ruggly wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
Perhaps we should make an effort to keep this thread at least *somewhat* on topic.
Regarding stupidity and appropriateness: compare the implementation of the idea of the merging of man and machine in ME3's Synthesis with the one in DX:HR!
I haven't finished Deus Ex: HR, and I don't think I ever will. I'm having a hard time getting into it. But I'm assuming that at least Deus Ex at least has an ounce of logic in the way that it works? Guess I'll watch it on youtube sometime. But then again, Deux Ex has the advantage of leading up to the endings.
I have only one major problem with the world of DX:HR: many of those augmentations would be more versatile if they were *not* built into the human body, as would their users be more versatile. For instance, if you have a built-in weapon, you'll not be allowed to go where weapons aren't permitted while you could just leave it behind if it wasn't built-in. Also, the same functionality as a gadget makes it usable by any number of people and you could give to someone else. One of the missions actually makes that point - sadly without discussing it further.
Basically, the passive augmentations - enhanced senses, locator devices, improvement of reaction time - make sense, as well as the social enhancement and others improving normal human capabilities without affecting your appearance (which is where they go with DX1's nano-augmentations). Built-in weapons only make sense if they're detachable, which Adam Jensen's don't appear to be and if they were, you could ask why build them into the body in the first place. Also, very situational augmentations are a waste of resources since 98% of the time you'll just carry them around unused, while a detached version could be passed to someone who needs it.
I'm willing to live with that since Adam Jensen is supposed to be a kind of augmented jack-of-all-trades for gameplay reasons, but it would've been desirable to discuss the practical disadvantages of built-in enhancements as well as other everyday stuff. For instance: how is sex for an augmented person like Jensen? .
Compared to ME3's problems, that's minor though, and while the DXHR's endings were implemented with the simplistic "press button ABC" mechanic nobody really likes and the epilogue is overly preachy, they fit the story perfectly, and the developers admitted they had planned something more complex - something more in the way DX1 did things - which was never done because they ran out of time.
One of the endings - the one thematically similar to Synthesis - has Jensen say: "For the first time in history, we have the opportunity to steal fire from the gods. We might as well get good at it". ME3's Synthesis appears as if the writer wanted it to carry the same theme, while forgetting that it takes considerable more effort to make it fit the MEU. Also, DXHR didn't inappropriately push religious aspects into it at the last moment.
BTW, I strongly recommend you give DXHR another chance. It has easily the most natural gameplay I've seen in a game of its kind for a long time. And if you can stand the old look, also play DX1. DX:IW is somewhat controversial though. The story is ok but it plays like a bad console port.
Modifié par Ieldra2, 29 décembre 2013 - 03:10 .
Retour en haut
