deus ex 3?

[Sparta]

In the Dx from the first moment there are strange things happening, and untill the last moment therte is no clear good or bad guy. There are as lot of twists, like that the order and WTO are the same, that aphostelcorp works for JC, and what the Knightstemplar are. The whole game you are finding out thinbgs that rase even more questions and it all wraps up nicly in the end. And the fact that you can piss of a lot of the sides till pretty late has a pretty damn good explenation. The game is also a good social political lesson, unlike the first one that has the plot of b movie.

Actually this fits Deus Ex much better then IW.

 

[Cons Himself]

you see Grey Fox, no one else shares your opinion. this is probably because you are WRONG

 

[Warbie]

He can't be wrong - it's an opinion.

He is very alone in thinking IW is a very good game though, and even more alone in thinking that it's better than the original.

 

[Cons Himself]

nope. he's wrong.

someone could have an opinion that made-for-daytime-TV movies about empowered women overcoming evil husbands are good films. they'd be tragically tragically wrong.

 

[Warbie]

No, you're wrong!

 

[Asknoone]

Nobodies wrong...it's just an opinion....which Grey Fox takes as an insult if you don't agree with it.

 

[Cons Himself]

No, you're wrong!

post count ++

 

[Gray Fox]

Nobodies wrong...it's just an opinion....which Grey Fox takes as an insult if you don't agree with it.

Funny the how you carefully bash me without it actually sounding like that. Get over it.
I don't take an opinion as an inslut, but I do take it as an insult when I'm trying to have my arguments are ignored, not responded to, and all the anwser to it are either bashes at me, and/or things that make no sense what so ever.

 

[Cons Himself]

dude, you make no sense at all. probably smoking too much weed or something jar?

 

[Warbie]

post count ++

Nope, just trying to add a little levity to this silly thread.

(and you're still wrong )

 

[Warbie]

but I do take it as an insult when I'm trying to have my arguments are ignored, not responded to, and all the anwser to it are either bashes at me, and/or things that make no sense what so ever.

*reads our past debates in previous threads*

The irony

 

[Cons Himself]

oh man postcount ++++

and im still right

 

[Warbie]

oh man postcount ++++

and im still right

Last word freak!

 

[Axyon]

Back on topic, now.

 

[Gray Fox]

*reads our past debates in previous threads*

The irony

what irony, the best you could do is say that everybody loves the first better than the second and that, that means that it's better. Why would that be so, if every one decides to jump from a bridge does that mean that you have do that to, or that they are right. Having the majority behind you mey give you a bit more leverage but it doesn't necesairy make your points right.

 

[Asknoone]

Funny the how you carefully bash me without it actually sounding like that. Get over it.
I don't take an opinion as an inslut, but I do take it as an insult when I'm trying to have my arguments are ignored, not responded to, and all the anwser to it are either bashes at me, and/or things that make no sense what so ever.

I never bashed you, I just said I didn't agree and you just decided that I/we (Absinthe) didn't understand the story.

 

[Gray Fox]

You are the ones that wrote that Chad had been bastarized, thats a clearl indication that you did not understand the story.

 

[Absinthe]

What's your rationale to support that?

 

[Gray Fox]

Kieron Gillen: At the end of Deus Ex, it was essentially voices shouting at you like "Do this!" "No! Do this" "No, this!" "This!" From what I've seen of Invisible War, this appears to have been extended to the whole game. It's like having parents having a divorce, constantly pulling you in different ways.

Warren Spector: It's pretty wild. Sometimes the different factions give you different goals, which is cool because you can actually play the game through several times and see completely different stuff. Not just interactive stuff - but different stuff. But my favourite moments are when people give you diametrically opposed goals on a single map. Kill this person/Don't kill this person. Destroy this thing/protect this thing.

You can't imagine how much I want to see millions of people play this game. It's completely out of our hands. It's done. I don't know what they're going to respond to... I think I do, but I don't know. I just want to see it.

Anyway - yes, you're right. The entire game is suffused with that. And you decide which directions, if any, you want to be pulled in. During the course of the game, we let you surf the wave - do whichever goals you want and create your own faction. But at the end of the game - and I'm so happy about this, though it may kill us.

