Deus Ex

[Luftwaffles]

Hilarity, courtesy of Johnny:

 

 

Oh man, I haven't watched that guy's videos since the Moonbase Alpha text to speech romp ones.

 

I now feel the sudden urge to go do that in my game, though. I just took all my cardboard boxes downstairs and threw them at her.

[deanb]

http://pressxordie.com/2011/09/05/pixelogic-talks-deus-ex/

[deanb]

For Staysick (and anyone else on hacking 101)

 

If you're finding yourself Hacking a lot then spending early points on reducing the chances you'll be noticed. Can knock it down to 15%. Hacking Stealth Add-on.

 

Where possible, if you reckon you can do it safely and 80% of the time you can, get the datastore nodes as these contain Stop and Nuke viruses. Nuke means you can take over nodes without triggering the alarm, and Stop! does what it says on the tin and temporarily stops the system scan from reaching you.

 

What you should be doing too, though be aware this can trigger the alarm, is to fortify your captured nodes. This means when the system scan starts it'll take longer to reach you giving you up to a minute of breathing room (most time you get 15 seconds). Because this has a high chance to trigger the alarm you shouldn't start doing this until you get at least half way across. If you trip the alarm on your first node you're kinda fucked.

 

Since you can net 75-several hundred XP a pop I'd suggest you hack everything you can, even things you have the code for. Getting the hacking augments early on has pretty high return of investment if you're able to hack everything you see. 4000XP per praxis, you can easily hack 100 items per mission/chapter.

 

Oh and I'd get the Turret and Robot hacks early on too. It's really damn fun.

[Vargras]

This. At first I thought it was impossible, but then...

 

That is outstanding, how did you do it?

 

 

I got it on my non-lethal playthrough too, and as it's been said before, you have to be quick. If you can't kill or incapacitate enemies, at the very least try to get their attention off the VTOL and onto you. Keep in mind, the VTOL doesn't have an actual health bar, but rather has a limit as to how many hits it can take before blowing up. As a result, the box robot and heavy gunners take priority over the snipers and other baddies. Just work fast and you should get it.

 

[Hot Heart]

Since you can net 75-several hundred XP a pop I'd suggest you hack everything you can, even things you have the code for.

 

I think this is why I have apparently played for 26 hours and am only just past the second boss. I spend ages exploring EVERYWHERE in order to loot and hack.

 

I always have at least 4 praxis points spare in order to adapt to certain situations.

[Hot Heart]

OK, so there go any hopes for a non-lethal playthrough, but it was so worth it because

 

I kicked so much butt and saved Malik. Man, I love that explosive revolver.

 

Edited September 7, 2011 by Hot Heart

[deanb]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/4137-Deus-Ex-Human-Revolution

[Vargras]

What's the favorite font of anti-aug protestors?

 

Sans-Sarif!

 

*badum-tish*

[Connorrrr]

So, I just posted a status about this, so lets open up discussion here.

 

 

Apparently, there are now advertisements like the one pictured above in the game. I've yet to see one, this was posted on Reddit... How do you feel about this? While it doesn't impede on an excellent game, I'm still a little annoyed they decided to patch something like that in.

[Luftwaffles]

I think I dislike the concept more than I actually dislike the execution. I don't want ads in my games, and I don't really want them patched in after release, but this doesn't seem as bad as it could be. A little ad at the corner of a loading screen I rarely see doesn't seem that bad, I'm personally more worried about whats been going on with some TF2 servers where they have pop up commercials instead of the regular map video. I also really don't mind some ingame ads like billboards, and somewhat enjoyed BF3 advertising itself in the alpha. If ads are going to start showing up in games (and I'm pretty sure they will), I suppose there are worse ways to do it than this.

 

More than anything, though, this makes me a little worried about Eidos Montreal. I figured they were in some financial trouble, but patching in ads to their game after release makes me think things aren't looking good for future games from them.

[CorgiShinobi]

Now enters the Devil's Advocate. (What with me being in Advertising.)

