Zero Punctuation: Deus Ex: Human Revolution

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Yahtzee echoed my sentiments almost exactly. I had a lot of fun with the game, and it was a great homage to the original Deus Ex in many respects; but the boss fights sucked and felt totally out of character compared to the rest of the game, and it was way too short. Something is wrong when I can finish a Deus Ex game in a few nights without even trying. Perhaps it was so short for me because I almost never used stealth. I just never felt like the incentive was there. The AI wasn't that great, and playing it on the PC with mouse control almost felt like cheating it made the combat so easy.

One thing that struck me as rather odd is the fact that there's only one side mission arc per level. That's just strange for an RPG.

Also stealing shit is so damn easy, no one cares.

Although I did forget myself and got in to a gun fight after walking in to an apartment and smashing a wall open in front of the tenant. I imagine his rage was equaled by his disbelief.

To people who missed Yahtzee's point:

No, this isn't a 'mediocre' fucking game. It's an EXCELLENT game, one of the best titles to be made in the last ten years, certainly the best cross-platform game *ever*. Buy it and play it.

But is it as good as the game who shares its name? You know, that game whom many pundits consider to be one of, or in fact THE best game ever made? Well, not quite. But if you expected that, I think gaming in the modern age must be a long tortuous string of bitter disappointments

Apart from that, I agree with pretty most of what Yahtzee said except for a few things:

1) He should have played it on PC. The combat is really quite bit more smooth and fun with a mouse and keyboard. And it looks way prettier (I played it quite a bit on my girlfriend's xbox too to compare).

2) The boss fights should really have had multiple solutions and more characterisation - true. But from a gameplay perspective they were NOT a problem. Playing through 99.9% pacifist route, and taking no combat-related augs of any kind (including even cloak) on "Give me Deus Ex" difficulty...the boss were a complete joke.

Why? Because I never fired my gun in anger except at the boss fights, I was ridiculously well equipped when I encountered them. The first boss I had a stash of EMP grenades, 200 health, 3 rockets and armour piercing souped-up guns to kill him in about 10 seconds with.
The next boss I had about 10 rockets and double that number of grenades and assorted mines. All bosses were a smear on the carpet after a few seconds of combat.

3) No, he's just flat wrong about it being a shooter with RPG elements rather than an RPG shooter hybrid. I remember one small encounter where I had saved 3 augment points. I was showing a friend the different approaches I could take and by taking an augment, reloading and taking another, I showed him five totally different approaches to it- some of which I had never done in my playthrough to that point.

(if you're interested - I was on a rooftop behind a bunch of guards. I first took dermal armour and tried a frontal assault, then too icarus drop with stun and assaulted from the middle, then took reflex booster and after dropping behind them multi-killed them with melee takedown, then took silent fall and landed behind and just ran off unnoticed, then took cloak, landed near them and ran right through them, then took steady aim and sniped them silently with a crossbow from 500 ft and they couldn't even see me, then just took super jump, got up to a vent and avoided them entirely. This is not a 'shooter' in terms of gameplay.)

As Daemonate said, even on the highest difficulty all the bosses are a joke if you are willing to either spend some points (go go RPGshooter) or spend a little time thinking. I watched seven different youtube videos of boss killing strategies and no two had the same method.

All the bosses seem like they need to be killed by plain shooting but that is a misconception. If you are looking for RPG credits you can spend 3 points and all can be killed by 2-3 hits from the heavy typhoon augment, which gives you invulnerability when you use it and staggers them. In addition each of the bosses have a unique way that they can be killed using their behavior and the environment. The first can be killed no bullets by throwing barrels at him DK style. The second can be suckered into blowing up power relays and electrocuting herself. The third can be either killed by a turrnt or even more hilariously can be OHKO'ed when he mantles the walls.

Finally the complaint about the ending is I think misguided. It may be 4 buttons but the entire game has been an extended argument as to which one you are supposed to pick. Everything from the little details about a man who kills himself because of the pain from badly installed chop shop augs to the dangers of neuropozyne addiction to the widening social injustice that human augmentation will exacerbate feeds into the question of "what future are we to take". Furthermore the whole question of comparison with the original is faulty. The last level of DX1 was just as asinine. The only difference was that the buttons are on opposite sides of a pond filled with alligators instead all together in the same place.