In the first game, our endgames were general enough for players to find what they want in each. Here, not everyone finds what they want... and they still have to make a choice. Which is maybe the most valuable life lesson to take from this. There are no happy endings. There is no easy answer. There is no bad guy you can kill to make everything right. That one comes through loud and clear.

source

There were no clear badguys, why was chad a badguy to you people, was jc better, do you like living like a borg? Did you like the knights templar better, their freedom. We had a poll in the politics forum, about nation vs freedom, most people chose freedom, you chose freedom absinthe,does that mean you liked the templar end the best. Whats wrong with chad dumier, he didn't want chaos, what bad has he done thats so bad, the illuminati ending is pretty good, 100 years of prosperity. Or did you like the jc end the best, did you really like it the best or was it just becasue of JC, how do you know Helios hadn't taken him completly over.

Judging from your post I have to assume that you like nice and simply stories, like SW, with the good and bad guys. Yu oversimplify things, hell even spector said that dx2 is much deeper.

Here are some more links to spector interviews, and he basicly says everything I said about Dx1 vs Dx2, and the direction they were going for and how they wanted the game to be. Be it with less flaming.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/437/437838p1.html
http://deusex2.filefront.com/file/Warren_Spector_interview;20131
http://archive.gamespy.com/interviews/february03/spectordx2/

 

[Absinthe]

There were no clear badguys, why was chad a badguy to you people, was jc better, do you like living like a borg? Did you like the knights templar better, their freedom. We had a poll in the politics forum, about nation vs freedom, most people chose freedom, you chose freedom absinthe,does that mean you liked the templar end the best. Whats wrong with chad dumier, he didn't want chaos, what bad has he done thats so bad, the illuminati ending is pretty good, 100 years of prosperity. Or did you like the jc end the best, did you really like it the best or was it just becasue of JC, how do you know Helios hadn't taken him completly over.

1) Clear bad guys? Maybe not. Anybody worthy of my sympathy? Certainly not. Again, everybody was an extremist and I didn't like any of them.

2) Templars and freedom? The templars hated biomodifcation and wanted to kill anybody associated with it sans you. What freedom? It was nothing but their own brand of fundamentalism. It's strange that you criticise us for not understanding the story when you don't seem to either.

3) Chad Dumier's character had completely changed around. He was all about global control in order to maintain stability. But in the first game he was a gainst such a control because of the implications and abuse it could and would result in. He also completely disregarded JC despite the fact he saved his ass. Chad Dumier's change in character made no sense and he only turned into another conspirator. Nonsensical. No rhyme or reason. If they wanted to make Chad so different, they might as well have made a new character.

Judging from your post I have to assume that you like nice and simply stories, like SW, with the good and bad guys. Yu oversimplify things, hell even spector said that dx2 is much deeper.

You can cut back on your condescension and your over-inflated ego already. You wonder why you get such a negative backlash when you treat everybody else as inferior. This is not an issue of complexity. This is an issue of having characters and factions that I don't have any sympathy for. This is about scant character development that relies on contrasts and cliches. It's not necessarily the content that is bad, but its subpar presentation that diminishes its impact.

It's ironic that you accuse us of liking simplicity. Because nearly everybody agreed (including Ion Storm) that DX2 was a simpler and more "streamlined" game. Some would go as far as to call it the Fisher-Price DX experience.

And what do you think Spector is going to say? It's his game. He wants to promote it. He's not going to say "Hey guys, we simplified the story for DX2 (as well as everything else)"? No.

Here are some more links to spector interviews, and he basicly says everything I said about Dx1 vs Dx2, and the direction they were going for and how they wanted the game to be. Be it with less flaming.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/437/437838p1.html
http://deusex2.filefront.com/file/Warren_Spector_interview;20131
http://archive.gamespy.com/interviews/february03/spectordx2/

How they wanted the game to be and how the game turned out are two different things. After all, I don't think any sane developer intends to turn out a bad game. But even then some of the decisions they made before the release were questionable to the fans. And guess what happened in the end? Game's released. Gets subjected to generally positive reviews, but everybody views it as inferior to the original. Fans bitch about a majority of the changes. Game doesn't sell too well. Oh wow, how did I not see this coming?

 

[Gray Fox]

Spector is basicly contradicting everything you people said about the game, gameplay wise, story wise, character wise, lvl wise. if you don't believe him by all means, my experience are simmilar to what he said Dx2 would be.

1) Clear bad guys? Maybe not. Anybody worthy of my sympathy? Certainly not. Again, everybody was an extremist and I didn't like any of them.

2) Templars and freedom? The templars hated biomodifcation and wanted to kill anybody associated with it sans you. What freedom? It was nothing but their own brand of fundamentalism. It's strange that you criticise us for not understanding the story when you don't seem to either.

