Review Deus Ex: Mankind Divided Launch Trailer and Reviews

[IHaveHugeNick]

Morrowind from gameplay pespective was absolute garbage, the only thing that made the gameplay bearable were all the exploits.

It's biggest redeeming quality was purely technological. It probably looked better than any corridor shooters on the market at the time, and it was open-world. We got used to the idea of free exploration in open-world over the years, but in 2001, those graphics combined with the sheer size of the world with no easily visible signs of procedural generation, it was absolutely shocking. And that's the kind of Bethesda I could still get behind. Yeah, the game in it's entirety was shallow and poorly designed, but at least they've had some ambitions.

Fast forward 15 years, they're on a 5th game that still uses slightly altered version of Gamebryo, the games have only gotten more shallow, ithey've gotten so lazy, they make EA look like a hungry ambitious startup determined to push the envelope.

 

[Kev Inkline]

For me, the single greatest moment of Fallout 3 (and actually a cinematic moment that fares well compared to any crpg in that matter) was when you first time emerged from the vault. After downright silly and inane character creation and whatever background story there was (can't bother to recall), that singular "OOH" moment really met my expectations after so many years being deprived of a new FO game.

Needless to say, once you arrived to Megaton the game felt already a bit stale.

 

[ArchAngel]

For me, the single greatest moment of Fallout 3 (and actually a cinematic moment that fares well compared to any crpg in that matter) was when you first time emerged from the vault. After downright silly and inane character creation and whatever background story there was (can't bother to recall), that singular "OOH" moment really met my expectations after so many years being deprived of a new FO game.

Needless to say, once you arrived to Megaton the game felt already a bit stale.

Funny, that was my experience as well except I found the Vault character generation cute. But once I arrived at Megaton and seen this is same Bethesda shit with random pointless wandering and being able to pointlessly pick up every plate and spoon I uninstalled it and forgot anything beyond F2 and BoS exists.

 

[Ash]

Morrowind from gameplay pespective was absolute garbage, the only thing that made the gameplay bearable were all the exploits.

Aren't you being a bit too critical of the gameplay?

-Good for exploration fags, at least until you start getting bored of the same old dungeon themes and fetch quests.
-Decent GUI, inventory, quest book etc. Not the best, but not absolute garbage.
-Good dynamic weather in an open world game in 2002? Did anyone else do this before? Affected gameplay because navigation and combat in a sandstorm was quite the setback, plus it gave you blight iirc.
-Just the little things, like having to levitate up Tel Aviv, or exploring one of those underwater dungeons with those bastard crab Dreugh or whatever they are called, or the verticality of the dungeons.

But of course quests left a lot to be desired, combat was a chore (at least before you got moderately skilled anyway), systems were a clusterfuck, and some systems were stripped from Daggerfall. But you can't go wrong with a nicely hand-crafted world over a procedurally generated one, providing the craftsman are good.
It's a highly flawed game but I suspect we all enjoyed the gameplay on some level when we first played it, while simultaneously raging at certain aspects of it.

 

[Lurker King]

However, comparing Fallout 3 to similar games like Morrowind, Oblivion, Gothic, Two Worlds, Assassins Creed, etc presents a much more favourable reaction.

Putting Gothic, Assassins Creed and Oblivion in the same bag.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I played the first Assassins Creed game for a couple of hours and didn't really like it (as in didn't see any reasons to keep playing). Maybe the sequels were really awesome but I've never tried them.

Gothic was a mixed bag game for me. The atmosphere was superb. The character system was non-existent. Combat was tolerable but not something I'd describe as enjoyable. The gameplay was very grindy, weapons were tied to stats so if you wanted to use better weapons you had to grind a lot. The first half of the game was pretty good but the moment you join a camp the game hopped on rails and became a rather boring action rpg where you run through the game killing orcs in two hits which got boring very fast.

 

[Ash]

Assassins creed is the original ubisoft AAA mindless map marker collectathon simulator. It's utter shit. I don't think even Oblivion or FO3 deserve to be chucked in the same bag, especially given they are, or pretend to be RPGs. But we're being pedants here. All popamole is popamole at the end of the day (excluding MW and Gothic).

 

[an Administrator]

Waiting for Codex review.

We *mostly* do RPG reviews here, so I don't see that happening anytime soon...

You review the Shitcher 3, which is the definition of popamole fantasy action FPS with light RPG elements, but refuse to review Deus Ex 4, which is even more an RPG than most of the other reviews in that genre?

On top of that, you reviewed Undertale... Favorably... let that sink in for a moment.

