I feel like I was born too late to be impressed by this game. You see, despite the obvious labour of love Eidos Montréal have put on display here, 'Human Revolution' bears many sins, the one of most weight sadly being that, unlike the original, it just isn't timeless. It's unfair, deeply unfair, because it's not reasonable to expect any art to be so, yet it has left me feeling more distant from this prequel than I ever wanted to be. I had an expectation set that 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' was likely to be a more dumbed down version of the original 'Deus Ex', but what is really fucked up is not just that this is a totally accurate description of what the game ended up being, but that Eidos Montréal almost escapes it. This game could have been great, but unfortunately I could only ever see myself being impressed by 'Human Revolution' if I had been playing it in 2011, when the immersive sim was practically dead and it would have become my beacon of hope for the genre. Between an amazing first half, some of the best presentation in the whole medium, great characters, a complete collapse of level design in the second half and a story which frustratingly postures rather than ever taking the many opportunities it opens to actually say something interesting, 'Human Revolution' left me the most conflicted I've felt about a game so far this year.
I've been on the dangerous record saying that the original 'Deus Ex' has the worst presentation of any old school immersive sim, as much as the game is undoubtedly engrossing, there aren't too many moments of stunning art direction, and while the tracklist had some bangers, the music never really effectively held consistent sonic textures which helped bring me into the setting as well as other titles from the time. I know this is likely blasphemy to some, but I certainly hope saying that 'Human Revolution' knocks it out of the park isn't. What a stunning video game. Very few games that come out these days look anywhere near as good as Eidos Montréal's depiction of Detroit or Hengsha. It's a perfectly constructed cyberpunk mood. McCann's score deserves every ounce of praise it has received and then some, with its hauntingly atmospheric synths and angelic vocals climbing up the dreary walls of the game's cities. Oh yeah, and the yellow tint actually looks kinda cool. The visual theming is really spot on, it does however have two major flaws. While looking cool, the prevalence of yellow is brought down by the fact that it is one of way, way, way too many references to the myth of icarus, an allusion the game flaunts as the axom for its really underwhelming message—which I'll get to in a bit—and the sharpness of all the designs—which again, yes, look cool as hell—breaks visual continuity a bunch. It's really hard to believe this game is a prequel with how technology is handled visually. Neither of these complaints prevent me from feeling confident in praising the visuals however, especially considering that the "glow of the sun" yellow is far from the most irritating way the game connects itself to Greek myth. This all, in combination with the absolutely fantastic voice acting and solid flow of dialogue makes it very easy to think that 'Human Revolution' is a very smart game, but sadly it is all style over substance here.
The overall design makeup of 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' feels like a very surface level reading of what the original game was doing. This is due to execution of level design as well as game systems and mechanics. Things start off really great, which is why I say the game could have been great, in the first five hours—barring the weirdly wanky "cinematic" opening—we see here a vision of what an early 2010s Deus Ex game could be. It's not as clever or ambitious in scope as the original, but it's accessible for those not into immersive sims while still maintaining the spirit of the genre. I cracked a big smile when doing the 'Lesser Evils' side mission where I had to break into the apartment of one Brian Tindall, seemingly through a one way gate locked by a keypad Adam wasn't skilled enough to hack, and I simply ran around the level to find some physics objects to stack some boxes and vault clear of the gate. Of course, this is pretty bog standard as far as emergent gameplay goes, but the lack of invisible walls was showing that this environment was put together with the right attitude. Sadly, this is about as close as the game gets to being as stimulating as the original. Proper levels do have possibilities for simplistic emergent gameplay, but what really needs to be considered is the way this game views the idea of a level being 'open ended.' The original 'Deus Ex' invited players to approach the environment in any way they chose as well as find ways to explore it to discover new alternatives. 'Human Revolution' does this but to a far less interesting extent. The removal of lockpicking as a mechanic means hacking becomes the only skill gatekeeping certain pathways—and, in one of the weirdest, most annoying choices Eidos Montréal made, is sometimes the only pathway. No I'm not kidding lol, it is super weird—and vents have become glorified shortcuts to objectives rather than strategic traversal tools. While this prevents the game from ever really intellectually stimulating like the original and occasionally makes it pretty annoying, most levels do have a variety of thoughtful access points, like openable windows, roof entrances, back doors, and vent shafts that actually makes logical sense. hidden inside walls which you can enter from the outside. It's like a popcorn immersive sim, because those access points are great icons of good design, but most other elements of traversal have been sanded down too much to really have the player think. Getting in is the interesting part, because when I'm actually sneaking through a building in 'Human Revolution', I don't make an infiltration route based on the game's simulation logic in my head, like a good immersive sim should be making me. Instead, the thought process is "lol where's the next vent hidden so I can just skip straight to where I gotta be because I know it will always take me to where's most convenient, I hope there's no mandatory hacking this time." This is the caveat of making your immersive sim more accessible, was it worth it? Maybe, given how many people were introduced to the genre and series because of this game, but it sure as hell don't see this game ageing well. The more superficial aping of the 'Deus Ex' formula is what will make or break the first half of 'Human Revolution' for you, that is, before the game completely shits itself in the second half. As soon as you leave Montréal, 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution'' goes from cool but kinda superficial cyberpunk immersive RPG to annoying, posturing stealth cover shooter. This collapse into more bog standard, less open ended levels isn't uncommon among the genre—I still love you, 'Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines', or, at least I try...