and information, they are marketing items and will contain (dis-)information as such.

    As for console vs PC version, you can bet all your savings and first born that there will be a console version, and that it will gain the majority of the focus. Basically all he’s saying is that he doesn’t know whether it will be xbox or ps3 exclusive, or if it will be on both. That’s his official word not necessarily the truth as eidos might be negotiating exclusives and whatnot.

  29. Testicular Torsion says:

    UncleB00B says: “It seems to me that you are the ones who have major problems with people that really love and care about games and shove them aside them as “fanatics”, “internet angry men” and worse!”

    … Is this a parody? Because if so, it’s brilliant.

  30. lumpi says:

    I dropped EDGE a while ago.

    They’re more and more doing the “opposite of everything” journalism, that is not just alternative (which I would like), it’s inverted sensationalism.

    Remember when they gave Halo 3 the “Innovation” award for having an online community? That wasn’t anti-mainstream, that was plain trolling.

  31. Kieron Gillen says:

    Toranaga: I did say that’s part of the reason why no-one picked up on it. But it’s not the biggest part. I also note that the full article contains more than enough reason to fear for the game.

    KG

  32. toranaga says:

    fair enough

  33. Ergates says:

    “What’s up with all the “Angry Internet Man” crap ?”
    You kind of answered your own question there….

  34. eyemessiah says:

    I’m fine with regen if the fights are still tuned for a level of challenge appropriate to the difficulty setting. Losing kits kills one specific resource management challenge but gaming has no shortage of resource management challenges, so I’m not too worried about this.

    I was interested to read the Gorgeras’s discussion about about “false choices” above,

    “Now we have games where you can choose path A or B, oh but A has a diamond-encrusted rocket-skateboard at the start and a pimp cup at the end. B has squat, but you have to play it a certain way to get past hundreds of instant-death situations. It caters for people that want reward for little effort and for people who like frugal challenges. But who in their right mind would choose B when A is even on offer?”

    People who enjoy B type challenges more than they enjoy A type challenges.

    It doesn’t seem like a false choice unless B is genuinely unfun, in which case the B path was just a simple waste of development time.

    I sort of get the impression that you are worried that people who think they like B more than A could coerced into taking the A path for some reason. This just seems too convoluted to me to be a real concern. Won’t people just take the path that appeals to them the most? Even if they alternate challenges are poorly sign posted B gamers that pick the A path by mistake can presumably just pop a quickload and change direction.

    IMHO, if everyone picks A over B that just means that when it comes down to it no-one really likes B gameplay. Maybe they sort of think they like B more than A, or think that they should like B more than A, but if they consistently pick A paths over B paths then I don’t think the A paths are really to blame.

  35. Ergates says:

    In that kind of situation, I’ve picked B many a time.

  36. Rath says:

    “There weren’t enough exciting, memorable moments. It was aimed more towards a simulation rather than a game experience.”

    I do not trust this man, for he speaks lies. How he can differentiate between a simulation and a game experience is beyond my comprehension, as I would judge those to be the same thing, and in Deus Ex we had a game experience that was a simulation, one of of being a bloody awesome super-agent.

    Memorable moments in Deus Ex:

    - Over-hearing all the conversations between various NPCs throughout the game, like the NSF troopers on Liberty Island discussing Gunther and the Cult Of The Machine, and the guy from Alabama complaining about the “punk with the tattooed forehead”.

    - Listening in on Simons’ interrogation of the NSF prisoners.

    - Discovering that you can kill Navarre on the 747 without breaking the flow of the game, and that characters will interact accordingly with you.

    - The MiBs’ raiding the apartment and the choice you make about how it plays out.

    - Waking up in the cell and being contacted by Daedalus.

    - First time you realise the MJ12 facility was underneath UNATCO the whole time.

    - Flatlander Woman.

    - Laputan Machine.

    - The helicopter missiles destroying the door in the Hong Kong landing pad.

    - Dealing with Maggie Chow and destroying the universal constructor underneath Versalife.

    - Condemning the super-freighter to destruction, and subsequent exit from same.

    - The phone message from Icarus in Paris.

    - Watching the reactivated X-51 bots duke it out with the MJ12 bots at Vandenberg.