Okay.

I can't see why Deus Ex MD is less of an RPG than games like Thecnomancer, Hard West and Fallout 4(even though it was a bashing review, you guys still wrote a review for it)

 

[Space Insect]

So if FO3 was good for what it is, what is Oblivion? Is that still good for a generic fantasy action RPG?

 

[an Administrator]

it actually tries to be a deus ex game

Invisible War tried not only to be Deus Ex game, but even tried to become better than the original.
Trying too hard doesn't end up will sometimes...

 

[ghostdog]

Hmm? Invisible War? I don't know such a game. No sir.

:closes ears and runs away:

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Gothic 1&2 are a perfect example of sum sometimes being greater than parts.

Take almost any aspect of these game individually, and best case scenario is it turns out mediocre. The graphics were 3 years behind, the combat was meh, the interface and camera work were atrocious, the voice acting made my ears bleed. and I could go on, and on, and on. But the games in their entirety somehow managed to mask a lot of deficiencies. It's like, it was on rails just enough to keep the experience tight, but open enough to not feel constipated. It seemed like I'm freely exploring, even if in reality I mostly went where developers wanted me to. I never could put my finger on what makes these games tick. And neither can Piranha, judging from what they started making after Gothic 2.

 

[Vault Dweller]

So if FO3 was good for what it is, what is Oblivion? Is that still good for a generic fantasy action RPG?

In my opinion, Fallout 3 was a big improvement. So far Oblivion and Fallout 4 are the low points.

Consider this argument. If Fallout 3 was a game without any redeeming qualities, there'd no fucking away that New Vegas - a game running on the same engine and using the same systems and mechanics - would be so well received.

Gothic 1&2 are a perfect example of sum sometimes being greater than parts.

Take almost any aspect of these game individually, and best case scenario is it turns out mediocre. The graphics were 3 years behind, the combat was meh, the interface and camera work were atrocious, the voice acting made my ears bleed. and I could go on, and on, and on. But the games in their entirety somehow managed to mask a lot of deficiencies. It's like, it was on rails just enough to keep the experience tight, but open enough to not feel constipated. It seemed like I'm freely exploring, even if in reality I mostly went where developers wanted me to. I never could put my finger on what makes these games tick. And neither can Piranha, judging from what they started making after Gothic 2.

I think that Gothic's atmosphere was so good and unique among all the generic fantasy shite that many people overlooked the mediocre parts. You weren't a hero but a new guy who had to watch his back and explore the prison very carefully. You were given choices and freedom, which was also a rare feature back then, each camp had its own quests, etc. Then you make your choice, freedom is replaced by rails, you are no longer a weak new guy but a mighty hero wielding a 200-STR sword on his way to slay orcs and dragons.

By the time the Risen games rolled out, this was no longer new and exciting but old and done to death, which quickly exposed how much the gameplay was lacking.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Consider this argument. If Fallout 3 was a game without any redeeming qualities

Which it undoubtedly was/is. Unless maybe you count post-apoc setting which is still underused compared to standard fantasy when it comes to any subset of the RPG genre but that's about it, everything else in the game is fucking terrible (not in the least gunplay which feels worse than even other FPS/RPG hybrids like Bloodlines or Deus Ex let alone pure shooters). To compare it to games like Gothic series and Morrowind who have absolutely nailed world design and exploration (two key aspects of sandbox games) is laughable, Fallout 3 is not even in the same ballpark.

there'd no fucking away that New Vegas - a game running on the same engine and using the same systems and mechanics - would be so well received.

FNV strengths have nothing to do with idiotic Fallout 3 systems and mechanics (or terrible Gamebryo engine for that matter) it inherited. It's a great game despite those constraints, certainly not because of them. It would be as stupid as claiming PST was so well received because of Infinity Engine and RTwP combat system.

I think that Gothic's atmosphere was so good and unique among all the generic fantasy shite that many people overlooked the mediocre parts. You weren't a hero but a new guy who had to watch his back and explore the prison very carefully. You were given choices and freedom, which was also a rare feature back then, each camp had its own quests, etc. Then you make your choice, freedom is replaced by rails, you are no longer a weak new guy but a mighty hero wielding a 200-STR sword on his way to slay orcs and dragons.

By the time the Risen games rolled out, this was no longer new and exciting but old and done to death, which quickly exposed how much the gameplay was lacking.

