Cutter wrote on Apr 30, 2011, 23:17:
If you know anything about the genre it doesn't take much to realize this is going to be a 300 million dollar failure.

Jerykk wrote on Apr 23, 2011, 02:49:
If they add regenerating health, I'll riot.

Overon wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 16:46:
I want specifics. Can a developer please say something like this:
"We are completely changing the size of GUI and menus for the PC version because when playing on a PC these elements can be smaller since people sit close to their monitors."

Not this vague shit that they constantly spew out whenever the question is asked.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 16:49:

This complete quote is the biggest rubbish of the week because what you obviously failed to remember while writing that post (or there's something wrong in your head) is that Deus Ex is not a 2010 game.. but a 2000 game. Yes, indeed, it's 10 years old, dude!

Now that I reminded you of that little though important fact, you have to agree that more than just the story was GOOD about Deus Ex.

I'm not gonna waste my time typing down the obvious list.

*scoffs once more at the ridiculous post*

DangerDog wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 14:31:
It won't have a real inventory system, not like the first one. It'll be a PC game the same way Bioshock was to System Shock II.

/console port

Cutter wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 14:23:
Untill consoles drop controllers and move to the superior control of the mouse and keyboard they'll never converge. To say nothing of Sony and MS wanting to integrate social platforms like Facebook and such, the advantages all around of the keyboard and mouse far outweight controllers.

J wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 14:16:

NKD wrote on Sep 12, 2010, 13:56:
Oh boy, this'll be a good one.

You all act like the first game was a masterpiece of complexity. It wasn't. It had a skill system where most skills were useless. Many augmentations were also useless. Hacking consisted of "Hit hack and wait." The shooter portion of the game was woefully bad, and the melee takedowns were "whack an NSF soldier on the buttocks."

That's a lot of generalizations there. And "whack an NSF soldier on the buttocks"? Seriously, you aim for the head or you have to hit them an awful lot more. Or if you have the prod then you go for the lower back.

I contest that you, sir, are talking rubbish.

Jerykk wrote on Sep 11, 2010, 03:44:

A lot of money thats used to buy new games in fact comes from trade-ins of games which does fuel used game trade. It also helps customers buy those shiny new 60 dollar games.

Your logic has some holes in it:

1) The sale of the used game does not benefit the developer or publisher of that game.
2) If someone sells their games and is running tight on money, why would he or she buy shiny new $60 dollar games? It makes more sense to buy the $55 used games that Gamestop offers so readily.
3) Different developers make different games. Selling a used copy of Game A and then using that money to buy a new copy of Game B does not benefit the developer of Game A.

I don't really care about laws and such so I'm not defending this ruling. However, people really need to stop claiming that used sales help developers. They don't. The only people they help are consumers who want to save money.

Prez wrote on Sep 10, 2010, 16:10:
Buying or not buying does not send any message because it is always interpreted incorrectly.

necrosis wrote on Sep 10, 2010, 01:53:

Prez wrote on Sep 10, 2010, 00:47:
I'll just wait for the warez dudes to properly crack it before I buy it, like I did with AC2. How ironic that a sale is dependent on the work of filthy pirates!

And if you hate the DRM so much don't buy it!

Giving them your money says you are OK with the DRM even if you crack it after.