3) Chad Dumier's character had completely changed around. He was all about global control in order to maintain stability. But in the first game he was a gainst such a control because of the implications and abuse it could and would result in. He also completely disregarded JC despite the fact he saved his ass. Chad Dumier's change in character made no sense and he only turned into another conspirator. Nonsensical. No rhyme or reason. If they wanted to make Chad so different, they might as well have made a new character.

You first chad was a badguy and now you say there are no clear badguys.
The templars certainly were the ones who wanted the most free society of the three main factions, and their id what happens whne there is no social controle, not something like the WTO, maybe thats why Chad turned his back on them, he saw what anarchy could lead to, The templar ending is the anarch ending. And furthermore hcad had very good reasons for turning, thast what happens, people do that. People change, but once again you oversimplify it and don't like it.

You can cut back on your condescension and your over-inflated ego already. You wonder why you get such a negative backlash when you treat everybody else as inferior. This is not an issue of complexity. This is an issue of having characters and factions that I don't have any sympathy for. This is about scant character development that relies on contrasts and cliches. It's not necessarily the content that is bad, but its subpar presentation that diminishes its impact.

It's ironic that you accuse us of liking simplicity. Because nearly everybody agreed (including Ion Storm) that DX2 was a simpler and more "streamlined" game. Some would go as far as to call it the Fisher-Price DX experience.

And what do you think Spector is going to say? It's his game. He wants to promote it. He's not going to say "Hey guys, we simplified the story for DX2 (as well as everything else)"? No.

I don't have a inflated ego, I treat people the way they act, and if you act like 13year old, you get treated like it, get over it.
And I never said the gameplay is more complex, I said that the story and the characters are more complex, exactly as spector said. Streamlined, does not mean supperficial.

How they wanted the game to be and how the game turned out are two different things. After all, I don't think any sane developer intends to turn out a bad game. But even then some of the decisions they made before the release were questionable to the fans. And guess what happened in the end? Game's released. Gets subjected to generally positive reviews, but everybody views it as inferior to the original. Fans bitch about a majority of the changes. Game doesn't sell too well. Oh wow, how did I not see this coming?

No the second Dx was meanth for a different crowed of people, that a lot of the fans of the old Dx bitch doesn ot mean the game is inferior, it means that they didn't like it. Nor does it make spectors claims false.

 

[Absinthe]

Spector is basicly contradicting everything you people said about the game, gameplay wise, story wise, character wise, lvl wise. if you don't believe him by all means, my experience are simmilar to what he said Dx2 would be.

If he only pleased one out of ten people, would you say that he succeeded?

Although it's dumb to bring Spector into this. The project lead was Harvey Smith.

You first chad was a badguy and now you say there are no clear badguys.

No. You said that there were no clear bad guys. I would personally say that the Templars were the bad guys. And I never said Chad was bad either. He was, however, somewhat of a bastard and his change in character made no sense.

The templars certainly were the ones who wanted the most free society of the three main factions, and their id what happens whne there is no social controle,

No. They very much wanted social control. They just wanted the end of biomodification. You don't seem to know what you're talking about.

not something like the WTO, maybe thats why Chad turned his back on them, he saw what anarchy could lead to, The templar ending is the anarch ending.

No, it's not. Jesus, and you say I don't understand things. The closest you get to an anarchy ending is with the Omar. The Templars wanted to rule through strict fundamentalism. That is not anarchy.

And furthermore hcad had very good reasons for turning, thast what happens, people do that. People change, but once again you oversimplify it and don't like it.

What does change have to do with simplicity? They are not contrasting values. Can you please make some sense? I can understand a change in character, but there was no rhyme or reason behind his. Chad the revolutionary turned into Chad the guy who wanted global control. Something like that could happen in real life, but it served no dramatic purpose in DX2. Honestly, you could have changed Chad's name to something else and the effect would have still been the same. Instead, it felt like they were trying to force links to the previous game.

You keep talking about the good reasons behind Chad's change in character. Oddly enough, however, you have never explained them.

I don't have a inflated ego, I treat people the way they act, and if you act like 13year old, you get treated like it, get over it.

Ah, but you were the one who began accusing us of not being able to understand the story, when that's clearly not the case. Any immaturaty in this thread was spawned by you and you have continued in perpetuating it. You've attacked us on unrelated grounds (ie. you must have also hated MGS2's story), you have accused us of being stupid, and your argumentation has been poor. So excuse us if we're not going to reply in kind.

