EvaUnit02 on 10/11/2008 at 05:37
Quote Posted by redrain85
I noticed that the way Dugas described the third-person context switching, sounds a lot like V.A.T.S. from Fallout 3. Considering the DX3 team sent a cake to Bethesda as a message to show how much they "admired" their work, it sounds to me like they're going to use Fallout 3 as an inspiration. Whether that's good or bad, I don't know.
Hopefully they won't be inspired by FO3's god awful animation. I've seen first generation PS2 games that are light years better than Bethesda's piss poor efforts.
heywood on 10/11/2008 at 18:07
Quote:
Purists may also be alarmed to hear about the changes to the combat, now going for a straightforward approach to aiming, unimpeded by the statistically represented competencies of your character. “The shooting aspect of Deus Ex was very weak in my opinion,” says Dugas. “If you were precise it wasn’t necessarily because you were a good player, but because your stats were boosted.”
While you may think that being a good player might entail deciding which stats to boost, Dugas does make a fair point regarding the degree with which this frustrated your intentions: we remember quite a few galling instances when JC Denton, a trained anti-terrorism agent and burgeoning superhuman, would miss at near point-blank range thanks to an overt deference to the numbers.
Nonetheless, Dugas says that the ability to hone your play-style remains in the ability to upgrade the guns, and yourself, through augmentations, supporting the moment-to-moment decisions between combat, stealth, hacking or social.
Sounds like a skills system is out.
Quote:
[Dugas]“In the first game, the augmentations were a bunch of stat-boosters. They’d make you stronger perhaps, but not much would change on the screen – it was subtle and not very rewarding. That’s something we wanted to change a bit. Obviously there will be augmentations that are cerebral and less spectacular – but we’ll have a lot of physical augmentations that will allow you to pull off tricks that no ordinary human could. For those sequences we’ll switch contextually to a thirdperson camera view so you’ll see clearly what your character is able to achieve.”
Oh great, so they're going to break the immersion in order to show off the fancy animations they come up with.
I was not a huge fan of the plasmids in Bioshock which were more about showing off effects than giving you gameplay choices. But at least they were still first person. This quote makes it sound like DX3 augs are going to be like plasmids rendered 3rd person.
If that plus weapon upgrades are the only forms of character development in the game, it's no more action/RPG than Bioshock was.
Quote:
In keeping with this increased blockbuster bent, Eidos Montreal is adding boss fights and creating a greater variation in pace, citing Deus Ex as ‘kind of slow’. “There weren’t enough exciting, memorable moments,” says Dugas. “It was aimed more towards a simulation rather than a game experience.”
Now that I've seen the article, I don't see why Kieron Gillen thinks the quote used in the teaser was taken out of context. If anything, reading the quote in context makes it sound even worse!
And I wonder what they have in mind re: boss fights. In DX and IW, the boss fights were with the other augmented agents. If Dugas says they're "adding" boss fights, I guess that means something different.
Quote:
The team at Eidos Montreal certainly knows the previous games well, and has a healthily critical attitude to them; far from being sacrilegious, reassessing the value of such a hallowed title provides an essential perspective that might otherwise be stymied in nostalgia.
I dunno. Their critical attitude doesn't seem very healthy to me.
I hate to say it, but this game is starting to sound more and more like Bioshock only less ambitious.
Silkworm on 10/11/2008 at 18:22
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Hopefully they won't be inspired by FO3's god awful animation.
..as opposed to being impressed by Deus Ex's animation? That, along with AI was one of the game's really serious weakpoints.
EDIT: Heywood hit the nail right on the head, this is exactly like BioShock, only without the ambition and excitement. Just as in SS2, the skills system is being destroyed along with the apparent simplification of ... everything else. Still, I'm not totally pessimistic, especially since the skills system wasn't a major factor in Deus Ex. Perhaps there's something good about Eidos' honesty (as opposed to the blatant denial and dishonesty in the early interviews/articles on BioShock).
And yeah, Kieron Gillen was totally wrong, as he usually is.
The_Raven on 10/11/2008 at 18:57
Rename the game as Project Snowblind 2, please.
I can see the bullet points on the box now:
* Super Awesoma Boss Fights tm
* FPS/RPG Without the RPG
* Pointless Third Person Quicktime Events
* Replace Your Hands with Guns, Hurrrr
* From the Makers of Far Cry Instincts
NOTE: I'm a pessimist by nature, and given the state of the union these days, probably a good thing to be from the sounds of it
d'Spair on 10/11/2008 at 19:42
hey stop guys
is it just me or does it really sound sorta ridiculous:
BOSS FIGHTS IN DEUS EX???
now i'm properly excited about this game of no doubt
van HellSing on 10/11/2008 at 19:55
There were boss fights in Deus Ex, so why wouldn't there be boss fights in Deus Ex 3?
d'Spair on 10/11/2008 at 20:14
I would call it anything but boss fights
van HellSing on 10/11/2008 at 20:25
Let's see... fights with unique characters, who are more resilient than the usual cannon fodder and have some of the best weapons in the game, also special abilities. You usually fight them one-on-one, in set pieces.
No, not boss fights at all.
van HellSing on 10/11/2008 at 21:37
The first encounter with Revolver Ocelot in Metal Gear Solid is a critically important meeting with one of the key characters in a sealth/action game. Which, unfortunately, ultimately ends up as a bloody mess, but this is a script requirement.
Finding the monstrous Melchiah in Soul Reaver is a critically important meeting with one of the key characters in an action/adventure game. Which, unfortunately, ultimately ends up as a bloody mess, but this is a script requirement.
Etc.
Doesn't mean they're not bosses.
As for your Thief examples, the Haunt is not a boss since it's not unique. Unique to that level, yes, but not to the game. Cavador is also not a boss. You don't fight him, do you?
