Deus Ex 3 Confirmed

Eidos Montreal Website now offers a teaser trailer for Deus Ex 3 (thanks nin), an upcoming installment in the action/RPG series that was hinted at earlier this year (story) but never actually confirmed, though its existence was supported by a report about an earlier DX3 prototype which got cancelled (story). The teaser is true to its teasing nature by being a bit vague, with no hints at platforms or release dates. It does offer some sci-fi footage with an existential voice-over: "For centuries, man has struggled to understand his true nature. What is it that makes us who we are? Soon one answer will override all others." This is culminates a caption reading: "Who we are is but a stepping stone to what we can become."
View : : :
80 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older
80.
 
Re: DX1
Dec 2, 2007, 11:16
80.
Re: DX1 Dec 2, 2007, 11:16
Dec 2, 2007, 11:16
 
DX1 went on the PS2 and some consider it the best playing version (most of the bugs from the PC were fixed and it even supported USB keyboard and mouse).

Actually, it wasn a very good port, all in all. If you can manage to track down a copy of it you won't be disappointed.

For the particulars who justified their hatred for DX: IW because of the inane belief that Deus Ex should be a PC-exclusive, they should consider DX's port to the PS2 and realize DX: IW simply wasn't a proper sequel period, no matter what platform it was released on.

I'm not so entrenched in RPG/Shooter tradition that I can't accept something like Unified Ammo. Some people think that RPGs must include inventory management to be "true" RPGs, and I disagree.

I'm not "entrenched" on this opinion, either. I don't think it was necessarily a stupid design decision, but it was certainly the wrong one made for the game. It's always been my opinion that part of the love for Deus Ex was the insane amount of detail included in the game. It was also something that in post-release interviews with Harvey Smith stated he thought the game should have about a 2/3 the length it was at release.

2) It is entirely possible that Harvey Smith is a complete hack who can't design his way out of a paper bag. That said he was the Lead Fucking Designer of DX1...

Yes, but let's not kid ourselves here - he still worked under the direction of Warren Specter, who was the project director for Deus Ex. You can easily read in any number of interviews done with Ion over Deus Ex: IW that there were obvious changes to be made to the gameplay, most of the "streamlining" that was being done was more or less at the direction of Harvey Smith, who was then the project director for that game. The rather dubious design decisions in IW were done when Smith was at the helm and are in stark contrast to what Specter implemented in DX.

You can even read in the same interviews with Specter that he didn't necessarily agree with some of Smith's approaches to implementing certain design aspects (particularly the unified ammo).


This comment was edited on Dec 7, 09:27.
79.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 29, 2007, 23:10
nin
79.
Re: No subject Nov 29, 2007, 23:10
Nov 29, 2007, 23:10
nin
 

Heh... Thanks for the chuckle, Prez.

------------------------------------------------
http://niggytardust.com/saulwilliams/menu
78.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 29, 2007, 19:01
Prez
 
78.
Re: No subject Nov 29, 2007, 19:01
Nov 29, 2007, 19:01
 Prez
 
I'm so excited!
And I just can't hide it!
I'm gonna play Deus Ex 3
And I hope I like it!
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Avatar 17185
77.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 29, 2007, 11:42
77.
Re: No subject Nov 29, 2007, 11:42
Nov 29, 2007, 11:42
 
My main gripe with DX2 is something with the game got corrupt on my PC, either my save or the level (even after re-installs). I'd get part way through the last (or 2nd to last) level and the thing would die. I never did finish that thing.
Something similar happened to me with Fallout. On both occasions that I got to the end of the game, I ran into a game-stopping bug, and then discovered that I didn't have previous saves to go back to. Unfortunately, the second time I got to the end, I had forgotten about the bug, and I ran into it again. So I've never finished the "People's Choice Best RPG ever".

You're not missing much with DX2's ending. It was a weak point of the game, in my opinion.

This comment was edited on Nov 29, 11:44.
76.
 
Re: At least
Nov 29, 2007, 11:39
76.
Re: At least Nov 29, 2007, 11:39
Nov 29, 2007, 11:39
 
I don't know about the rest of you, but those screenshots are of a game I really would've liked playing.
I agree. The Egyptian-looking level is particularly interesting.

