Deus Ex 3 Details

Computer and Video Games offers the promised (story) first detail on Deus Ex 3, as the shooter/RPG sequel is previewed in the 200th issue of print magazine PC Zone, which has begun reaching subscribers in advance of its release on newsstands this Thursday. The game is under construction at Eidos Montreal with Deus Ex writer Sheldon Pacotti consulting on the project, and while Harvey Smith and Warren Spector are not involved, word is it has their "blessing." According to the article, Eidos Montreal is aware of complaints about Deus Ex: Invisible War, promising to redress "mistakes" like ammo type limitations. On the other hand, changes are described that further depart from Deus Ex canon, and make the project sound more like Gears of War, including combat relying more on player aim than stats, a cover system for stealth (rather than skulking in shadows), and an auto-healing system for damage. Thanks Jonas.
View : : :
91.
 
Re: No subject
Oct 5, 2008, 19:03
91.
Re: No subject Oct 5, 2008, 19:03
Oct 5, 2008, 19:03
 
Also, theres a difference between "streamlining" and "removing options". True, the interface was streamlined for consoles into a semi-circular menu but why is that bad? Are you actually saying it made more sense to have to stop and bring up a screen-sized box menu?

Uh, are you actually arguing that DX2's interface was better than DX1's? DX1's interface was perfect. It gave detailed, easily accessible information. Inventory management was a breeze. DX2's interface was bloated, didn't provide detailed information and inventory management was clunky and inefficient.

Streamlining = removing redundancy and inefficiency. DX2's interface didn't remove redundancy or inefficiency... it added them.

Here's a good example of streamlining an interface: In Arcanum, if you wanted to check out your companions' stats or inventory, you had to do it manually by clicking on them. However, once you were inside their stat or inventory screen, you could click on little arrows to cycle through the other companions. These arrows only appeared when you brought up a companion's screen though. If this were streamlined, you could just bring up your own stat/inventory screen, then click on the little arrows to cycle through your companions. That = streamlined functionality.

Here's another example in Arcanum yet again: The inventory uses a grid to place your items. If you try to place an item but don't have spots available in the shape of the item, you won't be able to put the item in. You'll have to manually rearrange your items first and open up the spots needed. If this were streamlined, there would be an auto-arrange option, where items automatically relocate to free up space for new items. Again, streamlining is supposed to remove inefficiency and redundancy, not functionality or detail.

Oh, you want another wonderful example, eh? Okay! System Shock 2 had a terrible interface. There were only two ways to use items: Use the hotkey or manually bring up the inventory and use the item there. Many items did not have hotkeys assigned to them. Also, the game did not pause when you brought up the inventory. Therefore, if you wanted to use certain items in the heat of battle, you'd have to bring up the inventory, essentially blinding you while you run around trying not to die. If this were streamlined, they would have used the same quick inventory bar as DX1. You'd have a row of 10 slots into which you could place any item or Psi power. Pressing the respective number key would use that item or power. Voila, streamlined interface goodness.

Avatar 20715
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
86.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
87.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
88.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
   Dorf Fort
2.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
16.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
18.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
  GITS
3.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
4.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
26.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
5.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
6.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
7.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
10.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
12.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
13.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
15.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
8.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
11.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
9.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
14.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
17.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
19.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
20.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
21.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
23.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
24.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
27.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
   Re: Ugh
25.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
22.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
29.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
31.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
32.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
33.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
34.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
37.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
28.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
30.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
35.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
36.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
38.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
39.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
43.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
40.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
41.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
42.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
44.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
46.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
47.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
48.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
   Re: True
49.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
   Re: True
50.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
    Re: True
51.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
     Re: True
52.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
      Re: True
53.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
       Re: True
54.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
        Re: True
45.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
55.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
56.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
57.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
58.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
59.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
60.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
62.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
64.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
     Re: No subject
66.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
      Re: No subject
67.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
       Re: No subject
68.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
        Re: No subject
69.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
      Re: No subject
70.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
       Re: No subject
71.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
        Re: No subject
89.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
       Re: No subject
90.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
        Re: No subject
61.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
63.
Oct 4, 2008Oct 4 2008
65.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
72.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
73.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
77.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
78.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
74.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
124.
Oct 13, 2008Oct 13 2008
75.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
76.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
79.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
80.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
83.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
 91.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
 Re: No subject
81.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
92.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
93.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
94.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
   Re: ...
95.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
    Re: ...
101.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
     Re: ...
102.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
      Re: ...
103.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
       Re: ...
104.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
        Re: ...
105.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
         Re: ...
106.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
          Re: ...
107.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
           Re: ...
109.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
            Re: ...
108.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
           Re: ...
110.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
            Re: ...
111.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
             Re: ...
116.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
             Re: ...
117.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008
              Re: ...
118.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008
               Re: ...
82.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
84.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
85.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
96.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
97.
Oct 5, 2008Oct 5 2008
98.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
99.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
   Re: Hmmmm
100.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
    Re: Hmmmm
112.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
113.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
114.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
115.
Oct 6, 2008Oct 6 2008
119.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008
120.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008
121.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008
122.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008
123.
Oct 7, 2008Oct 7 2008