 

There's most definitely a financial reason behind this, and I'm perfectly fine with a fraction sized banner advertisement on a loading screen that pops up from time-to-time. You know, that thing that does nothing except the occasional useful tip. I know there's talk of, "I need a benefit" and whatnot. Well, if the studio is actually in trouble and needs extra revenue, then your benefit will be future titles.

 

If this was like Angry Birds on Android where banner ads are almost always displayed in the top-right corner of the game, then yes, you should have a benefit. There is one: it's free! I can't see much of a price decrease when that tiny image is only presented at a limited time. Be glad it isn't like most other in-game advertisement, and some are not that bad.

 

It's the ones like in-game commercials and giant pasted images that bother me. I mentioned it before, and thus:

 

Oh, and poor product placement too.

[Connorrrr]

I'll throw my two cents in too... I'm fine with in-game advertising if it's done in a way that makes sense. The examples you posted Atomsk are horrible, and that's the sort of thing I hate. I like the adverts to be subtle and have some sort of context. I mean there's been adverts in games for a while and they don't always bother me (though I'm having trouble recalling one right now).

 

The banner ads in Deus Ex just feel lazy, tacked on, and generally shite. I'll quote this comment I saw on Reddit about this as a way I'd have liked advertising to have worked in Deus Ex:

 

I think what makes me the most angry about shit like this is just how fucking lazy it is. With video games, advertisers have the opportunity to seamlessly integrate a product into a game in a way that's not only unobtrusive but actually jives with the game... only if they're willing to do a little extra work. For instance, Human Revolution is set in what, 2200? so Eidos goes to Coca-Cola early in game development and tells them they're looking for ad income in an upcoming release set in the future. The suits from each company get together and after actually planning out an integration strategy, they decide to have Coke incorporate their next new logo release with the release of the game instead of a stupid superbowl commercial or marketing campaign. Every soda can and vending machine in the game gets Coke's new logo slapped all over it with a snazzy new futuristic design and it blends right into the game experience. A banner ad on a loading screen is just a lazy eyesore to be ignored away.

The problem with product placement is that the decision makers at most of these companies are the worst combination of greedy and stupid

[CorgiShinobi]

However, this is post-production. A seamless integration now would take more time, money, and work hours for a game that has already been released (with the exception of Japan). It's most definitely not the desirable answer, but it's also the most doable.

 

Go ahead and call it lazy, but given the circumstance, I can't see those responsible pulling off anything better that isn't worth the trouble. Hindsight is a troublesome thing and I do wish there were some interesting product placements or advertisements tucked away in-game, though what's the point of advertising if you're going to hide it.

 

Also, a large pet peeve of mine. I loathe the perception that anyone who works in an advertising agency is some "greedy fat-cat" who cares more about bonuses than creativity.

 

 

Remember this trailer? The one that broke YouTube's layout?

 

Agency: Goodby Silverstein & Partners, not Nintendo.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Atomsk88

[RockyRan]

Atomsk, nobody should stand for this kind of in-game advertisement, ever. No matter how small or minuscule, there's absolutely no reason that a person who has paid money for a product be subjected to advertisements that we were never warned about at any point until now. And this kind of change is deviously calculated, done right after the honeymoon period with the game and once attention has started to shift toward other games, because you bet your ass people would be far more outraged if this was 2-3 days after launch and not nearly a month after the fact.

 

There's no reason to sympathize with poor Eidos because they can't seamlessly integrate it post-production. It should be painfully obvious that if they can't implement this in a reasonable manner, they shouldn't implement it period. Hell, we shouldn't even be having this conversation at this point in the game's life at all. Shoehorning advertisements in a game after everybody has bought it is absolutely deplorable.

 

I'm not running a charity here, I'm the end consumer. You don't get to splash ads on loading screens of a game I already paid for, timed just so I don't even get the opportunity to choose whether or not I want to support a game with in-game ads. The fact that it was done quietly, hidden in a multi-MB patch containing a bunch of fixes people actually want after the initial purchase rush has ended isn't grounds for justification. It's actually quite the opposite. "Given the circumstance", there shouldn't be any ads, period.

Edited September 16, 2011 by RockyRan

[Connorrrr]

The bottom part of that post was supposed to be part of the quote too, not sure why it didn't stay in the box...

