One small example....

[DaveW]

Fair enough. I think not running out of ammo for the basic stealth(ish) weapon is a good thing - it means that you always have a good takedown option. In Deus Ex, if you run out of ammo for the prod you basically can't take down an enemy quietly (seeing as the tranq dart gives them enough time to set off an alarm).

coughmeleeweaponscough

The baton would work for that, I suppose. The other melee weapons wouldn't (notice I said quietly) - but it still seems odd/limiting that a nano-augmented super agent can't just punch/grapple a terrorist.

I thought making the 'stun' weapon much more effective and replacing the melee weapons with manual take-downs (seeing as you have blades on your arms) was quite a nice way of keeping the game simple but efficient. But again, different philosophies - I see simple and efficient as a good thing, but I know a lot of people prefer the more convoluted (imo) gameplay of Deus Ex.

Again, game design philosophy - I don't think punishing a player because they dared to run out of ammo is a good thing.

Then why have ammo in the first place?[/quote]

Don't take what I said out of context - I was talking about quiet take-downs with the prod, not weapons in general.

What I'm talking about is essentially the same principle behind 'pop guns' in FPS games. Just like you don't punish a player and say "No more combat for you!" because they run out of ammo, I don't think you should punish a player with no more stealth because they ran out of prod ammo. Unfortunately that's what happens in Deus Ex unless you happen to have a baton. I think it should be made harder, but not impossible, because that ruins the enjoyment of the game (and the purpose of the game is enjoyment).

In HR, they do this by giving you the stun gun which is much easier to take down enemies silently because you can do it at a distance, so if you run out of ammo with that you have to creep up to enemies and take them down in close quarters which is generally more difficult.

[DDL]

That sort of comes under resource management, though. If you've gone and used all your prod ammo when you really need prod ammo, then you suck at resource management and should reconsider your career as a stealth agent who uses a prod.

I realise that allowing the player to totally gimp themselves is not something designers really like nowadays, but if you're going to include resource management at all, you need to (at the very least) make it actually meaningful. And of course, it's not like you NEED to kill/KO everybody (in either game).

[Cybernetic pig]

Deus Ex pushed the boundaries of game design and got so many things right, Human Revolution not so much.

[DaveW]

Deus Ex pushed the boundaries of game design and got so many things right, Human Revolution not so much.

You really like making generalised, sweeping statements and not backing them up. And when anyone asks you to clarify you just make more generalised, sweeping statements.

Deus Ex 'pushed the boundaries' a lot more than Human Revolution, because HR was an evolution of the genre that Deus Ex helped define. Pushing boundaries does not make it an objectively better game.

As for getting things right, I'll point you to the many things I've pointed out it didn't get right. Human Revolution did almost everything it did right - the reason some people here don't seem to like it is it didn't try to do some things. So you may disagree with the design philosophy, but that doesn't mean it didn't get things 'right'.

[Cybernetic pig]

That statement doesn't need backing up.

Some things that Human Revolution got wrong:

Its an XP grind-fest, rewarding XP for kills/takedowns and hacking ect was wrong, the system already used in deus ex was perfect as it did not penalise you for your playstyle and encourage you to hack everything in sight.

Side quests were just that, typical rpg side quests, in Deus Ex they feel natural and you dont just do them for the rewards.

Removed melee weapons and replaced them with contextual takedowns, other than the flashy, satisfying animations this imo was a bad decision: immersion breaker, dominated battery use, removed the melee playstyle (Skill involved, RPG elements that influence melee playstyle, choice of melee weapon etc). There should have been at least been a weak gun bash.

Level design was good, but was lacking compared to Deus Ex.

I could go on but like you said- different design philosophies. One of them was short sighted unfortunately.

[VectorM]

That statement doesn't need backing up.

Yes, it freaking does, unless you enjoy being treated like a dogmatic fanboy who doesn't actually know what he is talking about.

Side quests were just that, typical rpg side quests, in Deus Ex they feel natural and you dont just do them for the rewards.

Why do they feel natural in Deus Ex? Why don't they feel natural in HR? What makes them "typical" in HR and "untypical" in DX1? How do you know people did them only for the rewards in HR and not in DX1? Coherent arguments, can you do them?

Level design was good, but was lacking compared to Deus Ex.