You sound like Gothic type games are dime and dozen, I must have missed all those copycat/inspired by titles in the sea of hand-holding, level scaling, MMO inspired, multi-platform garbage that graces us every year. Gothic 2: NOTR is as much ahead of the curve when it comes to exploration focused ARPGs now as it was then. No dev (including PB themselves) has the balls, talent or dedication to make a similar title today, it's a design masterpiece of a bygone era.

 

[Tito Anic]

You sound like Gothic type games are dime and dozen, I must have missed all those copycat/inspired by titles in the sea of hand-holding, level scaling, MMO inspired, multi-platform garbage that graces us every year. Gothic 2: NOTR is as much ahead of the curve when it comes to exploration focused ARPGs now as it was then. No dev (including PB themselves) has the balls, talent or dedication to make a similar title today, it's a design masterpiece of a bygone era.

 

[Vault Dweller]

To compare it to games like Gothic series and Morrowind who have absolutely nailed world design and exploration (two key aspects of sandbox games) is laughable, Fallout 3 is not even in the same ballpark.

Yet these aren't the only key aspects.

FNV strengths have nothing to do with idiotic Fallout 3 systems and mechanics (or terrible Gamebryo engine for that matter) it inherited. It's a great game despite those constraints, certainly not because of them. It would be as stupid as claiming PST was so well received because of Infinity Engine and RTwP combat system.

I didn't say it was well received because of the systems. I said that the systems were decent enough for them to build something on it, both in case of PST and FNV.

You sound like Gothic type games are dime and dozen, I must have missed all those copycat/inspired by titles in the sea of hand-holding, level scaling, MMO inspired, multi-platform garbage that graces us every year. Gothic 2: NOTR is as much ahead of the curve when it comes to exploration focused ARPGs now as it was then. No dev (including PB themselves) has the balls, talent or dedication to make a similar title today, it's a design masterpiece of a bygone era.

You keep pushing exploration as if it's the only yardstick worth measuring games against. Did anyone say the exploration was subpar? Did the paragraph you quoted have anything to do with exploration?

 

[DeepOcean]

Which wins and why?

Vivec vs Moira Brown.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Yet these aren't the only key aspects.

And what key aspects of sandbox/open-ended ARPG Fallout 3 excels at (or hell, is even adequate)? Cause remembering my terrible (though admitingly not that long) experience with I can't really come up with anything that makes it compare favourably to other aRPGs (well maybe Oblivion I guess? Depends on whether you prefer guns or swords, mutants or orcs, it's like a palette switch basically).

I didn't say it was well received because of the systems. I said that the systems were decent enough for them to build something on it, both in case of PST and FNV.

In both cases, systems have nothing to do with their (good) reception. If anything FNV would have been even better received among Fallout 1/2 fans if it wasn't saddled with F3 baggage.

You keep pushing exploration as if it's the only yardstick worth measuring games against. Did anyone say the exploration was subpar? Did the paragraph you quoted have anything to do with exploration?

I wasn't pushing exploration in that paragraph, it's just a name I used to describe the genre (exploration focused aRPG), I could have just as used terms like open-ended or sandbox, hiking sims or whatnot. To repeat myself, I fail to see this saturation with Gothic clones in the aRPG genre that makes it seem like the concept was done to the death, PB themselves very much deviated from the formula in Risen 2 and 3. If I wanted a similar open-ended ARPG experience today with a rough start where every resource counts and the world feels actually dangerous, no level scaling/leveled ordinary mobs, group of enemies actually using their advantage in numbers, no quest compass/hand-holding, limited itemization that is mostly tied to faction hierarchy, character advancement system that makes a character visibly handle weapon better instead of pure damage increase etc. I'd be shit out of luck.

 

[DeepOcean]

 

[Vault Dweller]

Yet these aren't the only key aspects.

And what key aspects of sandbox/open-ended ARPG Fallout 3 excels at (or hell, is even adequate)? Cause remembering my terrible (though admitingly not that long) experience with I can't really come up with anything that makes it compare favourably to other aRPGs (well maybe Oblivion I guess? Depends on whether you prefer guns or swords, mutants or orcs, it's like a palette switch basically).

It doesn't excel at anything but it has a better character and combat systems as well as the side quests (i.e. 90% of quests in a sandbox game) than Oblivion, Gothic, Morrowind, Two Worlds, Skyrim, Fallout 4, etc. It doesn't make it a great game or a good RPG. It makes it an RPG you can play. In comparison, I couldn't play Fallout 4.

In both cases, systems have nothing to do with their (good) reception.

If the systems are utter and irredeemable shit, no quest design would make the game playable.

