The Dues Ex IP has immense potential to be genre defining. If you haven't played the original you missed out on one of the most adult videogames developed ever.

However, my fear is that it's going to be essentially Bioshock in the future which has become a sort of standard for the industry. Not to mention this looks like its a very linear narrative already.

I am worried that they'll dumb it down, but what they've said about sticking to the model of the first game at least makes me hopeful.

In-game screenshots apparently:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=397260

bet its another shit generic Game.

its not like the late 90s and early 00s when publishers would just trust a new dev and a new typ of game and go along with it. now they want x game based on x game that will generate x amount of cash.

Deus Ex remains to this day my favorite game of all time. I wasn't impressed by DX2 and I don't have particularly high expectations for the third, especially with regards to some of the gameplay features. (Call of Duty style health regeneration, a cover system (what's wrong with leaning?), focus on combat, etc).

Also, what's with all the recent games and tinting everything certain colors. It's certainly stylistic, but it definitely starts to wear on the eyes. You can make a cool looking game without the annoying tints. (And the yellow here is particularly harsh.)

In any case, I probably won't bother with the game, as it's going to be a console game ported to PC, and I've decided to swear off non PC-exclusive games. (Or at least, games that aren't developed for the PC first, consoles second.)

The trailer does look cool and all, hence my upvote, but Square cutscenes always look cool.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Eidos Montreal, Square Enix, 360, PC, CGI, human augmentation' to 'Eidos Montreal, Square Enix, 360, PC, PS3, CGI, human augmentation' - edited by KnivesOut

Cyberpunk is dead. Long live cyberpunk.

Looks like it could be a great movie.

I really wish game companies would just quit it with the CG trailer bullshit. Show me the GAME.

>> ^Farhad2000:

The Dues Ex IP has immense potential to be genre defining. If you haven't played the original you missed out on one of the most adult videogames developed ever.
However, my fear is that it's going to be essentially Bioshock in the future which has become a sort of standard for the industry. Not to mention this looks like its a very linear narrative already.


For me, Deus Ex is a good game, but overrated. I much preferred System Shock (and Bioshock)'s excellent atmosphere in their take of the FPS RPG. System Shock is the true genre definer, whereas Deus Ex added some shallow dialogue and superficial plot choices (and a last minute selection of one of 3 endings) to the mix.

All the ideas and tone in the trailer were taken from Ghost in Shell, not impressed at all.

Square-Enix, the japanese developer of Final Fantasy are known for great CGI-trailers, true, but they are probably not involved in this game at all. The only reason this game has a Squeenix logo is because they bought Eidos last year, the game is being developed in Canada by Eidos Montreal.

I don't like the way they are branding stuff after the takeover, it's very confusing and easy to think the japan studio is somehow involved with games they have nothing to do with.

Do you think it's still worth playing? I somehow managed to avoid ever playing System Shock 1/2. Don't mind if it's graphically aged but I heard that it has a few too many similarities to Bioshock? Still worth going back to?
>> ^mentality:

For me, Deus Ex is a good game, but overrated. I much preferred System Shock (and Bioshock)'s excellent atmosphere in their take of the FPS RPG. System Shock is the true genre definer, whereas Deus Ex added some shallow dialogue and superficial plot choices (and a last minute selection of one of 3 endings) to the mix.

>> ^RedSky:
Do you think it's still worth playing? I somehow managed to avoid ever playing System Shock 1/2. Don't mind if it's graphically aged but I heard that it has a few too many similarities to Bioshock? Still worth going back to?


Bioshock and System Shock 2 are both by Ken Levine, and Bioshock's design is a simplified, console friendly version of System Shock 2. A lot of the same elements are present (Audio logs, hacking, different ammo, augments, powers), but SS2 also has things like RPG character stats (str, agi, end), inventory management, weapon customization, etc.

The main difference between the two games are the settings. SS2 is more of a deep space survival horror, like Dead Space. The atmosphere was excellent for its time, and it's one of the scariest I've ever played. If you don't let the poor graphics (very low poly models, even for 1999) distract you from the immersion, or let things like degrading weapons and the difficutly frustrate you, then its definitely worth playing.

This site has a nice faq on technical issues, and also includes links to the Rebirth high poly mod and the SHTUP high res texture mod.

The only good games are the ones that are NOT "like" other games... Too bad, not many companies seem to get that.

>> ^theali:

All the ideas and tone in the trailer were taken from Ghost in Shell, not impressed at all.


I'm a huge Ghost in the Shell fan, both the original movie and the series. (I also hate most anime.) But, seriously...does GitS have a monopoly on the concept of people becoming cyborgs? I mean, the themes in this trailer aren't even that similar to ghost in the shell. This trailer's all about corporations vs. the people, sweeping change in culture, etc. GitS was sort of beyond that stage for Japan...when people were more used to this stuff being around, and it was more about mind vs. biology/technology.

Anyway, people borrow heavily from other people's crap all the time. They had a story on NPR the other day about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Ring_des_Nibelungen

It was all about how Marvel comics borrowed heavily from it, people argue Tolkien borrowed from it (there's even a section about Toliken/Wagner in that wikipedia article.

TL;DR version: IP does not mean "nobody can ever make another creative work about this concept ever again".