Interview Deus Ex: Human Revolution Interview @ Gamasutra

[Gord]

My biggest gripe with the game (boss fights aside) were a few balancing issues.
I would have liked to see a patch addressing things like usefulness/cost of some augs, weapon balance and maybe the way exp was awarded.

 

[Mrowak]

By the looks of it there's still hope for Thi4f.

I am playing Deus Ex: HR now, and I must say this is perhaps the first time I've had so much fun with an AAA title in years. Granted it has some AI issues, some idiotic pressupositions (how come no one ever learns the you stunned/kill someone unless they find a body? You'd think in the future soldiers would have radios to copy back to each other and HQ) and godawful boss-battles, but behind it all for the first time in a long time a see a genuine effort not to dumb things down. Also, my storyfaggy needs are very satisfied with it. The sheer amount of backstory, the presentation of controversial issues, the realisation on numerous themesand how they keep recurring in narrative. First good attempt to depict hard sci-fi in gaming in years.

Also:

Spoiler

The mega-trolling with the replacement augment-chip was golden.

 

[mikaelis]

It's the whole transition thing. Same thing with Thief DS that the Marquess mentions: the levels themselves were actually bigger than they seemed, it's the whole breaking them up for the benefit of consoles that make them feel smaller. DXHR also tended to focus on narrow streets, building complexes etc. rather than taking place in more open areas like many of DX's missions. Just the Statue of Liberty level alone is mostly empty space.

I have fears for Thief, but from the list of so-called AAA devs I can't think of anyone that would do a better job. I'm glad they went with DXHR first as the DX games were always self contained and a bit of rape in one would not necessarily fuck up the whole set up. Thief on the other hand is GARRETT. T: DS may have been crippled by consolitis and a dying developer to an extent but the atmosphere and protagonist pulled it off. With Eidos Montreal already having some experience with DXHR; even though that's a different style of game even as it shares similarities with Thief; I expect them to have learned a bit more about what worked, what didn't(boss fight shit for one) and let Thief benefit from this.

Heh, was not sure to brofist you or not for that - so I did neither of those .

Funny thing "Thief" is. It is about Garrett. But it is also about "Thief" universe and background lore as much as about Garrett. Plus - there is this unique gameplay - sneak, steal, GTFO, be afraid (when you feel you are not enough of the thief badass). What stands for "Thief" is still heavily underused - merging Tech with Magic and Religion (same thing, hehe) and unique setting (filthy middle ages full of poverty, religious confrontations (Pagan, Mechanists, Hammerites, Keepers). Plus, and probably, the most important - the gameplay - where you don't shit bullets out of your ass like in Splinter Cell, but rather taking stealthy approach. All of those trigger "steampunk" phrase, but I think there is more to that.
So it is a fucking mixed bag which turned out to be a masterpiece. All three games. Though, there was some butthurt about the gameplay and level design in the third chapter. Still, I am the fan of all of them.

ps. It even could work well with the concept art world, where "future Garrett" is holding a gun in his Puma rucksack (or whatever it was).

 

[commie]

ps. It even could work well with the concept art world, where "future Garrett" is holding a gun in his Puma rucksack (or whatever it was).

You had me until this bit. Sorry bro but that's the derpiest idea I've ever heard. May I direct you to the Assassins Creed thread?

Of course it is the whole technology/nature thing..can't be arsed detailing it again. Said it all before in the Thief threads here. The whole concept would work and be elaborated upon in all sorts of spinoffs based in this universe. 'Thief' as a game series though is about Garrett the 'THIEF', hence the name. It's not about Betty the chambermaid or Brian the guard. It's not a strategic RTS set in the world of Thief or a adventure game. I have no problem about any of these things being made in this world, provided that they stay true to it. What I DO mind is if the eponymous 'Thief'(Garrett) is replaced by a relation or someone completely different in a subsequent game like with the DX series. There is only one THIEF and that's why I feel so strongly that any game using that title should have the same protagonist.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

HR was kind of like the first AssAssCreed. Fun and pretty until you realize every level is the first level. Still, I enjoyed it all the same...in a non-mind-blowing sort of way.

