SubJeff on 3/12/2007 at 04:25
These suits are going to come on in leaps and bounds, no pun intended. Seriously, in 20 years time or less you'll be able to get them as easily as a scooter.
Papy on 3/12/2007 at 15:14
Quote Posted by failure2comply
"Augumented people enter from the back" LOL - that has so many double entendres!
If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around, does it make a sound?
(Think about it)
(Edit : and before someone say this is not what the saying is about on a philosophical level, yes I know.)
Joben on 3/12/2007 at 23:10
The concepts that the plot of Deus Ex danced around were sudtle. My biggest complaint about IW is that what philosophical content it had felt (a) tacked on and was (b) pounded into your skull with all the sudtlety of a KKK rally...
...which lets me segway neatly into my worry about DX3.
The whole discimination against modified humans angle.
It's a horrible concept!
First off it's implausible. It's just not gona happen on a wide scale.
Secondly it's ripping off X-men which is a, literaly, comic book level plagery of the history of racial injustice in the United States. It's one of the most un-sudtle, boring, beat to death subjects ever.
So great job there, you take a series that started off quoting G.K. Chesterton, Thomas Aquinas and discussing the low level social forces behind government and religion and dumb it down to the 4th grade level.
They'll probably toss excerpts from "I Have A Dream" onto the books scattered around the levels and expect us to believe they have produced social commentary. Racism is bad, we get it.
Seriously, don't give us crap you came up with on your lunch break. Come back when you hire a real writer.
ZylonBane on 4/12/2007 at 00:47
Quote Posted by Joben
Secondly it's ripping off X-men which is a, literaly, comic book level plagery of the history of racial injustice in the United States.
It most certainly is not, comic book spaz.
In X-Men, being a mutant is something you're born into. That's what makes it a commentary on racism.
In the DX universe, on the other hand, augs are something that people choose. Those who can afford them, get them. This makes the theme not racism, but rather,
class struggle. Haves vs have-nots.
The only thing augmentees and mutants have in common (and granted, this is significant) is that the social stigma of physical difference is combined with genuine physical and/or mental superiority. DX3 would be wise not to overly emphasize this angle, precisely because it would invite unwarranted comparisons to X-Men.
D'Juhn Keep on 4/12/2007 at 02:12
Quote Posted by Joben
Seriously, don't give us crap you came up with on your lunch break. Come back when you hire a real writer.
You're getting very worked up considering we've only seen one very early trailer :)
Joben on 4/12/2007 at 02:53
*nods to Zylon* Touche, thats a good point on class struggle. Maybe the concept is redemable.
However quibbles aside you do agree that prejudice against transhumans is already well worked ground. :ebil:
Hence my worry about it being included in the teaser.
D'Juhn Keep lol no I'm not particularly worked up.
The_Raven on 4/12/2007 at 04:20
(
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3164708) New interview.
Highlights:
Quote:
D'Astous: Without going into specifics, what we've done the past several months with both games is read a lot of archives about how it was perceived. There's obvious features that we definitely want to continue.
I think the dialogue, choice versus consequences, the depth and richness of the game is something that we will certainly conserve. There are other more specific features that we want to keep...That's why we're working on a schedule that we're trying to respect as much as possible, but definitely the game will not be published until it has obtained a certain level of quality according to us...The success of the first game lies in that it was very well-done. The storyline was well-built. We're going to be working hard to have a solid and in-depth storyline that will give players the chance to replay.
The replayability is also very important.Very generic responses, but it doesn't seem
too bad.
Quote:
D'Astous: And just one more example of how we're trying to be transparent: this Saturday in Montreal, we're opening our doors to do an Open House. We're inviting the public, the families of the employees, and even the competition to come walk through our studios and see what we're all about. In the future, if there are some fans that would like to come down to Montreal for whatever reason and go through our studio, it would be our pleasure to organize something. We really want to work closely, not behind closed doors.
Am I the only one who can see headlines like "Montreal forum members storm studio, harass employees, and steal all the dry erase markers." :p
It also mentions in the interview that the next press-release will probably be next year, during the summer months.
Papy on 4/12/2007 at 16:25
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
In the DX universe, on the other hand, augs are something that people choose. Those who can afford them, get them. This makes the theme not racism, but rather,
class struggle. Haves vs have-nots.
Both with Deus Ex and Invisible War, things were not that simple. To me, ideology about what is human nature was more important than some "class struggle", at least as far as modifications are concerned.
When the two terrorists talk about Gunther, it feels to me it's more about ideology than a mere question of money. Same thing for the Templars of Invisible War. The different comments about the Omars from the game also show that modification is not a simple question of "haves vs have-nots".
I will agree some comments clearly showed biomodifications had values, but most of the time it was from people who were already modified in the first place. I don't remember a lot of comments from "ordinary" people saying they wish they could have money to have those modifications.
Of course, class struggle was one of the important point of the story of both Deus Ex and Invisible War. With Deus Ex it was mainly visible with the gray death, while with Invisible War it was mainly with arcologies. Modifications were not really related to this class struggle. It was only viewed as a way to end class struggle with Invisible War, but not what people were fighting for.
Having said that, the class struggle is an interesting point of view that is rarely done in games, at least not in a prominent way. But the question now is : if the player is supposed to be one of those "haves", how would you implement the concept of moral choices you were talking about? In the case of BioShock, the moral choice was : would you kill people to take their resources. Is that what you imply? Do you have something else in mind?
Edit : Wow, wow, wow!!! I just noticed the "this Saturday in Montreal, we're opening our doors to do an Open House. We're inviting the public, the families of the employees, and even the competition to come walk through our studios and see what we're all about". Holy shit! What Saturday are they talking about? If it's December 8th... I think I'll know what I'll be doing of that date!ZylonBane on 4/12/2007 at 18:04
Quote Posted by Papy
But the question now is : if the player is supposed to be one of those "haves", how would you implement the concept of moral choices you were talking about?
I never said anything about moral choice. I merely suggested that different parties would react to you differently depending on your degree of augmentation.
I'm imagining a character development spectrum with full augmentation but general NPC hostility at one end, and minimal augmentation but very helpful NPCs at the other.
Like most RPGs, the idea would be to make both choices viable, coming down to nothing more than personal preference. And like the best RPGs, it wouldn't try to dictate which path is the "good" one. I like a little philosophical ambiguity in my games.