Every time people complain about DX2, they bring up "Unified Ammo". I'm not so entrenched in RPG/Shooter tradition that I can't accept something like Unified Ammo. Some people think that RPGs must include inventory management to be "true" RPGs, and I disagree. Yes, it's nice to have that level of customization, but it's not required for a RPG. To be honest, the elitism of hardcore RPG fans sickens me. Once you start down this path, NMA-level arrogance and elitism is not far off.
And people wonder why hardcore gamers are being marginalized and ignored when sequels are made.

Anyway, instead of focusing on minor gameplay mechanics, why don't we consider factors that actually reduced the "role playing" of the game? Things like small maps had a far bigger impact on gameplay than Unified Ammo.


This comment was edited on Nov 29, 11:43.
75.
 
Re: At least
Nov 28, 2007, 21:07
75.
Re: At least Nov 28, 2007, 21:07
Nov 28, 2007, 21:07
 
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117877

About half way down this thread there is a post containing screenshots from around 2002. You can see that much bigger and more complex levels were initially planned for IW before the technology problems came up. Had the technology side of development gone better we could've seen levels like these, fixing one of IW's biggest problems: the miniscule and extremely simple levels. I don't know about the rest of you, but those screenshots are of a game I really would've liked playing.
This comment was edited on Nov 28, 21:07.
74.
 
Re: At least
Nov 28, 2007, 20:33
74.
Re: At least Nov 28, 2007, 20:33
Nov 28, 2007, 20:33
 
I'm sure it's again the fault of the publisher who messed up his development cycle and all the other bullshit that Harvey's defenders keep throwing up as excuses.

I'm assuming your directing this at me.

1) I've never said that Harvey Smith's approach to designing IW was guaranteed to be a smashing success. Just that I think it might have worked out had the technology end of the development cycle not gone to hell.

2) It is entirely possible that Harvey Smith is a complete hack who can't design his way out of a paper bag. That said he was the Lead Fucking Designer of DX1, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

3)I know nothing about A51 or its development other than that it sucks. That said Midway does have a terrible reputation when it comes to working with developers...

73.
 
At least
Nov 28, 2007, 20:12
73.
At least Nov 28, 2007, 20:12
Nov 28, 2007, 20:12
 
Harvey Fucking Smith won't be involved. Funny how his next game, Area51, sucks ass too. I'm sure it's again the fault of the publisher who messed up his development cycle and all the other bullshit that Harvey's defenders keep throwing up as excuses.

This will be a blatant console shooter with some plasmids upgrades thrown in, no semblance of choice and probably a pisspoor storyline since Warren won't be involved, and he basically invented the whole universe to begin with.

That said, I'm still marginally excited.

Now, I'm going back to Mass Effect.

Creston

This comment was edited on Nov 28, 20:13.
Avatar 15604
72.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 28, 2007, 14:32
72.
Re: No subject Nov 28, 2007, 14:32
Nov 28, 2007, 14:32
 
In retrospect, has anyone noticed the striking similarities between Bioshock & Invistiblibble War?

In some ways DX2 was to Des Ex as BioShock is to System Shock 2. Only, in my opinion BioShock managed to still be great with DX2 was only average.

I thought DX2 was an *alright* game, if you look at it as its own game and not compare it with the classic Deus Ex. DX2 wasn't spectacular, but it was average FPS suffering from consolitis.

My main gripe with DX2 is something with the game got corrupt on my PC, either my save or the level (even after re-installs). I'd get part way through the last (or 2nd to last) level and the thing would die. I never did finish that thing.

On the other hand, I thought BioShock was mad fun. The "splicers" weren't that original or threatening once you amped up, but it was still a blast.


This comment was edited on Nov 28, 14:33.
"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you."
-Fry, Futurama
71.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 28, 2007, 12:00
nin
71.
Re: No subject Nov 28, 2007, 12:00
Nov 28, 2007, 12:00
nin
 

Bioshock was a fucking blast...

------------------------------------------------
http://niggytardust.com/saulwilliams/menu
70.
 
