Re: This is why we can't have nice things (Deus Ex)

On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:46:20 -0400, Mike S. <Mike_S@nowhere.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:20:49 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>
Far be it for me to hope for a sequel rather than something new, but
if we /must/ have sequels, better it be for something like "Deus Ex"
rather than the 10,000th iteration of "Call of Duty", "FIFA" or
"Assassins Creed". Except we're not getting the former because it's
'too niche',* say multiple publishers who think the only way to
profitability is to market their too-large games to the widest
possible audience.

>
I have mixed feelings about Deus Ex.  I don't like conspiracy
storylines and I thought the original game looked ugly. But I know
this series is very well regarded and I should probably try them out.
I own several of them so I probably will at some point.
>
As for sequels, I am fine with them. Some of my favorite games of all
time are sequels.

The last time I played "Deus Ex" I made a comment that said something
along the lines of, "It's a great game, but it doesn't really start
being really fun until two thirds of the way of the game". I was
rightly called out on this, and told that any game that makes you wait
that long has some real issues. Nonetheless, I still hold to my
opinion that "Deus Ex" is a good game, because:

a) the parts before that point aren't bad, they're just
           pretty humdrum, and
  b) once everything starts coming together, not only is the
           rest of the game excellent, but you start reflecting on
           the earlier bits and appreciate what they were doing

But you do have to have a lot of patience before you get to that
point, and I can understand if a lot of people give up in frustration
before that point. Especially now, given the visuals and 1999-era
mechanics of the game. I honestly don't know if I'd recommend any but
the most die-hard fans from playing it nowadays. It was an extremely
influential game, but I'm not sure that it would be worth the effort
to experience it anymore.

"Deus Ex: Human Revolution" was undoubtedly a more accessible game. It
was also a shallower title (there's a lot of hidden depths in the
conspiracy mythos of the first game) and the ending was disappointing,
but it's got the sort of smoothness and polish modern gamers expect.
"Mankind Divided" was even better in that respect, except it felt too
small and constrained compared to the world-spanning events of the
earlier games, and its story ended prematurely. The whole thing seemed
more an expansion pack than a stand-alone game.

"Invisible War" had some good ideas in it (and a rather impressive
ending) but the memory-constraints forced upon it by being designed
for console hardware meant those ideas were narratively neutered, as
was its mechanics and level design. You can see the bones of a great
game buried beneath the mess, but it never gets close to realising its
potential.

But, like I said, I'm not big into endlessly extending franchises.
"Deus Ex" had its day in the sun; it produced some excellent games
(and some not-so-excellent ones), and I enjoyed many of them. But I
don't see the need for more and more sequels.  I'm much more of
developers creating something new.