BlackCapedManX on 13/12/2008 at 15:57
Quote Posted by Ostriig
It's a fact that, nowadays, tall buildings are an issue of efficient investment in certain areas of many developed cities around the world - there are parts of town where it's simply not cost effective to purchase an expensive piece of land and then not build a minimum of X levels on it.
Which I totally understand (currently living in NYC and all), but what baffles me, and what seems totally unbelievable is this "platform ground" thing they have going on. I get that buildings should be tall, and a lot of engineering has been going into the newest tallest buildings out there such that they can be even taller, but the idea that it's somehow prudent to build a veritable "raised earth" some 60 or so feet above the actually ground is just one hell of a stretch, and doesn't seem like something that's reasonable or possible.
Quote Posted by van HellSing
By the way, IRL, on the neighbouring island a self-supporting arcology is being built, the first phase scheduled to finish by 2010. While it looks nothing like the urban monstrosity of DX3 (It's supposed to be eco-friendly'n'shit), it's a unique urban/social experiment type of project.
See, I'd actually like to see this as an environment in the game. Or way better, something like the (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryugyong) Ryugyong Hotel (which would be a stupidly ballsy move on the part of whatever game designer decides to do so, because the thing is considered a monument of sin in North Korea, and they'd despise whoever made a game about it), something of an attempt to make this incredible, huge, really ambitious project, that because of circumstance or funding just happens to fall apart and when you get to it in the game it feels like a dilapitated abandoned. I mean think of Freeside and the Villa Straylight in Neuromancer, it's this big 'ole space station with the ultimate summer home built into it, and it's inhabited by rastafarians and the Villa Straylight just feels like this abandoned maze of neglect. I'd think a more realistic representation of an arcology would be actually interesting, because the game would let you explore something that's grounded in real life, and something that a lot of use westerners are probably never going to get a chance to see (one of my favorite things about DX was when I first went to Battery Park in real life, and I knew my way around... at that point DX exceded everything I could possibly want from a video game.) Alternatively, if you're going to introduce a massive tiered city thing, do it in a way where it's realized this is entirely unsustainable, so when the player arrives the whole thing is falling apart and the rich are barely clutching on to the few bastions of functionality that still remain.
Ostriig on 13/12/2008 at 19:49
Quote Posted by BlackCapedManX
Which I totally understand (currently living in NYC and all), but what baffles me, and what seems totally unbelievable is this "platform ground" thing they have going on. I get that buildings should be tall, and a lot of engineering has been going into the newest tallest buildings out there such that they can be even taller, but the idea that it's somehow prudent to build a veritable "raised earth" some 60 or so feet above the actually ground is just one hell of a stretch, and doesn't seem like something that's reasonable or possible.
First off, I'd like to make an observation - returning and paying a bit more attention to the Shanghai concepts, I'm now under the impression that this is not a city built on top of another, per se, but rather a city fielding an extensive number of massive, very tall buildings, that has had a number of high-up suspended passageways erected around them. I think this is easier to spot in (
http://images.gamestar.de/images/idgwpgsgp/bdb/1985580/122.jpg) the first image, especially with the large skyscraper near the middle, and makes sense in the context of the other.
Now, in reply to your post. For starters, I do think this new possibility of suspended passageways is considerably more reasonable than city-upon-city. Still, even if it remains not entirely easy to swallow, you have to consider that Denton's "my vision is augmented" implant doesn't make a lot of sense as a military development, either. I mean, seriously, high-power luminescent cells implanted in the iris? Why? You'd go directly for infrared or something, micro flashlight implants don't justify the effort. And let's not start on the technical veracity of the Ballistic Protection or Cloak augs. Bottom line is that, if you want to create interesting quasi-futuristic fiction, you have to make some allowances on the tech side.
BlackCapedManX on 13/12/2008 at 20:16
But ridiculously over the top sci on a human level is far more allowable (especially within the cyberpunk context) than that of a whole city. I mean, Gibson had Yakuza ninjas with mono-filament spools hidden in their thumbs to use as secret weapons, but as much as characters may go over the top, the environment should be as accessible and immediate as possible, so the player can understand the world that these ridiculous things are going on in. There may be any number of justifications for an a double tiered city, but the mere concept smacks of "fantasy" or sci-fi that has more to do with "look how awesome this is" than "look at what our world has become," the latter being the defining attribute of cyberpunk. If I wanted over the top obscure sci-fi cities I'd look to Mass Effect or Star Wars, but really good cyberpunk is few and far between.
Ostriig on 13/12/2008 at 20:45
I understand that, but I guess I just don't see the idea of this skyscraper city with suspended passageways as being so over the top. We have skyscrapers, and they're always getting bigger and bigger, and we have portions of motorway or railway that are suspended above other traffic ways already - these are just bigger, higher, and with more varied utilities. Given the horrendous traffic congestions in major cities around the world, it looks like a viable solution, if the funds are available. And granted, it may look like a very quick development for a period in time set just 20 years from now, but I don't find it that spectacular to give me pause.
BlackCapedManX on 13/12/2008 at 21:56
But from the looks of it, they don't seem a logical extension of motorways and the like because they don't connect via ramps or anything to the ground level, it's just a flat single level. If it were even a matrix of interspersed levels forming a kind of z-axis web, it would make much more sense (imagine a city as a singular unit, built of threads that move in any orientation) but this thing literally has what appears to be a second layer, a "ground above ground." I'm probably reading too much into it, but it looks like a barrier, or level of differentiation, and I hope I'm wrong, but the art doesn't really support that.
Ostriig on 13/12/2008 at 22:56
Point, but at the end of the day, it is just concept art, mate, it's quite possible that we're all reading too much into it. And if the past installments for this series alone are any indication, the end product will likely differ significantly from the early concepts. For what it's worth, I also hope Eidos Montreal manage to keep enough of a current-day familiar look on their world, but I'd also like to see some interesting developments.
BlackCapedManX on 14/12/2008 at 03:01
Totally agreed, but with what we're given we've got no other choice than to read too much into it, no? It's all good fun until we've got a final product and then we can discuss the actually merits or failings in more direct terms.