I wasn't pushing exploration in that paragraph, it's just a name I used to describe the genre (exploration focused aRPG)....

I don't know what exploration focused Arpg means exactly. I know I've enjoyed exploring all 3 Gothic games but I didn't enjoy grinding at all. I'd say the Gothic games had a lot more action than exploration and their combat systems were always the weakest aspect despite being the main activity.

To repeat myself, I fail to see this saturation with Gothic clones in the aRPG genre that makes it seem like the concept was done to the death, PB themselves very much deviated from the formula in Risen 2 and 3.

I didn't say Gothic clones. I said that when Gothic was released that whole "3 camps to choose from, each camp has its own quests" was a novelty. Few games offered factions and fewer still offered mutually exclusive factions. Now it's no longer a novelty.

Was Risen a worse game than Gothic? I don't think so. The Codex review says:

I’m aware some people might hate Risen after chapter two, some will probably hate it completely, but I must say that I really had a splendid time with this game, with all three playthroughs being somehow different and exciting, despite some of the shortcomings.

And in the end, the question still stands: is Risen a worthy spiritual successor to the Gothic series? Hell yes, if you want another injection of Gothic, Risen is definitely what you’re looking for, since it’s the same formula, but in a new engine, some new ideas and a lot of improvements. If you never liked any game from Piranha Bytes, though, you should avoid it like the plague, because there’s nothing new that would make you enjoy it.​

Yet whereas Gothic took the gaming world by storm by offering something new, Risen barely made a splash because the setup was old and the gameplay to support it wasn't there, much like it wasn't there in Gothic.

 

[Cynicus]

You fuckers are triggering my PTSD.

I know where VD is coming from regarding FO3, though. I don't think I would have wasted as much time as I did amassing a dozen GB of of mods trying to fix the unfixable had I not sensed something semi-redeeming in FO3. Ultimately, it was a futile pursuit. I should have known better.

Amongst all the stupid and aggravating things found in FO3, the one thing that will forever be seared into my brain was during the intro bit in Vault 101, when you come out of the classroom to find the Tunnel Snakes harassing the overseer's daughter, who is sobbing, and then....OMG GORILLA HANDS!!! The faces where bad enough, but those fucking hands.... :shudder:

 

[Tito Anic]

Guys, you know to good the game you are hating

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Yet these aren't the only key aspects.

And what key aspects of sandbox/open-ended ARPG Fallout 3 excels at (or hell, is even adequate)? Cause remembering my terrible (though admitingly not that long) experience with I can't really come up with anything that makes it compare favourably to other aRPGs (well maybe Oblivion I guess? Depends on whether you prefer guns or swords, mutants or orcs, it's like a palette switch basically).

It doesn't excel at anything but it has a better character and combat systems as well as the side quests (i.e. 90% of quests in a sandbox game) than Oblivion, Gothic, Morrowind, Two Worlds, Skyrim, Fallout 4, etc. It doesn't make it a great game or a good RPG. It makes it an RPG you can play. In comparison, I couldn't play Fallout 4.

Wow. Just wow. Are you trolling us now VD?

 

[Excidium II]

Everyone knows the basic requirement to be a game developer is having shit taste in videogames.

 

[Cynicus]

Seems like everybody and their dog has a gamez site now.

Anyway, I've not been following the game's development, but I imagine that MD will be much like HR. Probably better in some ways, probably worse in others. OK for a diversion, but still missing the je ne sais quoi of the original. Despite IW, I would really like to see Deus Ex back in Spector's hands, although that's obviously a pipe dream at this point.

The je ne sais quoi was an actually interesting way the story unfolded, the npcs and espcially the much more fresh and to the point writing. HR really suffers in the last part, not enough paranoia. Only Sarif dialogues were cool and hinted at good things that turned out to be pretty meh.

Sorry, Crescent Hawk, I didn't see this until now.

Yeah, I agree, but I think the intangibles go even further than that. One of my problems with the Eidos incarnation is that it takes itself way too seriously too often. Deus Ex is at its heart a B-Movie with a wacky plot made up of a bunch of kooky conspiracy theories. And on the technological side, nearly all modern games have a tendency to get in their own way. You can't have genuinely emergent gameplay when everything is so over-produced and railroaded. Having sticky cover, "helpful" popups every three seconds, e.g., Press X to Climb, and crap like that doesn't help. Of course, it's not all the fault of developers. The reality is that there are many, many "gamers" who really don't want games but just want the electronic equivalent of this:

Anyhoo, MD is sounding worse than I imagined it would be. I'll probably pass on it until it's $5 or something.