 

[Gregz]

HR was repetetive,boring and bugged
i grey haired on this game.

This for me as well. I was really disappointed with it.

Wasn't there a poll on DE:HR a while back? I don't recall the results...I'm curious what the general Kodex Konsensus was on this one.

Check out the "Codex GOTY 2011" thread. You won't like what you see.

the whole in-game advertisement issue.

I never saw this. I think it's a myth. Or it was axed very quickly.

Color me shocked, but you were right Infinitron. More than 50% voted above average, which is pretty high praise around here:

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/deus-ex-human-revolution-the-codex-verdict.71058/

I was amazed (saddened) by the posters preferring HR over DE:1 though, I mean...wow. I voted 4/10 for HR (to be fair I haven't done a 2nd playthrough yet), whereas I'd put DE:1 at 9/10 on the same scale. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Maybe there's a correlation between how much people loved DE:1 vs. hated HR, that would make sense actually...

 

[Azrael the cat]

HR was repetetive,boring and bugged
i grey haired on this game.

This for me as well. I was really disappointed with it.

Wasn't there a poll on DE:HR a while back? I don't recall the results...I'm curious what the general Kodex Konsensus was on this one.

Check out the "Codex GOTY 2011" thread. You won't like what you see.

the whole in-game advertisement issue.

I never saw this. I think it's a myth. Or it was axed very quickly.

Color me shocked, but you were right Infinitron. More than 50% voted above average, which is pretty high praise around here:

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/deus-ex-human-revolution-the-codex-verdict.71058/

I was amazed (saddened) by the posters preferring HR over DE:1 though, I mean...wow. I voted 4/10 for HR (to be fair I haven't done a 2nd playthrough yet), whereas I'd put DE:1 at 9/10 on the same scale. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Maybe there's a correlation between how much people loved DE:1 vs. hated HR, that would make sense actually...

Deus Ex is my 'return to every year' game, and I'd still put HR as a 6 or 7 (if DEx was a 10 - it isn't, but given that it's one of my 1-2 favourites, that's how I'm scoring things subjectively).

I admit that I'm giving HR a lot of leeway for the gaming environment that it was competing against - Deus Ex came out in an era where the developers at least new that they would be praised for adding options, reactivity and emergent gameplay, whereas the HR developers were operating in an evironment that is openly hostile to these things. But what I liked about both was that each game disproves the entire design fallacy underlying the latter TES games, Dragon Age/Mass Effect etc. Keeping in mind that System Shock 1 and 2 both commercially failed in the short-term (though went profitable later), Deus Ex was targetted to fans of Doom and Quake, as well as rpg fans who would never normally pick up an action game, but had decided to give these FP-hybrids a go after UU. It showed that you could introduce a fuckload of reactivity, interactivity and sophistication with an interface and learning curve that even pure-FPS fans could grasp - just by having good level design and an intuitive levelling/skill system that prodded gamers to try out options other than straight combat. HR did much the same with the current shooter mechanics - not as good as the original, but it still showed that even the mass shooter fans can appreciate a step up in complexity, and that it doesn't have to be about endless simplification. My main beef again was the boss fights - mainly because they undid most of the work that the game's level design and abilities did to encourage indirect tactics (e.g. the easiest way to get through most of the action set-pieces during the main gameplay was to use the short-term invis to buy a few seconds to get you into stealth, use the jump and landing augs to skip several floors and sneak away, isolating and picking off enemies silently or plain avoiding them, whereas the boss fights gave no such option and essentially mandated a run+gun tactic, with the investment required to make that possible).

Basically, if you can play Mass Effect you can play Deus Ex. If you can play FO3 you can play Deus Ex. It shows that great design allows you to give the player a lot of freedom, while retaining an intuitive and friendly 'feel' that doesn't scare casual gamers away. The exact opposite of the utterly unambitious attitude of Bioware at present, where it's all about cutting features away as soon as a chunk of the audience struggles to understand them - Bioware games treat the degree of choice itself as being the problem, whereas Deus Ex shows that if gamers are struggling to grasp the complexities of a shooter-rpg hybrid then it's a problem with your interface or your level design, and you need to go back and rework those until you can KEEP the complexity AND the intuitiveness.

