Jeff Goldblum Fan wrote...
first, no, there was a 30 minute long or so video taken from a behind closed doors thing at E3 that showed parts wandering around the city and talkign to people and stuff.
Okay, that explains it, since I haven't seen it yet.
Jeff Goldblum Fan wrote...
your arguments about the artistic direction and higher quality graphics is fuckin laughable because that's no excuse for the basic underpinnings of the universe just gettin thrown out. having better graphics doesnt mean now everything can be covered in neon and hover around and do shit nothing could in the first game.
Paraphrasing "They do it now, because they can".
Not that it isn't a valid point. If you made something, you should stick with it. But it's not like it's impossible to fit it with previous conceptions. Maybe it all gets blowned up? Maybe it doesn't. This was done again and again in pretty much every a lot of varied franchise (not just PC games) and people lived with it. Some don't notice it. And there's also the dilemma if people will really want to see all those silly cleaner bots, the blocky, bright alarm buttons and 90's style concrete urban housing. I'm pretty sure that even if they went along with exactly same stylistic, somebody would whine. Because it wasn't exact enough for change.
On entirely related note, Original Hong-Kong was ugly. Don't want to see it again.
Jeff Goldblum Fan wrote...
ahhahahahaha yeah they're much subtler about it now. *sunglasses aug activates*
Hey, I like my sunglasses. Besides, so many people wear those things nowadays that you stand out more if you don't wear them. Just sayin'.
Jeff Goldblum Fan wrote...
also again, thats no excuse for changing things in the game's world. this is the same shit the Star Wars prequels ran into. if something is going to be in the same universe as another work, it must be consistent. it doesn't matter that aesthetic sensibilities have changed since then, it just makes the devs look retarded if things don't match up.
>Implying that most computer games were ever consistent with each sequel and prequel.
Jeff Goldblum Fan wrote...
the weapons are also much more futuristic. going back to the arm-cannon and "skul gun" argument, those kinds of things were obviously not in effect at the time of DX1. if they were, it was highly experimental, so why would a game that comes before this seem to have them everywhere?
probably the most advanced weapon in dx1 was the GEP gun, and it was really just a homing rocket launcher. i dont know if youve seen the weapon stuff for this one but it looks like some shit the Covenant use in the Halos.
also the dude with the gunarm is named Barrett. jesus fucking christ.
Because they're experimental? They might've been lying in magazines until some technician got the bright idea to make a skull gun with it. Kind of a devil's advocate argument, but it works.
The most technologically advanced weapons in Deus Ex were the Dragon's Tooth and plasma rifle. The first one is a nanotech-blade. Second fires fucking plasma. That's pretty futuristic, isn't it?
Unless they have laser crystl-firing railguns, I don't call the futuristic. Unless they do have it. Then you're right.
Also, Square Enix. That explains the hand-barrel guy.
Jeff Goldblum Fan wrote...
im not gonna bother with the mech/nano aug argument since you obviously didnt understand the significance of the two in the first game, or at least didn't read all the emails explaining it.
No, you're right, I didn't read all the mails. But isn't the underlying reason behind why the nanotech was kicked off, was the Page's little ego trip? He wanted to become "perfect being/God/saint" bullshit and merge with Helios to rule the world after Grey Death would kill of all those nasty people. Denton siblings were experiments to show if human/nanotech fusion was possible.
I won't speak of Inivisible War because I didn't play it, but wasn't the Denton ending about him using new generation of nanites to improve mankind and somehow link them (either with Helios or each other in semi-collective state, can't remember)
I'm not saying that cybernetics were better than nanotech, but I never got impression that nanotech was universally stronger. It certainly had unlimited potential and was way more practical than cybernetics. And it gave you lightbublbs in the eyes. Ergo, you got to wear sunglasses. At night. Yeeeaaaaahhhh????
And finally, you, I and pretty much everyone can't expect that it will be super-great and fill all our dreams just because it's god-dammned Deus Ex. Because world never works that way. Somethings you like. Some suck. No need to make that much rucks around it.