This really needs an Elder Scrolls Oblivion-style remake. Use the original engine for everything except graphics, and remake only the graphics part (and the contact surface between the visual and original engines).
you are speaking like that is fact rather than opinion. what would make it “useful” for you though? i understand not caring for remasters personally but that is a pretty insane blanket statement to me.
the original is 25 fucking years old now, this brings the game to an entire new generation, new consoles, etc. and provides those with nostalgia to relive what they remember. if you think the OG deus ex looks good in the slightest you are way too deep in nostalgia. no depth, no shadows, and barely any contrast though 🔥
i mean no one has even tried it yet, how in the hell can you say its bad already?
nice, very genuine and thought provoking response. i am just trying to understand and no one has given a good explanation in my opinion. seriously i love how every response is just dodging absolutely everything i say.
any actual thoughts or are you just angry and need something to be pissy about?
I’ll reply to you because seems you really care about it, and also because many players have your same position: No, a game doesn’t looks bad just because it’s old, like all the masterpieces ( and I’m not referring to Deus Ex in particular). Many players wrongly think everything needs to be updated to modern aesthetics, but you do not want to touch a great game just for that, that’s a commercial reason only. Real remastereds should just put a crt-shader on top of the game, in most cases.
i think the textures in the original deus ex look like ass and are so flat. the style is not good at all in my opinion. i think plenty of old games and lots of pixel art looks great but that shit looks terrible. it had a great story and decent gameplay.
that is your opinion about remasters, but in reality a large majority would be pissed if they just threw a CRT shader on. thats lazy as fuck.
That’s not an opinion but a fact: we are talking about remasters, not remake, the only purpose of a remaster in any art is to be faithful to the original. If many videogamers are confused about this is due to “the industry”.
But now I’m talking about semantics here and that’s not what I want to do; the important aspect is to point out how this type of videogames are useless: just look for new ones…or go for a mod if you like it partially…or enjoy this new versions but don’t be surprised when they are shadowed by the original games.
Okay, my actual thoughts are thus: The original game looked bad. I don’t think there’s any denying that. But: at least it was consistent, and it had a style to it that it kept hold of throughout. There was a real opportunity to properly overhaul Deus Ex with the remaster, but they’ve instead settled for Xbox 360-era models, while keeping the stiff animations from the original, and throwing ridiculous amounts of harsh lighting and bloom around. It doesn’t look like Deus Ex any more. What they should’ve done is taken some cues from Human Revolution and used that to inform the design. (Hot take maybe)
Is everything critical of Saudi Arabia Hasbara propaganda?
I hate Saudi Arabia’s leadership and brutal oppression of their people. Obviously, Kashoggi. Obviously, funding terrorism worldwide. Personally, a friend of mine witnessed a state beheading simply by being in the wrong place at the wrong time while he was working in SA (he was an Indian immigrant worker) - scarred him for life.
Hasbara are in the walls so I presume they saw me type that out and I’ll just patiently await my cheque.
Why? Israel and Saudi Arabia get along pretty well. They are natural allies against Iran. The current war in Gaza is all that stands between Saudi Arabia entering the Abraham accords.
“The team is heads down,” Huckaby said. “We drew a line in the sand when we said 2026. I don’t know if we’re going to make it, I just know that we’re going to do every single thing possible to make it. And part of that is not taking time for the distraction of CitizenCon.”
That means they already know they are not going to make it. Otherwise why say this more than one year before?
Battlefield players don’t play battlefield though. CoD kids do.
They added class customization and crazy weapon unlocks. Optimized for “battlefield moments” instead of “using your brain.” They need the game to be adhd friendly which left no place for the Commander system. Reloading was changed to be magic per-bullet bullshit instead of based on magazines. They’ve cultivated a culture of “look at those buildings collapse, man I hope the next battlefield is like a Michael Bay movie, oh man it’s like battlefield 1 we’re so back”
If new battlefield games are fun for you then you are more like CoD kids than people who installed realism mods for 1942.
I go back and forth on this a lot. I’ve been gaming since the Atari 2600 and I agree this happens in games, but personally disagree that Veilguard was a clear example. I really enjoyed that title and platnum’ed it. I think it’s more likely, that just like music, movies and tv, expensive studios tend to use the most profit / least risk model. So if a game is appealing for age 1 to age 80 it gives them the least risk and the widest demographic. To further minimize that risk, every game has to have the same stupid Hollywood pitch lines of “Oh this game is <insert popular title here as X> but with a different Y and a new Z” in order to get traction from investors. Boring and dull are side effects of it. The fact it started to spread in the RPG genre is just another level of degradation.
“What you need to know about your audience here is that they will watch the show, perhaps on their mobile phone, or on a second or third screen while doing something else and talking to their friends, so you need to both show and tell, you need to say much more than you would normally say.”
This is so baffling to me. So you’ve discovered your audience has a limited attention span. I can see that. But for the love of all that is holy, if you know this, why even make a game with a story in the first place? The thing with videogames is that stories can be minimalistic as all hell, or even optional. Just let the gameplay speak for itself and have the story be “defeat the bad guy on the mountain” or something.
As a fan of story-driven games, I absolutely am NOT advocating for complete removal of stories in videogames. What I was trying to say is that if Bioware knows that their audience has an attention deficit and is developing the game around this fact, you’re going to get a crap story. And judging by the reviews for Veilguard, that seems to be the case.
If Bioware is dead set on developing games for a crowd that watches twenty-seven thing simultaneously, why develop the story at all?
pcgamer.com
Ważne