That doesn't give us back the kind of straight-crpgs that many of us here would like, where it's simply a different market segment than the action-gamers, who want a different type of game altogether. But if the industry was better skilled, Deus Ex should have been the model for 'mass entertainment' games of the 2000s, not the decline that even FPS's experienced.

 

[Infinitron]

I've found that it's better to treat DX:HR's boss fights as very lethal puzzles rather than combat sequences. You've been trapped in a room with this homicidal maniac. How do you dispatch him in the easiest way and get out of there?

But if the industry was better skilled, Deus Ex should have been the model for 'mass entertainment' games of the 2000s, not the decline that even FPS's experienced.

Amen. When I made my post months ago about whether the decline is manageable, I was thinking about games like DX:HR.

 

[Mrowak]

I've found that it's better to treat DX:HR's boss fights as very lethal puzzles rather than combat sequences. You've been trapped in a room with this homicidal maniac. How do you dispatch him in the easiest way and get out of there?

I say... rocket in the face! It always works... if you hit them three times...

Meh, the boss battles were the epitome of console-arcade design I am whining so much on TW2 forums. Random augs that can take shots from rocket launchers to the face? Super abilities you can't possibly have? Running and dodging because those dudes and dudesses have - muhahaha - one shot kill abilities. Your most standard mode of dispatching people (hand-to-hand combat) not only not working but giving an edge to the enemy?

The only thing I really liked about it is that it kind of forced you to take pure combat augments. This helped a great deal during the crisis with Malik.

 

[Kaol]

I guess its like fallout 3 is to fallout 1&2 fans. I never got into the them massively and i enjoyed fallout 3 alot despite that it has flaws.

 

[Mrowak]

I guess its like fallout 3 is to fallout 1&2 fans. I never got into the them massively and i enjoyed fallout 3 alot despite that it has flaws.

Son, you've just committed most profound sin of all. Repent, blasphemer!

 

[DwarvenFood]

ITT putting FO3 above FO1/2 actually IS worse than putting DX:HR above DX1.

 

[commie]

I've found that it's better to treat DX:HR's boss fights as very lethal puzzles rather than combat sequences. You've been trapped in a room with this homicidal maniac. How do you dispatch him in the easiest way and get out of there?

I say... rocket in the face! It always works... if you hit them three times...

Meh, the boss battles were the epitome of console-arcade design I am whining so much on TW2 forums. Random augs that can take shots from rocket launchers to the face? Super abilities you can't possibly have? Running and dodging because those dudes and dudesses have - muhahaha - one shot kill abilities. Your most standard mode of dispatching people (hand-to-hand combat) not only not working but giving an edge to the enemy?

The only thing I really liked about it is that it kind of forced you to take pure combat augments. This helped a great deal during the crisis with Malik.

Yeah that fucking invisible bitch raped my arse so hard as I had gone a pure stealth wimp with just H2H and that weapons' system thing. Was so hilarious that those things don't work on bosses.

What crisis with Malik are you talking about? The ambush? I finished it non lethal, using stealth to get close then H2H with dropping off the emp mines where I knew the mechs were going to land. Took a few goes to learn the pattern of where the most dangerous enemies are and where the waves show up but it felt fuckin good man to get past that thing without killing anyone...

Pissed me off that the boss fights forced me to kill(even if indirectly). Same thing with DX though...


bong

Who's putting HR over DX? All I see is at most people enjoying it for more than just 'what it is'. No-one is saying it's better than DX although even I can see elements that it does better than DX did.

 

[Volrath]

lolle no

fallout 1 or 2 isnt the best game ever created

dx is

 

[Gord]

Yeah that fucking invisible bitch raped my arse so hard as I had gone a pure stealth wimp with just H2H and that weapons' system thing. Was so hilarious that those things don't work on bosses.