I am actually a bit weirded out that for once Yatzee gets an ending that doesn't boil down to mother teresa or baby eating and then complains. I mean I understand that the "endingtron 2000" is a great joke and it would be hard for any humorist to pass up but it is jarring.

DX:HR has far more profound questions to ask and answer than DX1, the art direction (no not the graphics, the coherent aesthetic theme) is far better and the incidental power of it's background events are much greater. Coming from someone who played the original obsessively this game is in every way a worthy sequel and in many ways a superior creation to it's predecessor. There is a loss of breadth that is unavoidable given graphical limitations but there is as much or more depth.

AndrewOfHell:
Totally agree, though I have to say I really did not mind the boss fights. I admired it for kind of the old school challenge that they presented to me, though I can see how a stealth playthrough would be considerably difficult!

A stealth play through is quite easy, even on hard, and I'm not just saying that to sound like an elitist douche, I'm not that good at games. But just keep a stun gun, tranq gun and PEPs for the grunts and have a fully upgraded combat rifle ready for bosses.

By the way Yahtzee, the first boss can be (and is primarily meant to be) killed by throwing gas canisters and explosive barrels at him. Throw gas first, they hurt and blind him, run somewhere, get an explosive barrel, throw at him for massive damage. Lather, rinse, repeat a further two times and you've won.

The-Fletch:
I don't think I'll bother with this then. From the review it seems a bit mediocre. All hype, as usual.

Haha, I see what you did there. ;)

Anyway, I totally predicted he'd pick on the boss fights.

Thinks I didn't like about DXHR:

-Non-lethal takedowns - the way they use up your battery and the overly brutal animations. It makes me feel patently stupid to sit for minutes in some supply closet waiting for some goon's friends to look the other way so I can quietly strangle him, only to watch Adam break the poor guy's elbow and punch his face in. What an immersion-breaking showoff you are, Mr. Jensen.

-The wolverine claw thing that only pops out in cutscenes. If I can't use it when I want to, why is it even there?

-The way tranq darts, shocker cells and energy bars are so scarce - even in shops. Is it some kind of Illuminati-induced non-lethal ammo shortage designed to shape the world economy in subtle yet significant ways? Or is it just annoying?

-The boss fights, naturally. Especially the first one - after evading all the guards, cameras and turrets like an awesome ninja that I am I had to watch Jensen being snuck upon by some huge clanking overarmored asshole who wasn't even trying that hard - and then was forced to kill him by throwing explosive barrels at him? FFFFfuuuuuu....

-The way it all turns into some kind of a left4dead parody at the very end. That's where I said, "to hell with that sweet, sweet non-lethal playthrough achievement", and pulled out the heavy machine gun.

-The way Jensen's face looks like the one of a baffled rodent half of the time.

-The 4 buttons for 4 endings - it's even worse than the way you chose the ending in Invisible War.

-The conspiracy thing is just stupid. Well, the whole plot is, I suppose. The more it lets you on, the dumber it gets. Preachy, pompous crap.

It's still a very good game though.

I agree with your idea that a boss fight should be like a final exam. Fallout: NV spoiler below

.

Well, that was kinda what I expected. Captures the essence of Deus Ex while still having a modern feel, with all the advantages and disadvantages that comes with it.

jmarquiso:
*snip*

That was probably part of my issue with Half Life 2, I found that considering the number of enemies coming at you and potential damage they could do, the aiming seemed very basic, like Fallout 3, where I found unassisted targeting useless except for sniping purposes.

As for RDR and Mass Effect, You're choices in the game could be perfectly consistent with your actions. John Marston is a badass, but also one of the few protagonists I can think of who is noticeably polite and respectful to anyone except his enemies, or some more deliberately repulsive npcs. He would be exactly the kind of character I could imagine helping out an old man by keeping an eye out for flowers on his travels. In Mass Effect, if your playing the paragon option you can simply not loot people's houses. If you do loot them and you want to be consistent, no doubt the renegade path doesn't require you to get angry at other looters.