 

Anyway, I'm not saying that advertisements can't be creative. You've already given one good youtube example, but the tipp ex youtube channel was awesome too...

 

(As I was writing this Rocky already posted and made the same points but I'll continue).

 

More to the point, however, is the fact that those adverts shouldn't be there. If they didn't have the foresight to include them in a good way while the game was under production, then just because it is now released doesn't make it okay to just tack them onto the loading screen. It looks retarded and as people have already stated, we've paid for this game already, why are we now getting advertisements in it, a month or so after the release? It's bullshit. I don't mind supporting a developer when they create a great game like Deus Ex, but I did support them by pre-ordering their game at full retail price without a demo or anything, and I won't even mention the "slippery slope" argument that could be made for this.

[CorgiShinobi]

So the game is completely ruined and Deus Ex will never be the same ever again.

 

Got it!

 

Sorry, but given how much worse this could be, this kinda talk is blowing it out of proportion. You know what I did when I saw the Star Wars ad last night? Yeah, it was there that early.

 

I played the game and had a blast. Oh wait, there's that advertisement from the loading screen half an hour ago! WHY?! It doesn't hurt me, it doesn't alter the game, it merely exists in a select moment of time to haunt me. I know I'm sounding rash, but to me the reaction from gamers is what's ridiculous.

 

EDIT: If something was truly altered, and not something aesthetically during one of the most pointless times in any game, then you can be upset.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Atomsk88

[Connorrrr]

No one ever said anything that retarded. It's still a perfectly natural reaction to be annoyed that advertisements have literally been tacked onto a loading screen in a game I have already paid for when they were not there before. Yes I will still play the game, yes I will still enjoy it, but that doesn't mean I have to swallow whatever bullshit Eidos wants to do next, and no one is blowing anything out of proportion by saying that these adverts are out of place and lazy.

 

Edit in reply to your edit: You don't get to tell me or anyone else what I or they can and can't be annoyed by. People use adblocker on the internet because they don't want to see advertisements on a website they visit for FREE. Why should I have to put up with them in a game I paid £30 for?

Edited September 16, 2011 by Connorrrr

[CorgiShinobi]

Substitute "you" for "one" (then one can be upset) if you're going to take it personally, which it never was intended to be.

 

People use AdBlocker because Internet advertisements are annoying and intrusive, following you at nearly every page (even prolonging your browsing). This advertisement is small, non-intrusive, and exists in a small select time of the media.

 

I think this has been blown out of proportion because this cause of "alarm" online is playing out like there was some actual harm done to the game. There hasn't, and this form of advertising isn't something new. I get annoyed by advertisements too, but I know there's always a purpose behind it.

 

After all, why do we now have an advertisement here? I wouldn't believe Dean would do it for shits-n-giggles.

[Connorrrr]

The difference in that scenario is that I'm not paying Dean to be here, and Dean isn't charging people £30 for entry.

 

The ads are fairly small and not very intrusive, I will admit, and as I already said, this isn't going to dampen my enjoyment of the game, but I do believe there's a real problem when developers can just patch in advertisements without any warning. Like Johnny said in Rocky's status, they've avoided any bad words being said about them in the press and through initial word of mouth, ensuring sales wouldn't be affected (because as small a problem as this may be, some people would decide against buying it simply because of that) and how long is it until all developers start doing this, and they are more intrusive?

[CorgiShinobi]

If they become more intrusive, I have no doubt in my mind that many people, including me, will make ourselves known. As video games further in online connectivity, the more it appears that developers are treating the games themselves as a type of "territory" thanks to patching, and so forth. That's why I compared this forum with the game: those in control can alter what we view.

 

As I said in the same status, I would think it pathetic if someone would pass on Human Revolution because of this ad. My earlier examples though, completely justifiable since in Fight Night that stupid pasted image takes up 50% of the screen. It's something that stares at you no matter what camera angle.

 

I guess I see this (forgive the analogy) as a small cut. Getting cut is never fun, but for me at least it wasn't bigger, or worse, that something was cut off.

