Problems, changes and comments on HDTP

EER · Post by **EER** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:49 pm

_Alex_ wrote:
giantzucchini wrote:I agree. No matter how ugly or disfunctional it is...it's still a vital part of the game aesthetic. I'd go with just Hi Def-ing the current one.
Going with that argument, the fact that the original characters had no freakin' ears was just as vital to the *aesthetic* , we should probably go ahead and shear them off the new models.

I think the missing of ears is of vital difference to changing the form of the assault rifle in the way that the original modellers couldn't be bothered to model ears, the AR I think is not really 'missing' stuff, it's just low-res.

giantzucchini · Post by **giantzucchini** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:10 pm

Well, a poll (or making 2 versions as is the current favourite choice) would be perfect for this situation.

EDIT: Well great minds think alike eh...I'm a bit slow on the uptake today it seems lol

Post by **Jonas** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:08 pm

EER wrote:I think the missing of ears is of vital difference to changing the form of the assault rifle in the way that the original modellers couldn't be bothered to model ears, the AR I think is not really 'missing' stuff, it's just low-res.

I think your argument is bad but your point is valid. I think a better argument would be that the missing of ears is with 100% certainty due to the low polycount limit on character models back in yonder 2000, whereas the appearance of the rifle is intentional design born from the creativity of an artist, not technology limitations.

justanotherfan · Post by **justanotherfan** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:11 pm

EER wrote:I think the missing of ears is of vital difference to changing the form of the assault rifle in the way that the original modellers couldn't be bothered to model ears. the AR I think is not really 'missing' stuff, it's just low-res.

Absolutely not, all the weapons should have ears. It's 2052 FFS.

Solid_Choke · Post by **Solid_Choke** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:10 am

_Alex_ wrote:As promised - heres a quick and dirty concept image i did using elements of both weapons.

Looks awesome! BTW I want my name in the credits heh

Post by **DDL** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 10:03 am

See now I greatly prefer the DX one to that...sorry, but I do.

Anyway, I think the DX assault rifle looks exactly right for what it does: it's a low-powered compact design for close quarters fighting. It doesn't do a lot of damage per round, but that's ok: it fires five at a time, and carries 30 rounds.

If we make it look like some sort of uber-modern 'realistic' machine gun, it will STILL be a low-powered weapon. It will STILL do not a lot of damage. It will STILL carry 30 rounds. So now there will be an irritating discrepancy in look and feel.

Changing something because 'it's ugly' is just a bad reason: it's not universally accepted as 'ugly', anyway.

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:31 pm

DDL wrote:Anyway, I think the DX assault rifle looks exactly right for what it does: it's a low-powered compact design for close quarters fighting. It doesn't do a lot of damage per round, but that's ok: it fires five at a time, and carries 30 rounds.

Let me put it this way:

A low powered compact design would never be widely accepted by the world's military forces and secret organisations bent on global domination when better firearms exist today.

Close quarters combat is in the realm of Sub Machine Guns, not Assault Rifle's.

Mr_Cyberpunk · Post by **Mr_Cyberpunk** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:45 pm

Besides, the gun is extremely underpowered anyway

Yet Assault Rifles are so popular in today's military - because they are very powerful weapons and very useful, yet I never seem to pick one up during the entire game. So I'd love to know what they were thinking with that one.

EER · Post by **EER** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:13 pm

SnipaMasta wrote:Let me put it this way:

A low powered compact design would never be widely accepted by the world's military forces and secret organisations bent on global domination when better firearms exist today.

While that may be true, it HAS been accepted in the parallel universe of Deus Ex.

Mr_Cyberpunk · Post by **Mr_Cyberpunk** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:27 pm

la la la la la la la..

While that may be true, it HAS been accepted in the parallel universe of Deus Ex.

ITS A FUCKING VIDEO GAME! NOT A UNIVERSE! There is a Style involved in Deus Ex, we're following that.. Not some rules that a game designer made up.

Post by **DDL** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:35 pm

There's a style which you're apparently completely discarding, you mean?

While we're at it, shall I increase the clip size and damage of the assault rifle? I could reduce the recoil, too. Hell, let's have it do as much damage as the sniper: they're both rifles, right?

Mr_Cyberpunk · Post by **Mr_Cyberpunk** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:47 pm

Well I dont know about you, But if I got hit by a rifle bullet. It'd probably kill me.. yet don't seem to happen in this game.

EER · Post by **EER** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:50 pm

Actually, the name assault rifle is wrong then.

Post by **DDL** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 3:16 pm

Mr_Cyberpunk wrote:Well I dont know about you, But if I got hit by a rifle bullet. It'd probably kill me.. yet don't seem to happen in this game.

If I got hit by a huge glob of plasma, I'd probably die, too: yet this also fails to happen in this game.

Hell, getting hit by a sniper round doesn't necessarily kill you in-game, either. I don't think in-game lethality matches real-world lethality terribly well, so it's probably not a great method of comparison.

Mr_Cyberpunk · Post by **Mr_Cyberpunk** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 3:21 pm

Yet I die if i'm shot with a Glock!?