I'd have said Rico Rodriguez's motivation was "Here's a magic grappling hook and a tropical island to play on. Go nuts.":)

You make a convincing argument, I'll probably have to wait til summer comes round again, as I have college to deal with myself, but I'll definitely put Deus Ex on my list of games to try out.

Random berk:

That was probably part of my issue with Half Life 2, I found that considering the number of enemies coming at you and potential damage they could do, the aiming seemed very basic, like Fallout 3, where I found unassisted targeting useless except for sniping purposes.

Consoles required more assisted targeting as they're harder to use on dual thumbsticks. Mouse and keyboard - the primary gaming device on PC games in the 90's, with the exception of the now defunct joystick (I miss flight sims) - is far more precise. It evolved as a gaming device despite not being a gaming device at all.

That being said, it's a generational thing. I still prefer M&K with little to no assistance - with some exceptions (Borderlands makes it work for me for some reason).

The Half Life series also perfected the linear FPS, literally railroading you for the most part, and not asking for much exploration (though it still rewarded exploration). Some would say this plagues modern shooters. I'd say the pacing in the Half Life series is much better than modern linear experiences today, not that linearity doesn't have its place.

Strangely, Yahtzee's still a big fan.

Random berk:

As for RDR and Mass Effect, You're choices in the game could be perfectly consistent with your actions. John Marston is a badass, but also one of the few protagonists I can think of who is noticeably polite and respectful to anyone except his enemies, or some more deliberately repulsive npcs. He would be exactly the kind of character I could imagine helping out an old man by keeping an eye out for flowers on his travels. In Mass Effect, if your playing the paragon option you can simply not loot people's houses. If you do loot them and you want to be consistent, no doubt the renegade path doesn't require you to get angry at other looters.

I could buy both. Renegade Shep also chastizes them for looting, so that doesn't really apply. Looting is just a mainstay in RPG exploration gameplay (since Zelda and DND, after all), but it is horribly inconsistent with a military commander like Shep.

I don't know Marston well enough (not a console player), but this was an issue I had with Rockstar games in general. At least in the earlier GTA's your character tended to be a bit nuts to begin with.

Random berk:

I'd have said Rico Rodriguez's motivation was "Here's a magic grappling hook and a tropical island to play on. Go nuts.":)

That's the player's motivation :)

Random berk:

You make a convincing argument, I'll probably have to wait til summer comes round again, as I have college to deal with myself, but I'll definitely put Deus Ex on my list of games to try out.

The first one is real cheap. I envy guys like you in this generation of games, and all the older games you could get later.

I hated the Endingtron 3000 too. That was a huge letdown.

DanHibiki:
One thing that struck me as rather odd is the fact that there's only one side mission arc per level. That's just strange for an RPG.

I think I found at least 2 side quests in every single level. I know it's only one more, but it means you've missed about half of the side quests out.

Daemonate:
To people who missed Yahtzee's point:

How can you be a ZP regular and take Zahtzee's reviews at face value? Everything he says is true (as far as the detals and weaknesses of a game go, objective stuff), that's why I like him (that and he's funny) but it doesn't mean he gives the whole picture (plenty of other journalists are paid to emphasise the good points). On top of that tastes vary. Yahtzee for example might find that vending machines are too much of a racial stereotype but you might find it dehumanises them and makes stealing cola easier. Your milage WILL vary as legitimate "flaws" may not bother you at all even if those features or lacks of features exist. His reviews are a good part of an informed purchasing decision. If you can't read between the lines, as well as apply your own tastes to his reviews, then I wonder if you buy any games at all?

However even if you agree on the subjective parts with him you have to read between the lines. The boss fights are annoying and immersion breaking but also challenging (I just shot the first boss in the head repeatedly, apparently stealth/hackers can find extra rocket ammo in the base which also makes it easier). The stealth game is fun, there's multiple ways to take every obstacle, usually there's a couple regardless of your build, though as you play you'll find that you can access more and more of the routes. The game is enjoyable and well crafted and while shorter than the original is still 3 times longer than most releases.

