Reply With QuoteI'm amused at what's being read into that. It doesn't mean anything, guys. It's a string of buzzwords signifying nothing whatsoever.
A set piece is usually a scene or part of the environment that is extravagantly constructed specifically to draw attention to itself. If you played Bioshock Infinite, all the displays in the Hall of Heroes are the epitome of set pieces. Many games, especially linear ones, follow a routine of setpiece area/mundane area/setpiece area/mundane area, etc, usually with the action occurring in the set piece locations. Deus Ex games are known for being realistic, non-linear, livable/believable environments ("immersive sims"), which are pretty much the polar opposite of the set piece method.
I'm amused at what's being read into that. It doesn't mean anything, guys. It's a string of buzzwords signifying nothing whatsoever.
God forbid we give players more options in how they build their character and the ability to customise their equipment to suit how they play at any given time. I have this nice 8-10 hour long, linear as fuck, heavily-scripted "interactive movie" railroaded game from bargain bin game developer Naughty Dog that you might like instead.Originally Posted by heywood
Riiight, that's what they said about Thiaf too.
I was thinking the same thing. "Everybody enjoyed the stealth gameplay in the last game, so let's focus on something else."
Glorious! Well this piece of news caught me by surprise.
Look, you took a comment about how action plays out - which they've made clear is optional, mind you - and turned it into a statement about set-piece level design, which it wasn't at all. Of course I expect DX:MD to have a great deal of set piece level design; after all, DX:HR certainly did, and even DX1 had a substantial share. But none of that is in the statement you're talking about.
It's ominous, but from my "shooty" run of DX:HR, I do think they need to work on the gunplay mechanics. I have few hopes that they'll abandon the cover system, but it needs to work better when firing.
DX:MD looks like the name of a hospital sitcom.
Plays out like a set-piece despite not being scripted might be a good thing. It means things are still free form, but it all comes together rather cinematically. That's completely different than "we made a bunch of set-pieces".
I'd take this with a grain of salt, but the way it's worded doesn't concern me at all.
It's an X-Men prequel set in a gene therapy clinic: Dr Xavier MD
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not after a linear, heavily scripted railroad game AT ALL. Quite the opposite.
What bothers me about doubling the number of augs is there will almost certainly be a corresponding increase in the number of available praxis kits, and there were already WAY too many praxis available in HR. It will further water down the role playing/character building element, which was already pretty watered down in HR compared to DX. Another thing that will get watered down is difficulty, due to overpowered augs (surely there will be more of those) and less scarcity of praxis and bio-energy.
Regarding the other point, I assume they intend to allow the player to pause time in the middle of a gunfight and change ammo type, reload, equip a scope, etc., and that the change is effectively instantaneous in game time. If so, that is stupid and immersion breaking, albeit not unprecedented. I'm not against allowing players to make these changes, but it should be in real time. This is not a deal breaker though, since you can just opt not to use it.
I'll explain what I meant.
set piece
noun
a thing that has been carefully or elaborately planned or composed, in particular.
setpiece (film production):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setpiece
My interpretation of set piece in gaming refers to a heavily orchestrated bit of level design that tries to make the player play out a scene just the way the designer has envisioned and "directed". Think Bioshock. It is the antithesis of designing game systems and game levels for role-playing and emergent gameplay, or to be an immersive sim as Brethren put it. I don't like set pieces because they limit player freedom & playstyle. And the more elaborately orchestrated the scene, the more you have to constrain the player in order to experience it as intended. I think it's very hard to do set pieces without breaking immersion, or worse, jarring the player by interrupting gameplay for an interactive movie moment. The only games I've ever liked that relied on set piece design were the Half-Life series, and only because they were absolutely brilliant at linear level design.
Human Revolution had plenty of scripted/triggered moments and conversations, but didn't really have set pieces in the above sense. The closest were the boss fights and the scene where the chopper is shot down and you try to save Malik. And these were my least favorite parts of the game. Fortunately, most of the game was free of anything resembling a set piece. Deus Ex also had plenty of triggers, but the closest it came to a set piece is probably that first firefight in Hells Kitchen.
It's possible that Eidos Montreal doesn't really mean set piece as per the definition, but is referring to a cinematic flow of action and character animation. If so, that could mean that player controls are streamlined and interaction with the environment will be more automated like Thief 4, or that movement and combat is more richly filled with pre-animated sequences, or there is more player aiding to make sure the outcome matched the player's intent. In any case, I think the same tradeoff will apply where player freedom & control is sacrificed to achieve a more cinematic look & flow.
Anyway, there will be plenty more opportunities to debate it once they start doing gameplay demos.