Why was it good? Why was it lacking compared to DX1?

[DaveW]

That statement doesn't need backing up.

[...]

in Deus Ex they feel natural

[...]

Level design was good, but was lacking compared to Deus Ex.

[...]

One of them was short sighted unfortunately.

Yeah, you know when I said you like to make "generalised, sweeping statements"

I'll pick on this point specifically since the others are just too vague:

immersion breaker, dominated battery use, removed the melee playstyle (Skill involved, RPG elements that influence melee playstyle, choice of melee weapon etc). There should have been at least been a weak gun bash.

Why does it break immersion? What does 'dominated battery use' mean? Why does it remove the melee playstyle, and why is there less skill involved considering the 'melee playstyle' is running up to someone and pressing the 'attack' button with the crowbar - and using the takedowns is..running up to someone and pressing the 'attack' button? How do RPG elements not influence take-downs considering you can upgrade your ability to do them (faster / multiple targets)?

I could go on but like you said- different design philosophies. One of them was short sighted unfortunately.

You realise this is basically "Yeah, these are all just my opinions on game design. But your opinions are wrong."?

[Cybernetic pig]

I could go on and give my argument more credibility, but I really dont think I need to.

My level design claim Doesn't need backing up, you cant see it then you are blind.

Immersion breaker? Dominated battery use? removing melee playstyle? No I dont need to explain that either.

Only my claim of natural side quests I feel I should explain further, but I cannot be bothered right now, dogmatic fan boy I can live with that.

You realise this is basically "Yeah, these are all just my opinions on game design. But your opinions are wrong."?

No it was "One of the teams design philosophies were not as great as the other". But yes that is an opinion.

[DaveW]

I honestly think we could get more stimulating debate from a brick wall.

[Jaedar]

I don't think you should punish a player with no more stealth because they ran out of prod ammo. Unfortunately that's what happens in Deus Ex unless you happen to have a baton.

Or a combat knife.

Or a silenced weapon.

Or just avoid the enemy completely. And it's not like batons are rare(well, they're kinda rare, but there's several easy to get ones early in the game).

The baton would work for that, I suppose. The other melee weapons wouldn't (notice I said quietly) - but it still seems odd/limiting that a nano-augmented super agent can't just punch/grapple a terrorist.

Eh, I dunno. I can buy it. If you can't tho, then you can't.

[DaveW]

I don't think you should punish a player with no more stealth because they ran out of prod ammo. Unfortunately that's what happens in Deus Ex unless you happen to have a baton.

Or a combat knife.

Or a silenced weapon.

Or just avoid the enemy completely. And it's not like batons are rare(well, they're kinda rare, but there's several easy to get ones early in the game).

Well, I'm talking about melee - not firearms. But yeah, if you're carrying certain melee weapons you can do a stealth kill (can't say I've ever tried with a combat knife - but then, I never tried playing Deus Ex with stealth because I never thought it played that well.)

I just think that making the player carry one of those as a backup is a bit superfluous. Why not just have the takedowns? I think it's a much more elegant way of accomplishing the same thing, and at no point do you (potentially) punish the player.

The baton would work for that, I suppose. The other melee weapons wouldn't (notice I said quietly) - but it still seems odd/limiting that a nano-augmented super agent can't just punch/grapple a terrorist.

Eh, I dunno. I can buy it. If you can't tho, then you can't.

A super soldier who can lift up crates taller and heavier than himself, who can't throw a punch?

[Cybernetic pig]

[
A super soldier who can lift up crates taller and heavier than himself, who can't throw a punch?

JC was never properly trained in hand to hand combat

But It does not make sense in Human Revolution either, you can only throw a punch if you have 1 bar battery, yet you can still jump, aim, reload, sprint ect if you have no battery.

[Cybernetic pig]

I honestly think we could get more stimulating debate from a brick wall.

I am hardly even trying & refuse to try. Human Revolution was a good game but was far behind Deus Ex overall, even with its much newer engine and much bigger budget. Also, Human Revolutions AI was not exactly top notch either.

11 year gap between the two games and it wasn't even as good as the first, let alone better.
So yes you might as well go debate with a brick wall because nothing will change my mind. Good day.

[DDL]

"In my opinion"

[Cybernetic pig]

"In my opinion"

Of course.... For now.