[madbassman39]

I take no issue with ads at all in the game. It is indeed not bad at all. I just feel that if they want money from ad's to support the games then they should pass some of those savings on to us users. In fact, I've said before to a friend, I hope they put ads in loading screens to help keep maintenance costs down (for MMOs and such) for us users.

 

I know the companies are in for the money, but they can pass some savings on to us and still make more money supporting ads than they can with zero advertising. The problem with my theory is drawing the line in the sand, there is a point where they become a bad thing no matter how cheap the game gets, but that is neither here nor there... at the moment.

[RockyRan]

Saying "it doesn't bother me, you're being ridiculous if it's bothering you" isn't really rational or mindful of other people's perception. I'm of the perception that this specific implementation of ads is unacceptable. It's really not the fact that they're on the loading screen, or the fact that they're a small size. It's the fact that they were added post-release, after not having told anyone about them, and to the end user there's absolutely no benefit.

 

What does the consumer have to gain with these after-the-fact, unsolicited ads? Absolutely nothing. So why exactly should the consumer see them? For absolutely no reason. Is it reasonable, then, that the consumer would then not want to see said ads? Absolutely. Arguing how big they are or how long they're seen is completely beside the point. Give me a choice between two images, with a small rectangle of an advertisement being the only difference between them, and I choose the one without it. Why, as a consumer, should I ever choose the one with it when there's absolutely no benefit to me?

Edited September 16, 2011 by RockyRan

[CorgiShinobi]

For me, I think the worse case scenario would be if you saw this ad in the HUD. Like, with all your icons and everything, every now and then some banner expands and it's something that completely takes you out of the atmosphere.

 

Perhaps this process will make the game cheaper for future consumers, though we have already purchased it. We purchased it for many other reasons, but others are waiting on a lower price because of a personal preference. All speculation mind you, but at least it's optimistic.

 

@Rocky: The nature of the advertisement is beside the point? Just a "principle of the thing" discussion?

 

Here's a benefit, even if it's hypothetical and one that's long-term. If the game does lower in price because of this, more people could play the game. They'll enjoy the same experience you had as the "end user" and etc. It's not a direct benefit, but it's a positive one.

 

Of course, if people keep poke the fire, Eidos Montreal might respond why this happened. Then it's up to everyone to decide if they're blowing smoke up everyone's ass or not. If they don't respond, assume the worst and go ahead and block the ad if it bothers you so much. Your problem will be solved.

[RockyRan]

It's not really a "principle" of the thing, I'm just taking it in as objective a context as I can. Because if we go into a tit-for-tat, "I'm bothered by it, you should be bothered by it" vs. "I'm not bothered so you shouldn't be either" thing the discussion isn't going anywhere.

 

Objectively, what's in it for the end consumer to tolerate ads, as small as they might be? If there is none, then as far as the consumer is concerned, they shouldn't be there. If the publisher wants to make more money and shoehorn these things in that's fine, they can be as greedy as they want. But nobody's obligated to agree or turn the other cheek just because they're "unintrusive" by some arbitrary measure (size, length, etc.). Nobody should be particularly surprised that people disapprove of any ads that don't benefit the player in any real way (subsidized cost, free DLC, etc.)

 

The hypothetical benefits are imaginary. The ads, however, are real. For me to accept the ads I'd have to know exactly why I'm seeing them besides the possibility of the publisher being greedy. If Eidos comes out and says "we'll release all the DLC free since these ads will pay for their cost", then by all means have the ads. If they're just doing it to squeeze more bucks, I won't accept them.

Edited September 16, 2011 by RockyRan

[CorgiShinobi]

Well, whatever one's position on the ad was, it might not matter because I think it's gone. (In case no one sees my status update.)

 

Maybe Eidos Montreal had a genuine reason for the ad, or maybe not. I guess the final point here is that the loudest voice gets heard. Not too surprising when you think of previous instances, like when Cole's (inFAMOUS 2) look was changed. Still, it might just be me. I did have trouble loading the game at first, so I had to manually turn off the system.

 

EDIT: It came back. I can't see it being my game alone since this is patched in. I dunno, maybe my system "hiccuped" and somehow prevented the ad from... I dunno, I'm not a programmer!

Edited September 16, 2011 by Atomsk88