Right, but that's not what he said. You all but nailed the intended message with your "it's possible" paragraph. He pretty much said he was impressed with the fact that entirely unscripted events came across as well as prescripted set-pieces. This, if true, would be a very damn good thing, if you ask me. It would mean that the AI and world mechanics would be capable enough to provide their own dramatic scenes without being specifically told to do so, and they'd be different every single time you played the game.
In "entirely unscripted events came across as well as prescripted set-pieces", what do you think "prescripted set-piece" refers to?
I don't have the actual Game Informer issue in hand, just what has been posted online. So maybe the context is clearer in what you're reading.
I didn't find that bio cannisters in DX were hard to come by. You really paid for it if you wanted to change your augs (or was that DX:2? I might be meshing them together)
Assuming that Adam has the ability to use twice as many augs means that there will be more praxis kits could be a viable deduction, but it could just as easily be that there are twice as many augs because you can't ever have them all. Maybe forcing the player to choose one or the other rather than unlocking them in a linear sequence like HR did.
I know one thing that DX did that drove me nuts, and that was how they implemented the skills. I find it incredibly hard to believe that somebody with perfect nano-augmentations, being trained as a combat operative, couldn't shoot a damn rifle by the time he was on his first real assignment.
I'd be very happy to find a good balance between hardcore 80s and 90s style RPG and the more modern form of it. I'm all for difficulty and a lack of hand holding, but it had better make sense.
If I'm a nano-augmented super soldier. I better fucking know how to shoot a gun and swim well before my first day on the job.
My $0.05 anyway (we don't use pennies in Canada anymore)
Didn't it say something about a "remarkable feat" because nothing was scripted?
What Volition said. The latter part of that sentence does nothing to negate the former. It's saying that unscripted events came across as well as if they planned everything out step by step for the most dramatic effect.
Having more augmentations doesn't mean there will be more praxis kits, there could be a lot of augmentations which are a one or the other choice. A lot of augmentations in Deus Ex were like that.
Speaking of overpowered augmentations, I doubt any augmentation in the Deus Ex games have topped Regeneration level 4 or Ballistic Protection level 4 in the original. It would be impressive if they did put one that good in this game.
I suppose I'm in the minority, but I rebound the cover key to something else during the prologue and didn't miss not using it. And, being a TTLG'er, I was obviously going pure stealth.
I tried not using it both stealth and shooty, but there are cover pieces that just don't block LoS unless you use the cover mechanic, and there's no lean keys, so I gave in.
Just watched the trailer again now that I'm not at work. They're really flogging the Icarus thing aren't they? I found it didn't really work too well as the cautionary tale it was supposed to be in HR unless you went on a killing rampage. It seemed more like a fable that the illuminati used as the reason behind their goals. Maybe this is forshadowing Adams fate? As though the original HR trailer didn't already do so?
Thoughts?
Edit - replied without seeing there was a page 2. This doesn't make much sense out of context... That's a QTE. Set-piece is a meaningless journalist fluff word. I wouldn't read too much into it.
Trailer looks HYYYYPE. Frankly I'd just take more of Human Revolution, but it looks like they're exploring some really interesting themes with this one. I love some of the imagery in the trailer - e.g. Jenson + corpse hand = Sistine chapel.
I wish EM would have had the kind of confidence they seem to have with DX's narrative when they were designing T4.
Some lore info from GI:
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...d-divided.aspx
I like how they shifted from pure gold & black palette and allowed for some grays and turquoise, a nice indication that the dream of renaissance is over, time for some reality check. For a brief moment you can see the news and Eliza Cassan, how 'conservative' and 'closed' she looks, in comparison to DX:HR.
Those were the nice touches. CheesyWings v2.0, CheesyRussianAccentsWe'reAllTiredOf v3.0 and Awful'Epic'Lines v5.0 are not – 'Their darkness must end'
I hate to beat a dead horse here, but set piece and QTE are two entirely different things and are both fairly well defined terms.
On DX:HR's "Give Me Deus Ex" difficulty you were quite fragile. Despite having all of those powerful augs at your disposal, if you were taking the "action approach" and didn't try to play tactically you'd be mincemeat very quickly.
So you haven't played any of those games? Without experience then your opinion on those games is entirely lacking credibility. Bioshock 2 for instance follows the same mould as Bioshock 1, i.e. streamlined System Shock 2. Infinite follows a more rigid narrative, but the freedom of playstyle and character building trademarks of a Shock are all there. (Thief 4 I can't adequately comment on in the slightest since I haven't played it past the first 10 minutes. Which is what you should be doing!)
Anyway as others have pointed out, you were misreading what was written.
ALL of the Shock games and ALL of Deus Ex games have "set-pieces". Unclench you anus and get over your hang-ups, you're missing out on great games like Bioshock 2. Infinite is worth playing just for the well written characters alone IMO.
Posting Permissions
