Skip to main content

DXMD: Is Eidos Montreal Autistic?

I have mixed feelings about Deus Ex: Mankind Divided.

I like a lot of the ways the mechanics have been refined from DXHR; I like that Eidos Montreal paid attention to how stupid the idea of "boss fights" in a Deus Ex game is. Overall, mechanics-wise, this is a great sequel to DXHR.

But there's something just plain missing, and that's, for lack of a better term, the heart. I'm anticipating more hours of a fun stealthy choice-of-options game, but I'm already convinced that there's zero chance that it will give me anything to chew on, mentally, and isn't likely to even keep me attached to the character I'm playing. With only mechanics and no heart, this is simply not worthy of the Deus Ex name; it's just cyberpunk Thief.

The original Deus Ex was a masterpiece in many ways - and notably, the stealth gameplay and shooter aspects were not high on the list: for example many shooter and stealth game fans rag, accurately, on the stupid guard AI. DXIW, despite the crappiness in which it was soaked by having to fit onto an Xbox, still set up some questions about what it means to be human, what free will is, the difference between guilt and responsibility, and such. DXHR utterly failed there (the pot-laden voiceovers that took the place of endings were particularly insulting) but at least the character was discovering himself and experiencing pathos, traversing an arc from naivete to action about the conspiracies around him.

But this time around, Jensen's story is already done, and on-screen he's just a rubber-chicken stand-in for a protagonist. Rock, Paper, Shotgun has described well: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/08/26/deus-ex-adam-jensen

So Eidos Montreal is now zero for two on showing the slightest clue about, let alone grokking, what made Deus Ex such an interesting and seminal game. I'm not exaggerating when I ask, is the studio suffering from an institutional form of autism, where they are incapable of empathy with players or understanding player' viewpoints?

In a way, it's worse than Squenix. Squenix despises their players, and has made it a solid expectation that their games will actively insult one's intelligence. But Eidos Montreal seems to be unable to comprehend who their players even are.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Looks like Nintendo may have gotten their head back into daylight this time

The Wii U was (IMO) a dumb idea that (factually) tanked, evidence that Nintendo had no clue how to follow up what made the Wii a breakthrough product. But it looks like they may have figured out what they are doing right with the 3DS, and how to really cash in on the new trend toward multiscreen entertainment at home without being needlessly expensive, asymmetrically lame on multiplayer, and totally separate from their successful handhelds. http://kotaku.com/heres-your-first-look-at-the-nx-nintendos-upcoming-con-1788004927

GW2 Heart of Thorns, after some serious play time

The first week or two after Heart of Thorns went live, I was a bit disappointed. Playing on, first because four of my friends and I always play together on Mondays, I got a little more of a philosophical handle on how the expansion changes the game, and I'm no longer ambivalent about having bought it - I love some parts, and I just had to learn that the "different kinds of fun as you feel like it" game design is now painted in broader strokes - especially you should only go into one of the new zones if you feel like the activity that is going on in it. Roughly speaking, HoT adds four things to the game: A new character class, a new "elite" subclass for each class, a new form of progression at L80, and a bunch of new zones with their story. Of these, the zones are the most visible and important, and the mastery tracks are the most novel and IMO successful, so I'll leave those for last. In thinking about these changes together, I think I see a philosophica...

This article didn't quite change my life, but it was the most worthwhile thing I've read in a while

I like the games I like, and I'm no longer in the business of making games, so in many ways this article is not to my address. But it was still really worth my time to read carefully. It never gets anywhere near the stupid misogynistic pseudo-editorial "defense of games" crap that I'm not naming to avoid the still-raging humans pretending to be flamebots, and it comes from the opposite, and very constructive direction. And it quotes Tim Gunn more than once, in a very on-topic way. Tim Gunn is an awesome individual, even though I doubt he's ever been in the same room as a videogame for long. http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2016-11-07-video-games-are-boring