Off Topic Productions

Not sure how many of you know this already, but apparently the franchise is going to take a break after Mankind Divided failed to meet sales expectations. Full report here: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017- ... ytime-soon

Not sure what to feel about this. I know that the Eidos Montreal Deus Ex games weren't exactly perfect, and there were things that turned off some players, like the simplified RPG systems, focus on transhumanism over a series of conspiracies, and of course, the infamous scripted takedowns. Even so, these games were still an attempt to create first person games focused on exploration of specific levels, conversation and multiple options through some light RPG elements, as well as tackle a dystopian(if somewhat over the top) world. And there aren't too many of those games.

Disappointing to say the least, especially given SE's treatment of the franchise.

I have mixed feelings.

Woo hoo! no Deus Ex remake (which would undoubtedly be shit). No more mobile DX games. I'm also not a fan of their main games. They're good for what they are, but they are inferior in all the ways that truly matter, in my opinion. On the other hand, AAA games these days are generally shit and the new DX games stood out as something at least worthy of playing. So it's a shame, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. It's still a loss for gaming though. what are Eidos Montreal going to make now that their moderately good games have failed? The next big brainless cover shooter or open world collectathon simulator?
Just to clarify: I love open world games and I love third person shooters. Those from 1990-2005. Since then they've mostly been dumbed down shit.

I think that there was some promise in the Squenix Deus Ex franchise, although it was definitely not Deus Ex. It was fine until they tried to hammer in all of the Deus Ex plot - they also placed the prequels way too soon (2027) and it never really fit in.
So while the games weren't perfect because of it, I didn't really have a problem with them - I had a problem with the handling of the franchise. If they would've called it "Bunny Spree 2127" and removed the Deus Ex references I'd probably play it and think it was very good.

Also, I think that Eidos Montreal came in the closest to Deus Ex with the Missing Link, which is a standalone DLC for Human Revolution. I think it's great - you have branching paths, multiple outcomes, it's hinting at a bigger conspiracy going on, and it really has a Deus Ex vibe. While I cannot recommend Human Revolution or Mankind Divided for Deus Ex fans, I can wholeheartedly recommend the Missing Link.

I didn't really shed a tear when I heard they were putting the franchise on hiatus, and it's a good opportunity for something better and fresh - I hope Squenix sells it to someone who actually knows what they're doing, like Night Dive Studios who are currently remaking System Shock, and not just sit on it and let the franchise wither and die.

Best thing would be to sell the IP to Gearbox then, eh?

Aside from the franchise crap they produced the two main titles were well-designed, coherent games, although I was disappointed that they failed to experiment or innovate with the latest title to any great extent (especially considering the relative success of HR). I was not impressed by the writing or general story aspect of either game. Can't say I'm disappointed by the result.

Bird wrote:Best thing would be to sell the IP to Gearbox then, eh?

Hmm, am I missing the joke? You are aware they put out Aliens: Colonial Marines and Duke Nukem: Forever?
The only place this IP should go is with Otherside Entertainment, owned by Paul Neurath (brainchild of the Immersive Sim) and currently employing Warren Spector.

Cybernetic pig wrote:

Bird wrote:Best thing would be to sell the IP to Gearbox then, eh?

Hmm, am I missing the joke? You are aware they put out Aliens: Colonial Marines and Duke Nukem: Forever?
The only place this IP should go is with Otherside Entertainment, owned by Paul Neurath (brainchild of the Immersive Sim) and currently employing Warren Spector.

If only

kdawg88 wrote:I was not impressed by the writing or general story aspect of either game. Can't say I'm disappointed by the result.

I was not impressed with the gameplay, and I get mildly agitated seeing so many give it a free pass. Like the story it's passable to good, but not Immersive sim-tier. Nothing really was though.

Cybernetic pig wrote:

kdawg88 wrote:I was not impressed by the writing or general story aspect of either game. Can't say I'm disappointed by the result.