And I never said the gameplay is more complex, I said that the story and the characters are more complex, exactly as spector said. Streamlined, does not mean supperficial.

I was merely showing how your accusation of us preferring simplicity was bullshit. But you're right. Streamlined does not mean superficial. But I do not think it worked for the better in DX2's case.

It's great that you accuse us of having weak arguments for pointing out how most of the fans agreed with us, but then go right around and point to Spector as if that adds any worth to what you say.

No the second Dx was meanth for a different crowed of people, that a lot of the fans of the old Dx bitch doesn ot mean the game is inferior, it means that they didn't like it. Nor does it make spectors claims false.

Meant for a different crowd of people, eh? Wow, that's smart. Let's make a sequel that alienates our core fanbase! Doesn't matter though. The game apparently wasn't too appealing to appealing to any crowd, considering its relatively poor sales.

You argue that just because the fans disliked it doesn't mean that it was an inferior game. By that same logic, you could argue that just because the fans liked something doesn't mean it's superior. You have no logical consistency with your arguments.

Here's how it generally works. If something is well recieved and makes a good profit, we consider it good. If something is poorly recieved and doesn't make a good profit (perhaps it loses money), then we consider it bad. Granted, there are some exceptions to this, but this is often the system we go by.

 

[Asknoone]

You are the ones that wrote that Chad had been bastarized, thats a clearl indication that you did not understand the story.

Yes, I did say Chad had been bastarized - that is because I felt, please take notice of the I (got that, good lets continue). Because I felt, that Chad had a few sticks shoved up his ass in the past 20 years between Deus ex and IW - is not a call for you to bash anyone, least of all me and Absinthe.

So I'm guessing somewhere in those 20 years, Chad wok up on the wrong side of bed and though; "WTF!? I'm a revolutionary, I fight for freedom!...Actually no this sucks, I want to be an evil coporate man."

In IW, he's become the very thing he fought against in Deus ex, why is this? Why is he trying to apply to society what he thought was absolutley wrong in the first...or did you hate Deus ex so much, you never got to the end.....or Paris..

 

[Gray Fox]

Yes, I did say Chad had been bastarized - that is because I felt, please take notice of the I (got that, good lets continue). Because I felt, that Chad had a few sticks shoved up his ass in the past 20 years between Deus ex and IW - is not a call for you to bash anyone, least of all me and Absinthe.

So I'm guessing somewhere in those 20 years, Chad wok up on the wrong side of bed and though; "WTF!? I'm a revolutionary, I fight for freedom!...Actually no this sucks, I want to be an evil coporate man."

In IW, he's become the very thing he fought against in Deus ex, why is this? Why is he trying to apply to society what he thought was absolutley wrong in the first...or did you hate Deus ex so much, you never got to the end.....or Paris..

This says more about you than teh game.

 

[Cons Himself]

This says more about you than teh game.

What? How does it say more about him than the game? Care to elaborate on your arguments for once without giving questionable logic to back back yourself up? You've dug yourself a hole and instead of stopping, you've just continued to make yourself look like even more of a child: calling other people stupid and questioning their intelligence because they don't agree with your rather eccentric view of the Deus Ex games.

Chad changed. OK, people change yes - I can agree with you there. But was it ever explained why he changed? No, it wasnt, and that meant we gamers playing the game lost our sense of disbelief - it was a plot hole. Dont you think that Deus Ex 2 should have bothered to explain why he changed? Dont you think Deus Ex 2 left out a lot of backstory compared to the heaps and heaps of Books, Newspapers and News Bulletins the first Deus Ex game had? Dont you think this was one of the major failings of Deus Ex 2 compared to the first game?

If you dont, theres not much point in carrying on a debate with you.

 

[Gray Fox]

There was no such point carrying a debate with you to begin with.
I don't need to defend myself, Spector explains it himself.

 

[Asknoone]

There was no such point carrying a debate with you to begin with.
I don't need to defend myself, Spetor explains it himself.

What? How does it define myself? You really don't understand anything, do you.

 

[Cons Himself]

I see, so because you have backed yourself into a corner, your only way out is to claim that Warren Spector agrees with you that Deus Ex 2 is a better game. Of course hes going to say that in interviews after the game comes out - he wants it to sell doesnt he? Or is he like you - content with (supposed) artistic perfection in a game even though it doesnt shift units off shelves.