Yahtzee even said it surpasses the original in several places how can it be mediocre?! The game is one of the best releases this year, everyone I know who played it loved it but it doesn't make it perfect, it's a modernised deus ex for better and for worse. And of couse it was never going to live up the original and surpass it in every way.

bombadilillo:

BlackWidower:
I remember one of the first pieces of news I heard about Deus Ex: Human Revolution, was it wasn't going to be dumbed down for consoles...and it appears I was right, instead it was dumbed down in general.

How exactly was it dumbed down? Hacking was rediculously more complex and enjoyable, the skill trees were much more COMPLEX and customizable.

Stealth actually works and is more complex.

More weapon customization

Dialog much more complex and meaningful.

The only thing less complex was regen health. which was already in the original game, you just start with it here.

So where was it dumbed down. Or are you just jumping on some bandwagon to be too cool for the game?

Actually, what I was referring to was Yahtzee's review. See, I haven't actually played the game yet, that's why I said 'appears.' After all, it was a shorter game was it not? There was probably something else, but quite frankly, I really don't care right now, I'm too tired, and have better things to do than re-watch the damn review try to remember what else I was referring to. Sorry.

Daemonate:
To people who missed Yahtzee's point:

Is this your opinion or Yahtzee's opinion. If it's his opinion, why not just let him explain it, and if it's your opinion, why did you preface it with that line.

Daemonate:
But is it as good as the game who shares its name? You know, that game whom many pundits consider to be one of, or in fact THE best game ever made? Well, not quite. But if you expected that, I think gaming in the modern age must be a long tortuous string of bitter disappointments

To expect that games get better overtime. That every game released is better than games that were released a decade ago is expecting disappointment? See, maybe it's just me, but I'd like to expect that people get better at their craft over time...not worse.

Thank you for the spoiler alert Yahtzee, this is the first time I've actually had to skip a part of your video because of it. I'm actually really enjoying DX:HR. Yes I played the original and yes I liked it too, but DX:HR trims off some of the "depth" that was really just fat (a morbidly obese person is very "deep" when you roll them onto their back, however all their important parts are the same size and usually a lot weaker for all the weight they've had to lug around) and replaces it with fun. You may hate cover-based shooters because they're so overused but I don't own a 360 so I've played all of about 3 or 4 in my life. To me, the cover mechanics provoke memories of Metal Gear Solid more than Gears of War, which I welcome with the giddy excitement of a 9 year old boy receiving 50 pounds of legos. Unfortunately, I haven't gotten to play through the game quite as quickly as I'd like since I host a Youtube channel and I have to spend a lot of time editing and rendering which takes away from playing. But I'm getting there, slowly but surely, and enjoying every minute :)

Brilliant review, especially loved the selling of developers hands back to them for 1200 mp. Classic.

BlackWidower:

Daemonate:
To people who missed Yahtzee's point:

Is this your opinion or Yahtzee's opinion. If it's his opinion, why not just let him explain it, and if it's your opinion, why did you preface it with that line.

Daemonate:
But is it as good as the game who shares its name? You know, that game whom many pundits consider to be one of, or in fact THE best game ever made? Well, not quite. But if you expected that, I think gaming in the modern age must be a long tortuous string of bitter disappointments

To expect that games get better overtime. That every game released is better than games that were released a decade ago is expecting disappointment? See, maybe it's just me, but I'd like to expect that people get better at their craft over time...not worse.

Wha..?? Yes, nice idea, but as I said; where have you been for the last ten years?

Games like Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Thief Metal Age, Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Quakeworld, Tribes 2, etc, etc have not been bettered in their respective niches. They have scarcely been APPROACHED, let alone surpassed - and as Yahtzee points out, due to the strain of current-gen tech on development teams, they're simply never going to.