I was not impressed with the gameplay, and I get mildly agitated seeing so many give it a free pass. Like the story it's passable to good, but not Immersive sim-tier. Nothing really was though.

I appreciate how easy it is for that style of game (or any for that matter) to be developed into an incoherent mess. I think if you look at the practical, gameplay aspects of those games, separated in a theoretical sense from the story/atmosphere/immersion aspects, you will find that they are relatively stable, intuitive and well-organised - at least using the original title as a point of comparison (which itself has obvious practical flaws). I am not in love with it either but it is a strong title and you need to give credit where it is due.

I think the story was deliberately made only passable given the type of market they were aiming for. Make the writing too smart and you will end up alienating a significant portion of the mainstream - not to mention, console - market. You might argue that hiring Pacotti would have been an obvious choice for A) linking up the new title properly with the source material and B) smarter, more interesting writing. Then again, the story of the original title is not fundamentally different in terms of its basic conspiracy theory / illuminati-runs-the-world structure. The original title demonstrably veers more towards socio-political critique, and Pacotti certainly 'sneaked in' quite a few leftist ideas, but I don't see the two stories differing all that much in a basic, structural sense. The only major difference I can see is that the original game perhaps placed more emphasis on the choice between the endings. I think each ending was made more meaningful to the player. And my basic point here is as much to say that the original title was not as good as you think it is, as it is to say that HR's story was not quite as dumbass as it appears - it at least lends itself to some degree of socio-political reflection, and there are meaningful and progressive relationships between the characters.

Seeing how Mankind Divided is only half a game, I am slightly upset to hear the second half will not be released any time soon.

I am quite hesitant to buy DXMD even if it is on 70% sale. I don't think there would be a better offer in the near future.

Jonas wrote:Seeing how Mankind Divided is only half a game, I am slightly upset to hear the second half will not be released any time soon.

Perhaps.

It is also not a surprising result. Take 5 years to release half of a sequel (with few enough innovations that 15 years ago it would have been an expansion pack) and you may very well find yourself justifiably on thin ice.

Playing Dying Light right now. Pleasantly surprised for a AAA. Now that's how you do a sequel/spiritual sequel. Absolutely everything is better.

Edit: What the hell?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying_Light

Reviews from the gaming press aggregate around 7.5, with such comments as this:

"the game is a definite improvement on Dead Island but still behind the curve in terms of most games."

Then immediately below this the "sales" paragaraph exposes what other AAA was being released in that time:

In the first week after its release, 1.2 million people played Dying Light.[92] The retail version of Dying Light debuted in No. 1 in the U.S. software sales chart, outselling heavy competitors such as Grand Theft Auto V and Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. Dying Light has the highest-selling first month of sales for a new survival horror intellectual property, breaking the record previously held by The Evil Within.[93][94] The game also debuted in No. 1 in the UK software retail chart for two weeks, outperforming other major releases in February such as The Order: 1886 and Evolve, despite the game was released a month early in digital format.

Call of Duty doesn't really even have a freaking campaign. The Order: 1886 was heavily blasted for being 3 hours long, and Evolve was met with mass disappointment too (but still sold very well of course, because marketing). The Evil Within was met without any real acclaim and is forgotten already. The only "real" competitor here is GTAV, which I personally didn't like and thought was worse than the likes of Vice City or San Andreas (and Dying Light so far by a considerable margin) overall for a number of reasons.
What the fuck are these reviewers on about. Oh right, it's a game focused on gameplay as opposed to cinematics, probably why they didn't like it. Some even complaining about the difficulty being too high when that's hardly the case at all, it only barely makes it on to a acceptable level of difficulty to be engaging.

Never mind, the game sold well and in my opinion it deserved it for innovating and providing an actual game. I haven't got too far so maybe it all goes to shit later on, but so far I've been loving it. With some quests even making me think and strategize. who would have thought?

Sorry, gone way off topic here with the edit.

Haven't even played MD yet. Those micro's kinda turned me off till it's really really cheap.
As it does most games really.

If it did bad, they really got themselves to blame