Deus Ex: Human Revolution - Comments on Invisible War
 

An Eidos Montreal Tumblr post from "Frank" (game designer Frank Lapikas?) addresses the team's view of Invisible War as they set out to develop Human Revolution:
More information.

As I said elsewhere today I think this quote is about perfect. I enjoyed IW, but it was nowhere near as good as Deus Ex. Focusing on the original while acknowledging the second as not terrible is perfect for me.

Same here. I'm glad they didn't jump on the "Invisible War is the worst game ever" bandwagon, and instead looked at it objectively to see what worked and what didn't.

The one thing that I'm concerned about is that I have not heard anything about how big the levels are. That was definitely an area where IW took a step back, and I really hope that HR's levels aren't significantly smaller than the original's.

I think it was the universal ammo that really killed the game for me, so I'm glad that they brought that up. Still I agree that it wasn't a completely awful game.

I kinda like this Frank person. He is definetly not from the marketing department.

This, and other interviews, have long convinced me that this won't be another Fallout 3, but a true sequel. The one we deserve.

I was more worried about it being another Invisible War.

I'd have no problem with another Fallout 3, as long as it's as moddable as the first. :)

So since when has unlimited ammo become a taboo? ME2 ditched it and I hate ammo clips. I have to admit I played more DX:IW than the original. Both games were good to me.

Really all the negative hate really baffles me.:S

universal ammo isn't really the same as unlimited ammo though i guess it kind of makes it as such. the problem is like many games where finding hidden caches and strategizing your use of certain types of ammo for certain tactical scenarios ramps up the difficultly and challenge many of us seek. for me i'm so miticulous about it in most games that for a large chunk of games it becomes nearly unlimited ammo anyhow due to most games being rather easy even on difficult settings for the veteran gamer.
also having different ammo in some cases can wean you off certain weapons and make you venture out to try new weapons and or tactics. to me that is thoughtful game development rather than lazy development.

Yeah, it was dumbed down a lot, but it wasn't bad. After patches.
Plot was sloppy sometimes, though.

i should note as many may know anyhow that i've always been a big fan of deus ex 2, especially the story despite the games major flaws.

Same here. For the most part, I really enjoyed IW, even though it faltered in some areas and ultimately didn't even come close to measuring up to the original. It's a shame that it has been unfairly labeled as a colossal failure and its legacy is viewed in such a poor light, when it's only "crime" was simply not being as good as Deus Ex - a game that (in my opinion) is one of the few masterpieces of gaming. I think the negative reception - and this is just an opinion and not a statement of fact, of course - stems from extremely high (and perhaps slightly unrealistic) expectations, given that the bar had been set extremely high by the original. I think these expectations magnified the flaws of IW and made the mistakes of the game seem more egregious then they actually were.

Was Invisible War a great sequel to Deus Ex ?

No.

Was Invisible War a great game by itself, perhaps better than most of today's production, including games like Bioshock ?

I would say yes.

Some design decisions were bad, and the game suffered from being made for xbox (smaller levels, sucky UI..). But it still had a great scifi atmosphere, dialogues, lots of decisions and very good story with many possible endings.

In a nutshell, I liked it a lot, although not as much as DX1, and I am glad HR devs are bringing back large levels and non universal ammo and all that.

I think some of us are starting to get overly apologetic here. I agree that IW wasn't as bad as some people try to make it out to be, but better than most of today's games? ….No.

I'm glad you enjoyed it, but given the choice, I'd take Bioshock 9 times out of 10.

I don't have much to add what you said. People seem quite apologetic to IW's design flaws.

I was never able to have fun while playing said game. From the very begining IW felt a gigantic dissapointment. I constantly reminded myself to keep an open mind and forget the orginal game, but I couldn't. Almost everything that was good in DX1 was either removed entirely or replaced with something worse. IW didn't only fail as a sequel to Deus Ex but also as a video game. It simply wasn't enjoyable.