So, even when developers aren't getting worse - which due to larger team sizes, multi millio dollar budgets and and corporatisation of development houses, is par for the course - they can't do what they once did in terms of depth of gameplay and focus on particular elements.

So no, it isn't unreasonable to expect game developers to get better than what they are now, but it's ridiculous to expect them to suddenly get better than golden-age era games.

To be honest I really didn't like this game. At no point did I feel total immersion despite wanting to badly. I didn't care for the stealth in this game. Tranquilizer darts and stun guns aren't "one size fits all" approaches. People would die if you used them on everyone. Plus when you take down people from the shadows everyone checks on the same pile of knocked out people. Can't anyone figure out the guy who's darting their friends is still in the area?

The character models also bothered me. Mostly because of their faces. Even if the person is supposed to be upset their expression can't change at all, so it just makes the entire scene comical. The voice acting also didn't help. Finally during stealth I can break stealth and shoot up people, then go back to stealth mode, and nobody brings up the fact that I was killing people in the building despite being caught by cameras occasionally.

Finally, I don't know about anyone else but the color scheme gave me a horrible headache. I didn't even want to play anymore after a while.

I will give this to the game though, the story was fairly interesting and the augmentation powers were somewhat fun. Especially the freaky looking wall break power.

Daemonate:

BlackWidower:

Daemonate:
To people who missed Yahtzee's point:

Is this your opinion or Yahtzee's opinion. If it's his opinion, why not just let him explain it, and if it's your opinion, why did you preface it with that line.

Daemonate:
But is it as good as the game who shares its name? You know, that game whom many pundits consider to be one of, or in fact THE best game ever made? Well, not quite. But if you expected that, I think gaming in the modern age must be a long tortuous string of bitter disappointments

To expect that games get better overtime. That every game released is better than games that were released a decade ago is expecting disappointment? See, maybe it's just me, but I'd like to expect that people get better at their craft over time...not worse.

Wha..?? Yes, nice idea, but as I said; where have you been for the last ten years?

Games like Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Thief Metal Age, Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Quakeworld, Tribes 2, etc, etc have not been bettered in their respective niches. They have scarcely been APPROACHED, let alone surpassed - and as Yahtzee points out, due to the strain of current-gen tech on development teams, they're simply never going to.

So, even when developers aren't getting worse - which due to larger team sizes, multi millio dollar budgets and and corporatisation of development houses, is par for the course - they can't do what they once did in terms of depth of gameplay and focus on particular elements.

So no, it isn't unreasonable to expect game developers to get better than what they are now, but it's ridiculous to expect them to suddenly get better than golden-age era games.

And you're saying we should just accept that and move on!? I'm sorry, but just because that's how things have gone for the past ten years doesn't mean we shouldn't complain about it.

Yes, I expect things to get better, and when they don't, which is frequently, I'll admit, I complain, and I will continue to complain.

Nocturnal Gentleman:
To be honest I really didn't like this game. At no point did I feel total immersion despite wanting to badly. I didn't care for the stealth in this game. Tranquilizer darts and stun guns aren't "one size fits all" approaches. People would die if you used them on everyone. Plus when you take down people from the shadows everyone checks on the same pile of knocked out people. Can't anyone figure out the guy who's darting their friends is still in the area?

The character models also bothered me. Mostly because of their faces. Even if the person is supposed to be upset their expression can't change at all, so it just makes the entire scene comical. The voice acting also didn't help. Finally during stealth I can break stealth and shoot up people, then go back to stealth mode, and nobody brings up the fact that I was killing people in the building despite being caught by cameras occasionally.

Finally, I don't know about anyone else but the color scheme gave me a horrible headache. I didn't even want to play anymore after a while.

I will give this to the game though, the story was fairly interesting and the augmentation powers were somewhat fun. Especially the freaky looking wall break power.

Sorry, if that sounds insulting but: Really?
Yes, (some of) your points are correct, but really?
You know there's something called Willing suspension of disbelief, an ability needed to enjoy every piece of fiction.
Without it, you couldn't watch and enjoy the Star Wars films because you know that ,in Space, no one can hear your Death Star explode.
You couldn't play the beginning of Uncharted 2 because Drake would most likely cut his finger of while trying to climb up that hanging train.
And even in games as realistic and hardcore as the first Operation Flashpoint, the magic abilities of a medic to regrow legs apparently torn of by a grenade, would make every immersion impossible.