You mean the Typhoon? I didn't really use it much (only put one or two points into it at the end when I didn't know what to do with them), but I heard it's pretty neat against the bosses when upgraded.

I found the vision-upgrade aug somewhat useful against the invisible punk-girl.

 

[Kaol]

ITT putting FO3 above FO1/2 actually IS worse than putting DX:HR above DX1.

Not really, FO3 is a different kind of game to FO 1&2. If you didnt like FO 1&2 you might like 3. Conversely if you liked 1&2 alot, you might not like 3.

DX 1 is pretty much the same to DX:HR, but worse in every way.

 

[Mrowak]

ITT putting FO3 above FO1/2 actually IS worse than putting DX:HR above DX1.

Not really, FO3 is a different kind of game to FO 1&2. If you didnt like FO 1&2 you might like 3. Conversely if you liked 1&2 alot, you might not like 3.

Not really. The reasons were aptly given by Azrael the Cat:

Basically, if you can play Mass Effect you can play Deus Ex. If you can play FO3 you can play Deus Ex. It shows that great design allows you to give the player a lot of freedom, while retaining an intuitive and friendly 'feel' that doesn't scare casual gamers away. The exact opposite of the utterly unambitious attitude of Bioware Bethesda at present, where it's all about cutting features away as soon as a chunk of the audience struggles to understand them - Bioware Bethesda games treat the degree of choice itself as being the problem, whereas Deus Ex shows that if gamers are struggling to grasp the complexities of a shooter-rpg hybrid then it's a problem with your interface or your level design, and you need to go back and rework those until you can KEEP the complexity AND the intuitiveness.

I fix'd for him.

DX 1 is pretty much the same to DX:HR, but worse in every way.

While I agree that HR is worse than original and can't really conced that it is worse in every way.

Please enlighten us on the following facets: How Deus: Ex human revolution is worse than Deus Ex in Story, Art-direction (not graphics - that would be too unfair) and Interaction (that one may be easy)?

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

Oh, fucking fuck, of course Human Revolution seems good when compared to other AAA titles. But don't you dare "contextualize" it in order to save it, as you don't do for other games.

The matter is very simple. HR, to me, was just... uninspired. I had been sinking a lot of hours in it. At a certain point, I asked myself: am I having fun, or am I going forward for inertia?
I discovered the answer was the latter, and I immediately stopped.
It was just banal and repetitive (when it wasn't downright offensive. Jensen's voice was a constant grating chipping away at my sanity with every grunt).

Then I played the first Deus Ex (spoiler alert: I HAD NEVER PLAYED IT BEFORE! I played HR before it! Shame!), and the comparison could not exist.
An atmosphere that's just right, cool characters, a nice setting, real dilemmas, an absolute degree of freedom, the skills that made their impact FELT, especially the costly ones,
the augs... and the looks.

Ah, that's another thing that I hate in EVERY prequel of slightly older franchises.
Does EVERYTHING have to look squeaky "technologic" and have that orangeish hue? Am I the only one irritated? Why does every Aug look so clean? Fuck, the modernest of the
fucking augs in HR should look older than Gunther. Where the fuck do you ever get the feeling that the thing is set BEFORE the original? Eh?

The technical limitations of the time, you will surely say.
NO! LOOK at the CONCEPT ART of the first Deus Ex! Then come up with something plausibly related! FUCK.

Sorry, I digress. But fuck HR with a bucket of railroad spikes.

Your opinions may vary and I repsect them all.

 

[Infinitron]

The "Harvester" gang member augs you met in Hengsha looked kind of similar to Gunther, actually.

 

[Kaol]

ITT putting FO3 above FO1/2 actually IS worse than putting DX:HR above DX1.

Not really, FO3 is a different kind of game to FO 1&2. If you didnt like FO 1&2 you might like 3. Conversely if you liked 1&2 alot, you might not like 3.