No subject
Nov 28, 2007, 11:31
70.
No subject Nov 28, 2007, 11:31
Nov 28, 2007, 11:31
 
In retrospect, has anyone noticed the striking similarities between Bioshock & Invistiblibble War?

  • Dumbed down interface that focuses on what amounts to power-ups rather than true RPG skills & progression. - CHECK
  • Faux-RPG progression, giving the impression of choice when it's really just a linear stroll to the finish - CHECK
  • A overhyped follow-up to a previous gem of a game that totally failed to live up to a large deal of its hype - CHECK
  • A large portion of the game being focused on shooting, as opposed to what makes an RPG good - character progression - CHECK
  • A clear limitation on the ability to make your character your own - CHECK

Avatar 23755
69.
 
Re: Needs a Neverwinter-style toolset!
Nov 28, 2007, 02:16
69.
Re: Needs a Neverwinter-style toolset! Nov 28, 2007, 02:16
Nov 28, 2007, 02:16
 
thanks

68.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 27, 2007, 20:25
68.
Re: No subject Nov 27, 2007, 20:25
Nov 27, 2007, 20:25
 
The only reason I brought this up is because I think Harvey Smith was, in general, on the right track.

I don't. Getting rid of the skill system was a bad choice. Unified ammo was a bad choice. It doesn't matter how polished a game is if it consists of poor design choices.

You mean kinda like Fallout 3?

Sure, if Bethesda removes the whole skill system and makes all the weapons use only one type of ammo.

Avatar 20715
67.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 27, 2007, 19:52
67.
Re: No subject Nov 27, 2007, 19:52
Nov 27, 2007, 19:52
 
Thanks for the mini DX2 post postmortem. I appreciate it.

Avatar 9030
66.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 27, 2007, 12:56
66.
Re: No subject Nov 27, 2007, 12:56
Nov 27, 2007, 12:56
 
If by "fleshed out" you mean "dumbed down," I agree.

As you often do, you kinda missed my point there, Jerykk. The point is that the FUBAR'd development cycle ensured that nothing we saw in IW was implemented as it was intended. I agree that, as implemented, IW was a dumbed down version of DX. Again, my point is that, had development gone smoothly, a lot of the design decisions that look stupid to us now may have actually been implemented properly and we wouldn't think they were quite so stupid.

The only reason I brought this up is because I think Harvey Smith was, in general, on the right track. If you read any DX post mortem the devs will talk about how the DX "magic" came about essentially by accident. They really weren't sure how the game was going to work, and they had added gameplay elements without any coherent vision. With IW they wanted to correct that. I say that I think Smith was on the right track because this is the same approach that Looking Glass took with Thief 2. Again, read the post mortem's for Thief and you discover that the game really didn't become "fun" until the last 6 months of development. LGS had not been sure how best to implement the stealth gameplay they were going for. That it was why you see levels like Down in the Bonehoard and The Lost City, levels that would seem more appropriate in a Tomb Raider game. In Thief 2 however, they built the game around what worked: sneaking around mansions and the like. Thief 2's story wasn't as good as the first, but the gameplay was a very solid improvement. Maybe had development gone better IW would have been a similar improvement over DX.

If they dumb it down for the filthy masses, it'll be crap.

You mean kinda like Fallout 3?

65.
 
Re: The real question
Nov 27, 2007, 12:03
65.
Re: The real question Nov 27, 2007, 12:03
Nov 27, 2007, 12:03
 
Deus XBox 360, w00t!

64.
 
Re: The real question
Nov 27, 2007, 10:00
64.
Re: The real question Nov 27, 2007, 10:00
Nov 27, 2007, 10:00
 
At least its called DX3. The first sign IW was a flop was them not calling it DX2 (as to not confound the brainless xbox players, "What??? Where's DX1???")
I'm sure that will change before the game comes out. The fad of not numbering sequels hasn't left us yet, I'm afraid.

