Deus Ex 3 - I'll just leave this here

[Dragon]

But what is clear is that shelf-time of games is reduced a lot if modding is not possible and that's a known fact.

Provide evidence for your bullshit claim, please.

I'm really not going to dig around my link-bag for a rude tone like that. Just look at HL type games and others. Furthermore it belongs to what is called "Replay Value" for those who know about game design and not go around throwing fuck into other peoples faces every time they can. If you still think "Replay Value" is "bullshit" then go google a bit first.

[JC_Helios]

New 3 minute long trailer... viral though, doesn't show the game at all.

Also the sarif site has changed a little:
http://www.sarifindustries.com/en/#/home/

[nerdenstein]

That's the same one I posted previously.
It was initally hosted on the offical Deus Ex Human Revolution youtube page called 'Purity'.

Still, it's kinda cool though. The Serif site didn't load up for me, I don't know why.

Has anyone here read the book Deus Ex: The Icarus Effect? It was released a few months ago as a spin off from HR and takes place during 2027. It's been quite good so far. Made even better by the inclusion of two characters from the original Deus Ex (Lucius Debeers and Gunther Hermann (Who was drinking Orange Soda no less! ))
I bought it from Amazon if anyone is interested.

[Jaedar]

So I read PCGamers review of the game today. Apparently its not only the best game in the last 4 years but also surpasses the original in every way but one(the boss battles).

And somehow the very first picture either contains grievous factual errors or the devs doubled the amount of options for that particular scene since the leak. Somehow, I'm leaning more towards the former.

[nerdenstein]

And somehow the very first picture either contains grievous factual errors or the devs doubled the amount of options for that particular scene since the leak. Somehow, I'm leaning more towards the former.

Explain please? I'm curious.
What factual errors?

[Jaedar]

Can't find any pic online but they claim that there's like twice as many options for resolvingthe encounter with Zeke on the first map than I found in the actual game.

[nerdenstein]

Can't find any pic online but they claim that there's like twice as many options for resolvingthe encounter with Zeke on the first map than I found in the actual game.

Oh. That's kinda cool.
Maybe that'll be the same for later conversations too. Zeke's Convo wasn't too bad IIRC but later conversations felt a little limited a points. Not that I can give any examples because I only played the leak once and for only part way just too see what it was like. I vowed not too play it again until the full release.

[EER]

So I read PCGamers review of the game today. Apparently its not only the best game in the last 4 years, but also surpasses the original in every way but one(the boss battles).

I would be very much surprised if this is so. Pleasantly so, I might add.

I still myself that I didn't go visit Eidos Montreal when I was on Montreal. Damnit.

[Jonas]

You know... I can believe that. I mean we all love DX's story and characters, but the truth is the story was cheesy and the characters lacked screen-time. We all love DX's gameplay, but every single individual element of it was kind of substandard in and of itself - a game that manages to include each one of those elements or adequate substitutes for them could easily implement them better, resulting in better gameplay. Of course we all tolerate DX's graphics, but achieving better graphics 10 year on shouldn't be difficult, and in fact Eidos Montreal probably has a lot more artists (and middleware) than ION Storm Austin had, so the general art quality should be pretty high.

I can totally believe that Deus Ex 3 may be objectively better in every way except the boss fights, the question is whether it'll be better enough to punch through our collective nostalgia. Additionally, Deus Ex gets a pass for being revolutionary and original, whereas DX3 is... a sequel. Well, a prequel, but in production terms that's the same.

Meanwhile there's E.Y.E for all your wonky, stereotypically glitchy and overly complicated FPSRPG needs!

[Dragon]

Personally I don't believe PCGamers reviews one inch. They tend to good-rate mediocre crap just because it is an AAA that made it and give bad scores to good games just because they can't buy their reviews. There is only one certain "somebody" of which I can accept reviews as he looks on the other side not adjusting the scores upwards depending on how much money (or pressure) the developer uses on him.

[Jonas]

Well to be fair though you are extremely difficult to please. You should probably take that as a compliment, but personally I tend to have a fairly high tolerance for mediocrity and blatant design flaws, I find it pretty easy to enjoy a game for those things it does well instead of despising it for those things it does poorly. For this reason, my taste tends to be pretty well in line with the reviews of PC Gamer UK.

Additionally they typically do a pretty good job of reviewing the game in such a way that you know whether or not you're going to agree with their assessment - for example Tim Stone would give good reviews to a deep, complex, and slow paced turn-based strategy game while making it clear to me that I shouldn't under any circumstances buy it.