Not really. The reasons were aptly given by Azrael the Cat:

Basically, if you can play Mass Effect you can play Deus Ex. If you can play FO3 you can play Deus Ex. It shows that great design allows you to give the player a lot of freedom, while retaining an intuitive and friendly 'feel' that doesn't scare casual gamers away. The exact opposite of the utterly unambitious attitude of Bioware Bethesda at present, where it's all about cutting features away as soon as a chunk of the audience struggles to understand them - Bioware Bethesda games treat the degree of choice itself as being the problem, whereas Deus Ex shows that if gamers are struggling to grasp the complexities of a shooter-rpg hybrid then it's a problem with your interface or your level design, and you need to go back and rework those until you can KEEP the complexity AND the intuitiveness.

I fix'd for him.

DX 1 is pretty much the same to DX:HR, but worse in every way.

While I agree that HR is worse than original and can't really conced that it is worse in every way.

Please enlighten us on the following facets: How Deus: Ex human revolution is worse than Deus Ex in Story, Art-direction (not graphics - that would be too unfair) and Interaction (that one may be easy)?

I would have thought those were some of the more obvious flaws of HR.

Story just isnt up to the same level as the orginal. Its difficult to make a short arguement that clearly demonstates this. In DX i felt every important part of the plot is both explained during the game and also believable, at least if you do not overanalyse.

DXHR just didnt give me that feeling, alot of the plot was either poorly explained or so unbelievable that it detracted from the game.

Art direction almost explains itself. I don't like games that have "art direction". DXHR has been slated for its so called "piss filter", DX had nice locations and the graphics were good for the time.

Interaction? I'm pretty sure the interaction with the environment is a strongpoint of the original and something that was much reduced in DXHR. If you mean with npc's then there isnt a huge difference. Both offer choices in dialogue, HR adds a dialogue minigame although it is only used at a few points in the game. I thought DX had far more interesting non critical npcs than DXHR however.

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

The "Harvester" gang member augs you met in Hengsha looked kind of similar to Gunther, actually.

Googled a pic. Only the specs look Guntherian. Everything else looks like a fucking prequel star wars droid with a hoodie.

 

[Mrowak]

Ah, that's another thing that I hate in EVERY prequel of slightly older franchises.
Does EVERYTHING have to look squeaky "technologic" and have that orangeish hue? Am I the only one irritated? Why does every Aug look so clean? Fuck, the modernest of the
fucking augs in HR should look older than Gunther. Where the fuck do you ever get the feeling that the thing is set BEFORE the original? Eh?

To be honest I liked the depiction on cleanliness and neatness in HR - especially when associated with augmentation. You relly get the feeling that this was the period before shit hit the fan and full global decline struck everyone - just few seconds before it, in fact. You do perceive the roughness of the world and it's really foreshadowed how augments will bring about degeneration - in the way how super-soldiers (like Adam) are augmented or how augmentation is used by criminals. It does fit the theme of corruption and downfall (symbolised by e.g. Icarus trailer).

On the side note - one of the best moments in the game is listening to that lunatic prophet on the streets of Detroit during the riots. He sounds like your average crazed preacher swaying the crowd with cheap propaganda... except the things he says are 100% correct and will prove true in Deus Ex.

 

[Infinitron]

DX:HR - "It's not the end of the world, but you can see it from here."
DX - "Five minutes before the fall of human civilization."
DX:IW - "Five minutes before humanity's rebirth."

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

I would someone get your point better if the style of tech wasn't so suspiciously Mass-effect-with-a-cyberpunk-spin.

To use an example, you know what would have made the star wars prequels even more awful? Having a shiny, slick, form fitting, dark-eldaresque ultra-tech black suit
to Darth Vader instead of the normal one at the end of episode III.

Basically, everything in HR gets this treatment on the aesthetical side.






But all of this is quite secondary to the issue of gameplay. While a tad more complex than every cover based regen-health aRPG, HR was still a
cover based regen-health aRPG. With stealth.
Can a bro get a witness? Am I the only one thinking this?