What does Spector have to say about the lack of the backtstory in Deus Ex 2 compared to Deus Ex 1, since you seem to have such a great knowledge of the inner workings of his mind (maybe youre symbiotic with him)?.

 

[Sparta]

In the first game, our endgames were general enough for players to find what they want in each. Here, not everyone finds what they want... and they still have to make a choice. Which is maybe the most valuable life lesson to take from this. There are no happy endings. There is no easy answer. There is no bad guy you can kill to make everything right. That one comes through loud and clear.

Then that kinda defeats the purpose of naming the game Deus Ex 2 then doesnt it

 

[kupocake]

Then that kinda defeats the purpose of naming the game Deus Ex 2 then doesnt it

Which is presumeably why it isn't named Deus Ex 2

 

[DeusExMachina]

I see, so because you have backed yourself into a corner, your only way out is to claim that Warren Spector agrees with you that Deus Ex 2 is a better game. Of course hes going to say that in interviews after the game comes out - he wants it to sell doesnt he? Or is he like you - content with (supposed) artistic perfection in a game even though it doesnt shift units off shelves.

What does Spector have to say about the lack of the backtstory in Deus Ex 2 compared to Deus Ex 1, since you seem to have such a great knowledge of the inner workings of his mind (maybe youre symbiotic with him)?.

Actually, DX2 had better backstory than DX. And isn't this thread about ideas for Deus Ex 3?! Just ignore Grey Fox and list some ideas you would have for a DX3 game.

 

[kupocake]

Actually, DX2 had better backstory than DX. And isn't this thread about ideas for Deus Ex 3?! Just ignore Grey Fox and list some ideas you would have for a DX3 game.

Deus Ex 2 Backstory: was Deus Ex 1 itself. Sure that's good, but it set up the new "post fall" world poorly and rather boringly. Part of the trouble I found was that the microscopic levels made each "city" feel like the size of densely populated village. Cairo now a conclave? It felt more like a shoebox.

And here's a suggestion for a Deus Ex 3: don't do it. Personally, the interest I had in Deus Ex was all but killed by Invisible War. It's not likely to be made, and developers are better off making new stories. Or giving us System Shock 3.

 

[Cons Himself]

exactlt by backstory deusexmachinia, i meant the random bits of info lying around in the forms of books, newspapers and news reports...deus ex 2didnt have much of this

 

[Asknoone]

Deus Ex 2 Backstory: was Deus Ex 1 itself. Sure that's good, but it set up the new "post fall" world poorly and rather boringly. Part of the trouble I found was that the microscopic levels made each "city" feel like the size of densely populated village. Cairo now a conclave? It felt more like a shoebox.

And here's a suggestion for a Deus Ex 3: don't do it. Personally, the interest I had in Deus Ex was all but killed by Invisible War. It's not likely to be made, and developers are better off making new stories. Or giving us System Shock 3.

Exactly.

 

[Cons Himself]

looks like Grey Fox threw in the towel. well he was taking a beating. never mind Grey Fox - everybody takes a beating sometimes.

 

[Gray Fox]

I quit because I argue to make a point, once that is done, and you just get people who want to argue to diss you, I leave, casue it does not contribute to the thread nor to my point. You on the other hand are just a pathetic pile of shit, who wants to flame, and your last post proves it, it's nothing more then flaimbait.

 

[Absinthe]

Ciao, Grey Fox. My irony meter is on the verge of exploding.

 

[Gray Fox]

Oh please, con himself is just a troll, trying to feed and bump his thread. And you are on par with him. He's just going to come in every few days and post a flaimbait, just to keep his thread alive, untill a mod closes it down. It's just pathetic, you people get off on this, and are comparing it to a boxing match.

 

[Asknoone]

My irony meter has already gone through the roof. Why call him a pathetic pile of shit grey fox? Yeah, it was a pointless post and could be veiwed as flamebait but I wouldn't go that far.

And you've fallen into the trap, if it was flamebait - you were reduced to swearing at him, you yourself becoming a flamer. Which actually, you already are, calling us brain dead and such for not understanding a story we don't like, and as i've said I understand it perfectly.

Ah well, auvior Grey Fox, perhaps we'll be able to engage in more interesting and less flamed discussions about the two now.

 

[Cons Himself]

You on the other hand are just a pathetic pile of shit, who wants to flame.

lol is there an internet irony awards website that we can put this up for?