Finally, I'm getting tired of having to defend games journalists against this tired old bullshit, but I would like you to prove to me that PC Gamer UK's reviews are in any way "bought". Go on, I dare you.

[Jaedar]

Finally, I'm getting tired of having to defend games journalists against this tired old bullshit, but I would like you to prove to me that PC Gamer UK's reviews are in any way "bought". Go on, I dare you.

You'd probably become a happier man if you just accepted that games journalism is a fetid hive of incompetence. Try it some time.

You know... I can believe that.

Yeah, why would we ever doubt Human Revolution is the best game in the last 4 years or that it is better than one of the best games of all time. It's not like we've ever been given a reason to doubt the magnificence of the developers

I can totally believe that Deus Ex 3 may be objectively better in every way except the boss fights, the question is whether it'll be better enough to punch through our collective nostalgia.

I hate this excuse. You may be colored by nostalgia but I am not. Every old game that people claim I am blinded by my nostalgia for is something I first played half a decade after its release. Sure, I played DX as a kid, but statistics would suggest that I am as blinded by nostalgia about it as I am about Fallout, or X-com or PS:T or ANY OTHER GAME YOU CARE TO MENTION. Sorry, I'm taking out my unspent rage on you. It's still a bullshit excuse tho.

[Dragon]

Well to be fair though you are extremely difficult to please. You should probably take that as a compliment, but personally I tend to have a fairly high tolerance for mediocrity and blatant design flaws, I find it pretty easy to enjoy a game for those things it does well instead of despising it for those things it does poorly.

There's a good reason I'm driving down this lane. It's the flaws in a game that break it. No matter how good your house looks it sucks to live in it if the doors can't be opened without a crowbar or it's shivering cold in the winter. That's why what interests me with games is not what "works" (under certain situations) but what does not work because this can potentially turn into a show-stopper making you delete the game and regret having spent the money in the end. And that's unfortunately the kind of information next to all reviewers I've seen so far fail to deliver properly. The question is not "is it looking good enough to bear with the problems?" but it should be "are the problems big enough to make the game not enjoyable?". As a game-dev the second question is actually more interesting to me since this one helps me improve while the first one doesn't.

EDIT: And this by the way brings us back to the problem of the missing modding support. If problems are show-stoppers or annoying they can be modded out to improve the game. If you have no modding support though the show-stoppers stay in the game. Just as a side note why the lack of modding can be another coffin nail.

[Jonas]

Sorry, I'm taking out my unspent rage on you. It's still a bullshit excuse tho.

Apology not accepted. Mind your goddamn tone.

There's a good reason I'm driving down this lane. It's the flaws in a game that break it. No matter how good your house looks it sucks to live in it if the doors can't be opened without a crowbar or it's shivering cold in the winter. That's why what interests me with games is not what "works" (under certain situations) but what does not work because this can potentially turn into a show-stopper making you delete the game and regret having spent the money in the end. And that's unfortunately the kind of information next to all reviewers I've seen so far fail to deliver properly. The question is not "is it looking good enough to bear with the problems?" but it should be "are the problems big enough to make the game not enjoyable?". As a game-dev the second question is actually more interesting to me since this one helps me improve while the first one doesn't.

Yes I realise all this, I was pointing out the differences in our perspectives, and regardless of your good reasons for being the way you are, those differences still stand. And I'd rather be me, all things considered - it's actually really nice not having to be unsatisfied or even angry most of the time

[Dragon]

There's a good reason I'm driving down this lane. It's the flaws in a game that break it. No matter how good your house looks it sucks to live in it if the doors can't be opened without a crowbar or it's shivering cold in the winter. That's why what interests me with games is not what "works" (under certain situations) but what does not work because this can potentially turn into a show-stopper making you delete the game and regret having spent the money in the end. And that's unfortunately the kind of information next to all reviewers I've seen so far fail to deliver properly. The question is not "is it looking good enough to bear with the problems?" but it should be "are the problems big enough to make the game not enjoyable?". As a game-dev the second question is actually more interesting to me since this one helps me improve while the first one doesn't.

Yes I realise all this, I was pointing out the differences in our perspectives, and regardless of your good reasons for being the way you are, those differences still stand. And I'd rather be me, all things considered (...)

That's true. No need to be the same or having the same way of tackling things.

- it's actually really nice not having to be unsatisfied or even angry most of the time

But it can definitely save you money