I hated the universal ammo and level design. Crappy ui and inventory gave me headaches. I really tried to give it a chance. Some of the new augs were in fact quite cool, but devs ruined the whole idea of augmentation when I realized that installing an aug wasn't a permanent choise anymore. In the orginal game JC had to constantly make choises between various augs. In the iw player could always change his mind later on if he made a bad choise. Such design only cheapens the overall experience. Since there weren't skill choises either, the whole character progression area felt quite thin compared to DX1.

Storyline had it's merits and it was likely the only area of game design where IW didn't fail. On paper everything was nice but for some reason it didn't inspire me at all. The game never connected me on emotional level. I hardly remember anything about game's main character or his motives other than how uncharismatic Alex was. Now and then I read comments that JC didn't have personality. I never felt that way.

Maybe I could see it differently if I hadn't played DX1 before IW.

It helps to not directly compare it. It's a shitty sequel to Deus Ex but on its own I think it's a fine game. Better than BioShock is a stretch, but better than most modern games? Probably.

i've said it before buts its all about prior experience with a series and when you play it.
take the bioshock to bioshock 2 comparison as both use the same engine and came out close together. bioshock 2 is an improvement in both gameplay and level design, however it uniqueness is somewhat diluted do to the original being so good and thus limiting the potential impact of the grandiosity that the original had. it was also somewhat of a shorter experience which ties into the next comparison. i like the original slightly better, though both have their strengths. also bioshock was a game i anticipated for longer than it took the sequel to come out and i played it straightaway.

gothic 1 i also played the demo long before it came out and is still one my most fond rpg experiences. the 2nd used the same engine, but unlike bioshock to bioshock 2 it offered not only refined gameplay but over double the content—this factor alone and the fact that some people didn't play the original first is why so many put 2 ahead of one. gothic 2 and notr are great games like all the gothics but the 1st still is a slightly better experience in my memory.

system shock 1 and 2 are quite different from the above two as they are nearly entirely different games. also having played the second one first and it being a perfect setting for me its not even a comparison that i like it far better than the original but this difference in game is why i can see so many who played the original first prefer the original. also i played system shock 2 near release.

which brings us full circle to deus ex. i played the demo for deus ex near release but i wasn't too much into shooters at the time and was far more enamoured with ion storm's anachronox at the time. when i finally got around to playing it, it had been out over a year and i did really enjoy the game immensely. deus ex 2 came around and was clearly beholden to the pull of consoles which if that element hadn't been there it would have been a different story with all the castrated design limits gone and a happy game for all. to me though there are so few cyberpunk games that it could have even been worse in the gameplay department and it would still have been a great game to me. with no members of the originals working on it unlike the above games it will be interesting to see which elements will resonate with people. for me i know i will enjoy the game regardless, but i can always hope for a long lasting memorable game, that makes me want to replay it like both its predecessors.

Bioshock has much better level design and story than Bioshock 2. BS2 has better combat. It really depends on your priorities which game you like better I would guess, but for me combat is not a highlight of either game and the original was much better designed and immersive.

DX2 was mainly a platform shift, from pc to the first xbox, and therefore it was mainly a negative experience for pc players. New graphics engine but awkward basic adjustments. You had to tweak the ini-files manually to gwt rid of the xbox adjustments. A physics engine that went amok and never got fixed (they used havok). Small levels compared to the first DX, permanent loading screens due to the outdated architecture of the xbox. And I remember that sneaking was totally unrealistic. Standing in front of an opponent and not being seen, etc. IIRC. I think that's what killed the fun.

Personally I didn't mind the universal ammo. I appreciated that they slimmed down the whole inventory thing. In some way, DX1 had problem of it's own. For Example, as a beginner you didn't really know from the beginning which weapon system would appear during the game. For me the result was that I skilled the wrong weapon talents. And you really got spammed with totally different weapons and ammo types you couldn't use. On the opposite, the DX:IW character system imho was to simple.

I enjoyed DX:IW, but the whole loading screen thing even within the mission's location was horrible. Bored me to death. I hated Kairo!

I think the console focus was only a huge deal because it was rather rare at that point still. Compared to games today which ALL lead on console it's not a big deal.

And honestly that kind of stuff rarely bothers me anyway.