So ,if the fact that Tranqulizer darts (advanced future cyberpunk tranquilizer darts at that) would be a stupid idea to use on human enemies in real life turns you away from a video game, then I'd maybe consider sticking to documentaries and other non-fiction media.

This does not that there were no moments in the game that broke my sense of immersion (while it's nice and just plausible that some employees of Montréal based Picus Communication write some of their personal e-mails in (canadian) french, it leaves open the question why all citizens of upper and lower Hengsha city communicate digitally in English but often speak Mandarin on the streets), however after a minute or so I was able to take that as given and just continue to enjoy the surprisingly well fleshed-out world and the interesting quests.

And now onto something completly different:
To all you people out there saying that the way the endings were made is justified, "because we all know what happens in the original Deus Ex".
Screw you!
Screw
You!
Because that's the fan in you talking, believing that continuity or canon or whatever you might call it, is more important than the experience and choice of the player. You could hardly be more wrong. By supporting this mindset you are stripping videogames of their biggest advantage as a narrative medium: interactivity and choice.
I'm not saying that every game needs multiple endings or the illusion of free choice and there are enough good examples out there that prove that (the Uncharted or Prince of Persia series and many others), but if a game includes all those things, then the developers should have the balls to go through with it, even if it means declaring three of the four as "non-canon" and maybe upsetting a few fanboys.(It's not as if this didn't happen before, the evil ending of Bioshock leaves no way for Bioshock 2) However, if you make a choice and there are no consequences to that choice, then this choice is unimportant and therefore obsolete.
"Wait!" some of you will cry out "But can't that be used as a narrative tool, showing that one man can hardly change the fate of humanity as a whole and that our perception of interactivity in videogames is an illusion, while we are actually just following a handfull of slightly differently painted tubes, created by the developers."
Yes, you are right, a lack of choice or first creating and then brutally destroying the illusion of interactivity can be used for misguiding the player and get him to think, as popularly demonstrated by above mentioned Bioshock and its "Would you kindly...", but in this case I think you would be giving Eidos Montréal too much credit. This does not mean, that I am not confident that they could come up with something clever like that, their excellent world building shows that they might be interested in a bit more than just taking your money, while developing their games. It means that the way the endings were made are not convincing me to believe that they were intended that way. See, I have nothing against games that don't take me by the hand and repeat Every. Single. Plot. Point.(plot point plot point) three times for the slower ones of us, but I'm not going to suspect a deeper meaning behind something that seems to me more like simple lazyness.
If I'm wrong and Eidos actually wanted to show the limits of choice, then they could have made it a lot more clear without spelling every single letter of the actual meaning.
How about this:

Simonism451:
snip

Just because I have a very strict range of disbelief doesn't make it stupid. If you've seen people die from stun gun attacks you wouldn't take it as a harmless attack either. All the things I mentioned just ruined the experience for me. Simple as that. maybe it's petty to you but I don't care.

It's the very reason most tranquilizer or knock them out with a blunt object scenes annoy me elsewhere. That's not stealth. It's easy to kill people doing those things.

Also, not liking that doesn't mean I can't like star wars. Everything about stuff like that is fantastical. In no way does any of that pass like a version of reality. So if there is sound in space that doesn't bother me because so much isn't passing for fact anyway. Deus Ex is different. We can make robotic arms, we can use hormone manipulation, and there are real world conspiracies. While still an alternate world it passes itself as a more probable alternate world. It tries to show technology that we could probably make one day (sooner in their reality). So I take it much more seriously.

Besides the stealth bothered me so I didn't use it. Not the biggest issue. Not nearly as much as the face animations, voices, overall story, and color problems bothered me. Those problems made me take the game back.

BlackWidower:

Daemonate:

BlackWidower:

Is this your opinion or Yahtzee's opinion. If it's his opinion, why not just let him explain it, and if it's your opinion, why did you preface it with that line.