    - The merging of Daedalus and Icarus into Helios.

    - The fight with Walton Simons at the Ocean Lab.

    - Jocks’ death, if you let it happen.

    - The 3 different endings are all memorable in their own ways.

  37. look out! Ninjas! says:

    Auto-healing will kill the balance of Deus Ex 1. But this isn’t Deus Ex 1. Don’t forget that.

  38. Ixtab says:

    Everyone fighting one way or another over the Health-Regen issue, I don’t think it’s really fair to say a certain mechanic is ALWAYS a bad idea, sure health-regen has been done abysmally in lots of games but I’m willing to give this a try because it could be done well. I don’t want to miss out on a good game merely because I got so wound up about a single mechanic.

    With most games with medkits I end up with so many I don’t know what to do with them all, and as a consequence it’s like auto-regen but I can heal everything in an instance rather than waiting in cover. The mechanic as a concept isn’t the problem really, it’s how they chose to implement it.

    If you can take cover in the middle of the fight to heal it probably makes all the fights too easy, if however it’s only really effective in a totally calm moment then it shouldn’t really affect the difficulty of the fights. Also you could make health regen so slow that most people will get fed up and use medkits but those in dire need and without any medkits will spend that 5 minutes in hiding to get enough health to survive the next encounter without having to reload and try again.

    tl;dr: We don’t really have enough information yet to decide if it’s a good thing or not.

  39. Verner says:

    I really, really, hope that THE BIG METAL ARMS THAT REPLACE YOUR REAL ONES, removing about five feet of nerves.

    Leave their fucking mark on you.

    I mean, the No Augmented People signs are rather… telling.

  40. LatwPIAT says:

    One of the things I notice is the notion that he claims Deus Ex was too slow. Heck no, Deus Ex was not “too slow” if I have any complaint, it’s that Deus Ex is a “tad bit too long.” The game was not too slow. Most areas had plenty of enemies, or interactivity of some sort. The game only becomes to slow if all you play for is the combat or want to play confrontational but build your character otherwise.

    As for regenerating health, the concept is great for games where the point only to have firefights, or the focus in on avoiding all forms of combat. (Such as portal) But in games where one of the primary play styles is stealth, it doesn’t work, because you’re not forced to focus on avoiding confrontations. You can take a risk, because it’s worth it.

    Additionally, Deus Ex always made the player focus on resource management, You couldn’t fit tons of weapons in your inventroy, so you had to choose. You could of course take both the flamethrower, the rocket launcher, the Assault Rifle, the Assault Shotgun, the Sniper Rifle and the Knife, but anyone who has played Deus Ex will notice I now have no room for Lockpicsk, Multitool, Medkits, the various forms of grenades or any form of food. Heck, I have to drop my Sniper Rifle just to complete various mission objectives. Alternativley, I could stock up on grenades, lockpicks, multitools, medkits, stealth camo, ballistics armor, a stun stick, a pack of cigarettes and a Stealth Pistol, but I now have no heavy weapons cappabilities. If I meet a Delta/3 sentry robot, I better hope my grenades bounce propperly, because right now I have no heavy firepower. (Unless I circle-strafe around with SABOT shells, but those are rare.)
    By removing these elements, the game doesn’t feel the same. Removing ammo types and inventory management has some interesting effects on Invisible War, and I doubt anyone wants a repetition of the mass-cancellation of pre-orders that game brought.

  41. get real says:

    For fans of DX, please get real. There is not allot that developer can do to bring the same enthusiasm players had for DX, not because they don’t know how to make the game, but because DX1 was something really revolutionary compared to other PC FPS games in that time. Askign them to achieve something similar in such of capable gaming industry today, is as asking the player if he would want to spend $150 on the copy of DX3…

    I think fans are really asking for something to bring the old feelings back, and not really looking into the game specifications objectively. In another words, most fans across web don’t know what they want the DX3 to do other then “mesmerize me”

    Certainly the DX2 was a dud in terms of game play, but that was clearly due to skinning the game engine down to the two thumbs controls. As long as DX3 is developed primarily for PC and not for console, the game has its potential regardless of trivial details about how some features were implemented in DX1.

  42. Ed says:

    RPS is amazing. Keep being amazing RPS

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>