Re: Deus Ex 3
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:44 am
words are cheap, you're all cheap. Actions speak louder then words, and my actions will say that I'm not as cheap as you bums
Official Forums
https://www.offtopicproductions.com/forum/
https://www.offtopicproductions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10411
I consider you classist and an ambassador to all classists everywhere..Hashi wrote:words are cheap, you're all cheap. Actions speak louder then words, and my actions will say that I'm not as cheap as you bums
Setting doesnt matter(for gameplay).. so yeah that is a crap criteria.You know what my opinion on RPGs is? My opinion is that any RPG that isn't set in a fantasy world featuring elves and orcs
A defensibly opinion, definitely.that doesn't feature skill progression through actions (seriously, you can get better at lock picking by bashing orc heads in with your sword? That's not how a true RPG should work), that doesn't let you create your own character from scratch including choosing from several races, classes, appearances,
Again, this is story, not gameplay.and that doesn't have a story centered on saving the world from an invasion by demons or dragons, is not a true RPG
Again, a defensible position, just not one I agree with.In my opinion, Bethesda is the only studio in the world that still makes true RPGs.
So if you disregard half of the character advancement, you get no new abilities? That seems like a bad argument to me. Augs are just skills by another name(both skill points and augs are given from exploration and plot right?)Jonas wrote: Well as I've pointed out, if you don't count the augmentations
True, but I play almost all games released on the PCDDL wrote:We are ALL going to play this. Some of us may play it PURELY to bitch about how dumbed down it is, but nevertheless, we are all going to play this.
Have to agree on this one... Its not too shabby, if its execution is good.Jonas wrote: Side note: upgrading augs with XP actually makes sense - it represents your character getting used to them and learning how to use them in different ways; picking up new techniques basically. As justifications for levelling up go, it's not too bad.
Good game? That is up to you, and I wont lose any respect for you if you think its good. Good sequel? hell no, its the same setting in name only, the gameplay bears no real similarities, and the RPG elements are so incredibly streamlined they may as well not be there.Nameless Voice wrote: I'm sure Jaedar will disagree, but I think Fallout 3 is a good example of it being possible for another company to take over an established IP and make a sequel that stands up on its own as a good game.
Fair enough, but I still needed my internet FixJonas wrote:Don't expect anything else out of me on this one, I've said what I needed to say.
So what's so incredibly different about the setting, apart from the ridiculous lack of progress in the 200 years since the war? The setup is the same, the style is the same, all the major players are there. What do you see as missing?Jaedar wrote:Good game? That is up to you, and I wont lose any respect for you if you think its good. Good sequel? hell no, its the same setting in name only, the gameplay bears no real similarities, and the RPG elements are so incredibly streamlined they may as well not be there.
The major players are there in name only. Bos are no longer an elitist "protect the knowledge" but instead paladins in power armor. Mutants sent fr.o.m. Intelligent super humans to orcs With machineguns. And so on.So what's so incredibly different about the setting, apart from the ridiculous lack of progress in the 200 years since the war? The setup is the same, the style is the same, all the major players are there. What do you see as missing?
It doesn't have all of Oblivion's flaws - some things are much improved over Oblivion. The way everyone levels up with the player is present to some extent, I think, but toned down enough as to not be completely ridiculous. Conversations are far more interesting and there's a larger variety of voice actors, which does wonders for the hated "same person everywhere" problem.Mr_Cyberpunk wrote:Fallout 3's biggest problem is that it shares all the flaws of Oblivion, and then adds its own in the form of Vats- ie. their I-Win button that essentially gives the player god mode and is a pretty major game breaking mechanic.
The BoS not being like their western compatriots is a major plot element? The Outcasts are the traditional Brotherhood types, and consider the main BoS guys as traitors for betraying their goals.Jaedar wrote:The major players are there in name only. Bos are no longer an elitist "protect the knowledge" but instead paladins in power armor. Mutants sent fr.o.m. Intelligent super humans to orcs With machineguns. And so on.So what's so incredibly different about the setting, apart from the ridiculous lack of progress in the 200 years since the war? The setup is the same, the style is the same, all the major players are there. What do you see as missing?
Steel be with you friend. QEDNameless Voice wrote:
The BoS not being like their western compatriots is a major plot element? The Outcasts are the traditional Brotherhood types, and consider the main BoS guys as traitors for betraying their goals.
Agreed. I would say that F03 is a better game than oblivion, but for some reason, I enjoyed Oblivion much much more.Nameless Voice wrote: It doesn't have all of Oblivion's flaws
Unless you know something I don't, and you may, this is just speculation.Jonas wrote:Side note: upgrading augs with XP actually makes sense - it represents your character getting used to them and learning how to use them in different ways; picking up new techniques basically. As justifications for levelling up go, it's not too bad.
PC Gamer's website is down right now, but the rationalisation of upgrading augs with XP representing getting used to your new augmentations is something I read in an interview with one of the EM guys. It's official, it's not something I'm just making up.chris the cynic wrote:Unless you know something I don't, and you may, this is just speculation.
Upgrading augs with XP could make sense. It could not make sense. It depends on how the augs are upgraded, and how it can be rationalized.
Ok, well that's what I get for not reading every thing about the game. I'd read multiple things where they talked about using XP to upgrade augs, but nothing where they said why. I'm not entirely surprised you knew something I didn't.Jonas wrote: PC Gamer's website is down right now, but the rationalisation of upgrading augs with XP representing getting used to your new augmentations is something I read in an interview with one of the EM guys.
Funny last time I checked you were saying it was a sequel to Fallout seems to me its a successor to Oblivion, and I will agree with you that it did a lot of things better than oblivion, but you'd expect that given the amount of time they had to improve their Frankensteinified engine (and it seems Obsidian are going to push that even further). I still stand by my claims though that Morrowind was their best game, I'd also go further to say that if it weren't for the bugs Daggerfall would have been their best instead. Morrowind was a step in the right direction, and then Oblivion screwed it all up by removing what made their games so good to play- Fallout 3 shares that problem, it doesn't share the fun that we had playing Fallout 1 and 2 instead feels like I'm playing Oblivion with an IWin button- If it had been Morrowind.. well I probably might not be so hostile towards it- morrowind had the detailed mechanics to make it fun- Oblivion doesn't it seems very void of them in an effort to make the player feel better about themselves being AWESHUM.It doesn't have all of Oblivion's flaws - some things are much improved over Oblivion.
Not that I remember. And yeah, you're right they'll have to plan it carefully. On the plus side, if they do make it more "new techniques" instead of "incremental improvements", that would be pretty great - Deus Ex was all about visible progress over small increases in arbitrary numbers (even if most of the weapon mods were arguably pretty incremental).chris the cynic wrote:I still think it depends on what upgrading means. Which, as far as I know, we haven't heard yet. (Did it say in the interview?)