To expect that games get better overtime. That every game released is better than games that were released a decade ago is expecting disappointment? See, maybe it's just me, but I'd like to expect that people get better at their craft over time...not worse.

Wha..?? Yes, nice idea, but as I said; where have you been for the last ten years?

Games like Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Thief Metal Age, Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Quakeworld, Tribes 2, etc, etc have not been bettered in their respective niches. They have scarcely been APPROACHED, let alone surpassed - and as Yahtzee points out, due to the strain of current-gen tech on development teams, they're simply never going to.

So, even when developers aren't getting worse - which due to larger team sizes, multi millio dollar budgets and and corporatisation of development houses, is par for the course - they can't do what they once did in terms of depth of gameplay and focus on particular elements.

So no, it isn't unreasonable to expect game developers to get better than what they are now, but it's ridiculous to expect them to suddenly get better than golden-age era games.

And you're saying we should just accept that and move on!? I'm sorry, but just because that's how things have gone for the past ten years doesn't mean we shouldn't complain about it.

Yes, I expect things to get better, and when they don't, which is frequently, I'll admit, I complain, and I will continue to complain.

Well, OK, even though I expect you will continue to be sadly disappointed. But you shouldn't go chiding DEHR for your unrealistic expectations - because then you become part of the problem. DEHR is one of the best steps to fixing what's been wrong with games this past decade. Is it there yet? No. But it IS one of the best games of the era. If you are overly critical of it, MORE critical of it than of a grey-ware tripefest that they didn't even try on, then the publishers get the message that they may as well no try and get things right.

And the game is FUN. It's really quite fun, and moving, and effective as a narrative, even if the earth didn't move as in the original, so harping on its faults is really mean-spirited and disingenuous.

Daemonate:

BlackWidower:

Daemonate:
Wha..?? Yes, nice idea, but as I said; where have you been for the last ten years?

Games like Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Thief Metal Age, Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Quakeworld, Tribes 2, etc, etc have not been bettered in their respective niches. They have scarcely been APPROACHED, let alone surpassed - and as Yahtzee points out, due to the strain of current-gen tech on development teams, they're simply never going to.

So, even when developers aren't getting worse - which due to larger team sizes, multi millio dollar budgets and and corporatisation of development houses, is par for the course - they can't do what they once did in terms of depth of gameplay and focus on particular elements.

So no, it isn't unreasonable to expect game developers to get better than what they are now, but it's ridiculous to expect them to suddenly get better than golden-age era games.

And you're saying we should just accept that and move on!? I'm sorry, but just because that's how things have gone for the past ten years doesn't mean we shouldn't complain about it.

Yes, I expect things to get better, and when they don't, which is frequently, I'll admit, I complain, and I will continue to complain.

Well, OK, even though I expect you will continue to be sadly disappointed. But you shouldn't go chiding DEHR for your unrealistic expectations - because then you become part of the problem. DEHR is one of the best steps to fixing what's been wrong with games this past decade. Is it there yet? No. But it IS one of the best games of the era. If you are overly critical of it, MORE critical of it than of a grey-ware tripefest that they didn't even try on, then the publishers get the message that they may as well no try and get things right.

And the game is FUN. It's really quite fun, and moving, and effective as a narrative, even if the earth didn't move as in the original, so harping on its faults is really mean-spirited and disingenuous.

It's not unrealistic or unreasonable for an art-form to get better over time. I'll give you it's probably better than Gears of War or Call of Duty, but that's like saying it's better than a pile of horse shit! That's not the point. I think it should be better than what has came before it.

The boss fights of the first Deus Ex sucked big times. They were messy, short and required picking the biggest weapons and firing randomly.
If there was one thing Deus Ex is not worth remembering, it is those boss fights.

Even taking into account that Yahtzee has made hyperbolic judgement into an entirely new form of interpersonal communication, the simple facts mentioned in the review makes the game sounds absolutely awful, for those looking for an experience similar to Deus Ex.

