TheDorkProject on 24/11/2003 at 23:13
There seems to be a widely accepted assumption around here, and other forums... that it is somehow really unrealistic, stupid, and naieve to expect new entries in a series to basically just be the same game, with better graphics and a new story.
Why is this an unreasonable assumption? what is wrong with wanting this?
Shouldn't that be the NATURAL assumption? That's what we've gotten with many games, and it's always a good thing. That's what Half-Life 2 is looking to be.
Same basic game, better graphics... new story...
Improvements are great! sure! innovation! yea! Nobody is saying "don't innovate! don't improve!"
but these innovations and improvements need to be built upon the existing success of the previous game, they need to use the previous game as a framework.
And improvements and innovations are almost always going to be in the form of ADDITIONAL THINGS, not REMOVING STUFF that was in the previous game!
So, I'm about tired of hearing people say "oh my god, you expected Deus Ex with better graphics?" because there is nothing wrong with having expected that, and there would be nothing wrong with that game either! it would rule!
And i'm also tired of having console-inspired dumbing-down be shoved down my throat under the guise of improvement! I'm tired of being TOLD that I didn't like the length of Deus Ex (supposedly it was too long?) or the size of the levels (supposedly they were too big?) or the inventory (supposedly it was confusing or something?)
I want to be optimistic, and I do like the DX2 demo in some ways... but I refuse to be blindly optimistic, and I refuse to put dev-ass-kissing above standing up for ourselves as consumers.
Hidden_7 on 25/11/2003 at 00:56
My favorite is how we never used leaning. Did you guys use leaning? I'm pretty sure I did, but I dunno, my memory is pretty fuzzy, I seem to recall liking the skill system and the epic length of the game, but apparntly I hated that so I could be wrong about this leaning thing too.
Blackjack on 25/11/2003 at 01:14
Yeah, DX was waaay too long. If I can't finish a game in a single weekend I get bored. WTF?
What makes me both angry and amazed about the demo is that all of the cool but supposedly 'unnecessary' stuff from DX1 that they've removed could simply have been left in, with an option to simplify in the menu for dumb twits who can't cope with its oh so complicated drag-and-drop system and keyboard commands. Keypads, lockpicks, ATMs, reloading: they could all have been tick-boxes in the menu. Even the dumbass unified ammo system could have been optionally achieved by aggregating all of the different ammos in the game and dividing by a limiting factor. However, putting them all back at the final dev stage is impossible. It's a one-way ticket to gaming mediocrity.
Someone at IS is a fuckwit, and I want their scalp! :ebil:
TheDorkProject on 25/11/2003 at 02:17
Well I won't lie, I've never really used leaning in any game that has offered it.
I mean, just a little bit... but I always like games that offer it, I like knowing it's there.
And mainly I don't use it so much because I don't conduct myself in a very stealthy way most of the time.
I'm a big fan of Deus Ex, Thief series, and System Shock 2... but I probably don't really deserve to be. I guess I am saying that even for those of us who don't necessarily take advantage of all those things, knowing that they are there makes the game so much more immersive and cool!
Azal on 25/11/2003 at 03:20
Quote:
Originally posted by Blackjack What makes me both angry and amazed about the demo is that all of the cool but supposedly 'unnecessary' stuff from DX1 that they've removed could simply have been left in, with an option to simplify in the menu for dumb twits who can't cope with its oh so complicated drag-and-drop system and keyboard commands....
When even Microsoft, ffs, gives option to configure their stuff like previous version, it can't be that hard to implement.
Nethawk on 25/11/2003 at 06:01
Regarding the "lean" function, I've used it extensively (Morrowind, ghost recon rainbow six, system shock, etc etc).
Shadowcat on 25/11/2003 at 06:18
Quote:
Originally posted by Blackjack What makes me both angry and amazed about the demo is that all of the cool but supposedly 'unnecessary' stuff from DX1 that they've removed could simply have been left in, with an option to simplify in the menu
Agreed. For a lot of those things, if the game supported it then they just needed to have the appropriate options switched off (and inaccessible to the user) for the X-Box build, and they automatically get their simplified behaviour for the X-Box version (I'm also presuming that much of this is indeed due to the controller) without needing to fork the code.
Renzatic on 25/11/2003 at 06:40
Here's the worst thing about it...
If DX2 and Thief 3 sell better for the Xbox than they do the PC then guess what platform ISA is gonna develop their next game for?
While the game isn't horrible (I know I keep saying that, but to me it's not) the controls pretty much are cuz they don't fit with the proper PC scheme we're all so used to. Hopefully when their next group of games come out they'll ditch the unified architecture that DX2 used and spend more time with each specific platform. Designing and implementing 2 different interfaces for one game can't be all that time consuming once they come up with a good template.
Morte on 25/11/2003 at 07:30
Quote:
Originally posted by TheDorkProject That's what we've gotten with many games, and it's always a good thing.
I'd have to disagree. The last thing the gaming scene needs is *more* by the numbers sequels. Tomb Raider anyone? How Deus Ex did it is how franchises should work imho. Keep the very basic elements and experiment madly with the rest.
How well it paid off is something I won't comment on (since I can't get the bastard demo to run), but It's nice to see them try.
TreeTrunk on 26/11/2003 at 01:32
Don't listen to the skull! He lies!
Just kidding, Morte.
I enjoyed the demo well enough. I look forward to the story with its moral dilemmas.
Yes, the demo reveales some limitations, and unfortunately, some engine flakiness that does not bode well for Thief III.
I hope that Ion Storm finds a way to make marketable, intelligent games. That would be a win for us all. We know they can't do that following the path of Looking Glass. I don't want Ion Storm to end up a footnote on this web site.