Am I too really bitter and strict towards HR? A lot of codexers seem to like it in some degree (ranging from meh to fuck yeah).
And I'm not as nearly a bitter "hardcore" guy as many people here are (or proclaim themselves to be).
Was it really so good? I can't see it.

 

[Mrowak]

ITT putting FO3 above FO1/2 actually IS worse than putting DX:HR above DX1.

Not really, FO3 is a different kind of game to FO 1&2. If you didnt like FO 1&2 you might like 3. Conversely if you liked 1&2 alot, you might not like 3.

Not really. The reasons were aptly given by Azrael the Cat:

Basically, if you can play Mass Effect you can play Deus Ex. If you can play FO3 you can play Deus Ex. It shows that great design allows you to give the player a lot of freedom, while retaining an intuitive and friendly 'feel' that doesn't scare casual gamers away. The exact opposite of the utterly unambitious attitude of Bioware Bethesda at present, where it's all about cutting features away as soon as a chunk of the audience struggles to understand them - Bioware Bethesda games treat the degree of choice itself as being the problem, whereas Deus Ex shows that if gamers are struggling to grasp the complexities of a shooter-rpg hybrid then it's a problem with your interface or your level design, and you need to go back and rework those until you can KEEP the complexity AND the intuitiveness.

I fix'd for him.

DX 1 is pretty much the same to DX:HR, but worse in every way.

While I agree that HR is worse than original and can't really conced that it is worse in every way.

Please enlighten us on the following facets: How Deus: Ex human revolution is worse than Deus Ex in Story, Art-direction (not graphics - that would be too unfair) and Interaction (that one may be easy)?

I would have thought those were some of the more obvious flaws of HR.

Story just isnt up to the same level as the orginal. Its difficult to make a short arguement that clearly demonstates this. In DX i felt every important part of the plot is both explained during the game and also believable, at least if you do not overanalyse.

While it's true you were a little bit central to the plot, that doesn't necessarily mean the story in Deus Ex was better. It just had different focus.

DXHR just didnt give me that feeling, alot of the plot was either poorly explained or so unbelievable that it detracted from the game.

I fully disagree here. To my minds the plot in original was pretty poorly explained - in the sense that it was explained but in pretty meh way. The intro cutscene comes to my mind. A lot of things were very direct... which is pretty fucking bad for a game where you play an agent of sort that deals with conspiracies.

HR was a little bit subtle with everything. I especially enjoyed how important were all the themes that appeared, how crucial were the issues that had been raised by the narrative, how the world you perceived - albeit small, and limited - truly seemed to live and react to the current news. I did follow the news in the TV, read emails, newspapers and books - which I simply don't bother in most other quasi-RPGs. It all fell together neatly.

There are, however, some gripes I have with character motivations... in both games.

Art direction almost explains itself. I don't like games that have "art direction". DXHR has been slated for its so called "piss filter", DX had nice locations and the graphics were good for the time.

I do like the games that have art direction. As a story-fag I pay attention to everything - costumes, weapons, architecture, character models. That was pretty win in my book. And "piss filter"? Suffice it to say it didn't bother me at all. I really don't see a reason why should it bother anyone.

Interaction? I'm pretty sure the interaction with the environment is a strongpoint of the original and something that was much reduced in DXHR. If you mean with npc's then there isnt a huge difference. Both offer choices in dialogue, HR adds a dialogue minigame although it is only used at a few points in the game. I thought DX had far more interesting non critical npcs than DXHR however.

You are right about interaction - I inserted it there just for show. However, while there is some truth in your opinion about non-critical NPCs I feel that the critical ones were better in HR.

I'll be honest with you. I haven't played Deus Ex 1 in maybe 7 years so perhaps I am biased having fresh memory of HR in my mind. Regardless, I think that DR: HR is a very good game - surprisingly good, as I've been warned by some other Codexers it's shit. It's far from that, and despite many shortcomings I enjoyed every bit of it (except for the bossfights). It may not be worthy to be a proper prequel to Deus Ex... but on its own it stands pretty strong.