While I won't waste much breath lamenting what modern console standards does to classic games, it would be nice if SOME new releases in classic franchises actually lived up to at least some of the hopes of fans of the original.

I have some problems with this game.
i'm playing, or at least I tried to play it, but it's unplayable on my PC.

I have some crazy delay with my mouse. FPS is nice, everything works perfectly fine expect that the camera moves 0.5-1 second later. I tried everything, downloaded the latest patch but nothing helps.

Good thing I took the game from my friend to test it before buying it. :(

Also, this captcha is less and less readable. Soon I will need a bot to read it for me. :S

Hopefully he does dead island next. I love that game but it does have flaws

I disagree with the notion that this game isn't a "true" RPG because you're good with all weapons. You're a damn ex-SWAT officer, it would make absolutely 0 sense if your character weren't proficient with rifles and pistols of all shapes and sizes. A game that gives you the supreme level of customization that this game gives you doesn't need to apologize for not having a "laser cannon specialization" skill tree that would only come up in the last third of the game (thanks Fallout "big gun" skill!).
Furthermore, I don't understand the hate that the boss fights get. I spec'ed stealth/hacking and still had no trouble with any of the bosses (the first one can be overcome by throwing barrels at him just like Dash O' Pepper always taught us, the second one can be mostly circumvented if you have the electricity immunity, which I got to explore, and the third one was fought without ANY of my augs and I still beat him. Oh and I hacked my way past the last boss). I find it very ironic that people who complain the loudest about the bosses being too "combat oriented" are also the ones who apparently weren't looking for any kind of solution other than "SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT!!!"

Boss fights... in 2011. Give me a f*cking break. And the first one is beyond idiotic.

LOL "Day o' sex" just made my day, oh Yahtzee you're brilliant!

QUOTE: "DX:HR has far more profound questions to ask and answer than DX1"

I feel the urge to disagree vehemently. DX 1 had a wide range of topics, and a wide range of great, well written, thought provoking, philosophical dialogues. It talks about the structure of society, democracy, freedom, human condition and such. The "hidden" dialogue with the Morpheus A.I. is its crowning moment of awesome, personally.

The only "questions" HR asks is 'should I fuse my body with some mechanical thingy, or should I not?'. And the best the writers can come up with is "no, you will be no longer human at all!" or "yes, you will be more tham human!". Mundane is a euphemism to most of the bland, dull and plainly unispired dialogue from HR.

I miss Sheldon Pacotti. Greatly.

While I understand that people are somewhat upset over the ending, as I was originally, there really is meaning to it. If we consider DE:HR to be a story driven game, that is.

At first I was kind of disappointed, why is there no conclusion, why is it just push a button and receive and ending, why couldn't it be a reflection of my actions?

But if I may, the ending is supposed to be the way it is, it isn't lazy writing. The entire concept is that the power of only a small few dictate how humanity will continue to exist, how much power they have over the world, how fast they can direct our thoughts through the media which is easily manipulated by them. Each ending was plausible with Adam's explanation, as well.

No conclusion with Adam or his friends is on the same level. The point of the game is about humanity and technology. It isn't about Adam, Pritchard, Megan, Sarif, or any specific person. If they made it more personal, the viewer would lose any worldly meaning.

But that's just how I feel about it.

I just finished it. I must admit: it has weakened towards the end significantly, just like Yahtzee said. The endings were all moronic, because the premise for them was moronic. "Deus Ex" Helios ending will beat any of them any time. Also the final boss fight was... weird. Square Enix must have had a hand in it.

Still: gameplay-wise I think it's better than the original, even if half of the upgrades are useless.

http://www.auger-loizeau.com/index.php?id=7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16315-invention-vision-amplifier.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=invention

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QComFWf0DUo 0:08

http://www.uniquepicturehunter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/uvtattoostattoopicturespichunter-8.jpg

Coincidentally, also why Cyberpunk > Steampunk.
And why I should spend all my money on games as soon as I get it.

The debate over human augmentation has now ceased, except for those few unmodified nutjobs who we shall cast out of society for being boring.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here