Should I play Deus Ex 1 first???

ZylonBane on 26/11/2005 at 17:53

You're proceeding from the premise that IW is, on its own merits, a good game. This ignores the fact that IW has a boatload of problems which have nothing to do with its quality relative to DX-- tiny levels, tiny inventory, low frame rate, long load times, console-centric interface, overcompressed textures, meaningless faction system, awful unified ammo system, no reloading, ugly character models, and probably a few other problems I've forgotten.

Why subject yourself to all that when there are so many superior games yet to be played?

Jonesy on 26/11/2005 at 20:31

Not to mention that playing DX2 completely spoils the endings of the first game and lessens their impact upon the player.

Javert4186 on 26/11/2005 at 22:04

Well, since IO said he/she was "captivated" DX2, I consider it a reasonable assumption that he/she thinks DX2 is a good game. I am not making any statement about its technical merit.

Also, how does DX2 lessen the impact of the endings? What has happened since DX1 is fairly vague, moreover, I think the storyline in DX1 (along with the newsclippings and interactions) is an interesting tale in the telling, even if the ending is known.

moop on 27/11/2005 at 00:04

Don't play DX2 first. As was mentioned, the ending of the original will be spoiled.
If you want a spoiler why this is true, here you go... but be warned, I think you'll be happy experiencing DX1 on your own first before you do [spoiler]The multiple endings of DX1 are incompatible with a decent explanation which presumes all three could occur, yet DX2 presents a VERY ugly, incomplete, illogical, inconsistent and implausible blending of the three.[/spoiler]
ZylonBane is right when he says DX1 is better, but not only is DX1 better, but DX2 is somewhat bad. Not bad overall... but after playing DX1 you will understand why it is bad, and which aspects are bad. The contrivances, the forced plotlines... none of it lends to the typical literary device known as "suspension of disbelief," as the DX1 had managed to a far greater degree. Part of the reason for this is that the main storyline for DX1 was written by a group of writers including Chris Todd, Sheldon Pacotti and Austin Grossman, from 7Crows. DX2 was, as far as I'm aware, pieced together by a less pedigreed group under the direction of Harvey Smith.

My advice... play DX1 first. Enjoy. Play it over and over. Enjoy again, filling in the bits you missed the first time, using different tactics, skills, and augmentations. Then, play DX2, but take it with a pile of salt. DX2 has a poor sense of continutity at first, but eventually manages to entertwine itself with its DX1 roots though painful, even wishy-washy explanations of events, relationships, technology, and history, almost like the script of DX2 was emasculated to appease the forces providing money to make DX2 for the XBox, so the game could reach a younger and less sophisticated demographic, although that is merely speculation.

Javert4186 on 27/11/2005 at 03:44

moop's spoiler is consistent with what I said inasmuch as DX2 gives no clear, logical, or even sensible view of what happened at the end of DX1, hence it won't do much damage to the story.

Moop, consciously or not, seconds my overall point directly here:

Quote:

... DX2 is somewhat bad. Not bad overall... but after playing DX1 you will understand why it is bad, and which aspects are bad.

Exactly. So if IO is already enjoying DX2, why spoil it by making him/her switch to DX1?

moop on 27/11/2005 at 13:13

Quote Posted by Javert4186

Knowing the relationships and plot of DX2 would diminish some of the novelty while playing DX1. In DX1, the plotlines progressed in a way consistent with the motives and desires of the characters involved. In DX2, the plotlines are a grand scheme, with the characters forced into actions which make somewhat less sense. That was the reason for my commentary on suspension of disbelief in my above post.

In short, that it won't do "much" damage to the story is a valid point, but for some, allowing that damage when it can be avoided is a travesty. Seeing Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace before you saw Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope I think is a fair analogy (although the chronology is reversed). The original (Episode IV) was a classic. Watching Episode I first would detract from the sense of ingenuity and feeling of naiveté one would get by watching Episode IV first.

Javert4186 on 27/11/2005 at 13:58

Whereas what you are saying about the Star Wars makes sense (it would be different to watch it knowing how Vader, Luke, and Leia are related), where is that in DX1? What, specifically, is going to "ruin the surprise"?

Is it:
[SPOILER]Meeting Beth Du Claire and Chad? Going to a burned out Unatco HQ? Meeting Paul? What is the critical plotlinie development that will be given away? [/SPOILER]

moop on 27/11/2005 at 18:16

More than one relationship between characters would be "spoiled" -- but the cumulative effect of background-information spoilers contained in DX2 is too much... also, I don't find the relationships between characters to be believable, based on their roles in DX1.

A better way to say it is probably that DX1's storyline was written so much better than DX2 that the poor writing would rub off on DX1 for someone who plays DX2 first. To go back to the Star Wars analogy, I don't think anyone would find the Force to be as interesting if they saw that stupid "midichlorians" explanation they gave in Episode I.

trevor the sheep on 21/12/2005 at 17:53

Reading this thread reminded me of something that I last asked myself when I completed DX2 and then promptly forgot about:

Why the FUCK was there an
[SPOILER]'aquinas node'[/SPOILER]

In the

[SPOILER]UNATCO base[/SPOILER]

that was

[SPOILER]signposted[/SPOILER]?

I mean, COME ON.

ZylonBane on 21/12/2005 at 20:43

Isn't it obvious?

Because Harvey Smith blows goats.