This could turn out okay, as far as I'm concerned. I doubt it will measure up to DX1, but as long as it's better than DX2, I'll enjoy it. DX2 wasn't a bad game, but it wasn't nearly as good as DX1. Some "dumbing down" is inevitable in this game, but that won't necessarily kill it. Of course, some die hard RPGers have already decided it's going to suck (just like the Fallout fanboys did with F3). Nothing would make them happy anyway, so I guess this game is only going to appeal to us less rabid fans.

63.
 
No subject
Nov 27, 2007, 06:07
63.
No subject Nov 27, 2007, 06:07
Nov 27, 2007, 06:07
 
Thats the thing, when you make a game, you select a target audience, and create your game around that group of individuals. What they are trying to do now, and with IW, is to create a game for everyone. Its this basic flaw in their thinking that leads to all these diluted crap games that we get, lets not focus on making a great game for this group of gamers, lets make a mediocre game that can appeal to anyone.

62.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 27, 2007, 02:51
62.
Re: No subject Nov 27, 2007, 02:51
Nov 27, 2007, 02:51
 
So even had development gone extremely smoothly we would have likely still seen a simpler game, albeit one that was much more polished and fleshed out.

If by "fleshed out" you mean "dumbed down," I agree. Cutting the whole stat system out of the game basically killed the RPG aspects of the game. Then you had unified ammo. And limited weapon upgrades. In DX1, you could take a weapon and then continually apply upgrades throughout the course of the game, making it a superweapon. In DX2, you could only have two weapon modifications at a time. The level design of DX1 also promoted emergent gameplay, whereas the level design of DX2 was very limited and basically limited your choices to vents or bribes.

If they want DX3 to be good, they just need to improve the AI and combat of DX1 while retaining everything else. If they dumb it down for the filthy masses, it'll be crap.

Avatar 20715
61.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 27, 2007, 00:33
61.
Re: No subject Nov 27, 2007, 00:33
Nov 27, 2007, 00:33
 
As a huge fan of DX1 I'd love to hear more about this Eidos meddling. I was really surprised that Witchboy changed the basic game structure for DX2 so much...maybe this explains why.

Here's the basic outline: the success of Deus Ex 1 came as a huge surprise both to Ion Storm and to Eidos. Eidos naturally wanted to capitalize on this success and the planned DX sequel was suddenly of a lot more interest to Eidos.

Initially, DX2 was planned to be an Unreal Warfare Engine (UT1 Engine) game and there was about a years worth of work towards that end. Eidos however wanted another AAA bestseller and became concerned that the, by that time, dated graphics would limit the games appeal. Eidos wanted Ion Storm to do a complete tech overall so that it could have next-gen graphics on par with the then upcoming Doom 3 and Half-Life 2. That meant extending the development time, and the projects budget, so Eidos also demanded that the game became multi-platform in order to boost sales. Ion then went about rewriting the game engine, and scrapping a whole bunch of work that was Unreal Warfare engine specific.

Despite the major changes that Eidos imposed from above, development went along fairly smoothly for another year. It was around this time that DX2 had the great E3 demo that won so many awards. Shortly there after however, it became apparent that there were major problems with the technology that Ion Storm had built specifically for DX2. Among a myriad of other issues, the biggest problem was that there was that there was no way to get acceptable performance with the engine, particularly on the XBOX. Ion Storm petitioned Eidos for more time to rework the engine, which Eidos denied and instead Eidos sent in outside producers to get the project back on track.

The result was a release date the wasn't moving and a game that was simply broken. Ion's response was to start cutting features and content in an effort to trim the game down into something that they could polish into a semi-releasable state. The result was Invisible War.

As for some of the design decisions, such as getting rid of skill points in favor of more fleshed out aug system, we still would have seen them. The basic approach Smith had taken with the sequel was to try to figure out what gameplay elements made Deus Ex such an incredible game, then to expand upon and polish the hell out of those, and get rid of all the extraneous stuff. So even had development gone extremely smoothly we would have likely still seen a simpler game, albeit one that was much more polished and fleshed out. Whether that would have worked out or not is hard to say. As it is, I think it's a little unfair to judge Harvey Smith's design approach either positively or negatively since basically nothing in IW was implemented as intended, but rather implemented in a way that is merely semi-releasable.

80 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older