—but no less saddening here. This did, however, make me realise just how overpowered guns are in the sandbox. Despite being an ex-cop turned security guard, Jensen is a master of all weapons right from the get go for some reason, unlike Denton—who, being just a cop—knew his way with a handgun but little else firearm related if the player didn't specialise otherwise. It makes sense for Jensen to be able to brandish a 10mm pistol decently, not have deadaim with a fucking plasma rifle from the get go. Get a red dot sight? A revolver? You beat gunplay. There are zero downsides to the upgrade and it makes it easier to dome your opps from across a high level research lab than sniping a guy from the same distance with rifle mastery in the original 'Deus Ex' ever was. I don't like playing this way, but it was so efficient that it took effort to not just resort to it. Oh and uh, speaking of standard combat, all that shit you've heard about the boss fights? Yeah it's all true, these are—no hyperbole—the worst boss fights I have ever played in a video game. Forced combat in an RPG like this is already pretty lame but it doesn't help that the fights themselves just play awfully. I was willing to forgive all this, these are mistakes immersive sims past which I love make, but there's another thing about 'Human Revolution' that's frustrating in how it could have been better, and that's the handling of the core views and values.
This is where Eidos Montréal solidified their prequel as more strikingly ostentatious rather than seriously intelligent. Transhumanism as a topic is just handled so badly here. Now, Ion Storm's classic was never subtle I'll grant you, but it escaped mockery by being both considered and relevant. Here's a little microcosm to look at, the opening shots of the games.
In 'Deus Ex' the first thing you see is the iconic—but pretty cartoonish—image of a statue, a huge hand over the Earth, sitting before two men aiming to rule the world. In 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' you see a statue of Greek legend Icarus, coming up from his physio-typical legs to his fleshless wax wings, right before one man aiming to rule the world. Both these symbols tie into the games themes, 'Deus Ex' was a game about many things, the uncertainties of who really controls the future of our civilization? Who wants control? Why do they want it? Why is it that we crave the idea of god so much? Is it because we should want to be ruled over, because the fate of mankind is so impossible to dictate in a way which won't in some way harm a part of it? Is it because we have an integral want for something to recognise our existence? Look up at a hand over the world, see it embody both the socioeconomic and theological values that this predictive fiction has put on the table. As 'Deus Ex' became more and more prophetic, this handfisted symbolism only became harder to mock.
In 'Human Revolution', the Icarus statue symbolises that, um, transhumanism is just like that, you know with the wax wings! It might be bad, what if we fly too close to the sun and, like, bad things might happen because of it?? You know???
The myth of Icarus is really trite already in most media but it's made all the more damning by the fact that 'Human Revolution' doesn't really bring any interesting or relevant ideas about transhumanism to the table, I'd be less condescending if it did.
The best predictive art forms their dystopic visions from extrapolations of already existing societal flaws, 'Human Revolution' tries to do this, but it doesn't really work. There are hardly any tangible arguments against a transhumanist future in our current socioeconomic that the game decides to bring up in passing when it should be focusing on them more focally. The increase of the homeless in Detroit because they've been fired for refusing to modify their bodies to work more efficiently is pretty powerful, especially when you find the workers who have replaced arms with literal tools later on. And that's it, the way capitalism could impact transhumanism just ends there. Remember how one of the most powerful things the original 'Deus Ex' presented was economic disparity? You know, something directly related to the world at the time and today? Yeah, this is like the only place where something even remotely like that comes up. All anti-augmentation arguments are just stupid, vague moralistic stances about how it's 'not human' instead of anything that is tangibly, directly related to our real world. Just weird posturing which put me off the story by the end.
There is a lot to like about 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution', but ultimately, while I'm hopeful about what 'Mankind Divided' could do, I doubt the Adam Jensen story has the maturity to deal with the topics that made the original 'Deus Ex' so interesting to begin with. A 'baby's first' immersive sim with a pretentious story sounds bad, but at least 'Human Revolution' knows that if you're gonna be style over substance, keep some of your good ideas around and make sure it's really stylish. I respect the shit out of this game for trying in a time where games like it were dead in the dirt, but I can only wish that I had been there to see it in 2011, because Eidos Montréal's effort here doesn't hold up today, despite everything they got right.
I've been on the dangerous record saying that the original 'Deus Ex' has the worst presentation of any old school immersive sim, as much as the game is undoubtedly engrossing, there aren't too many moments of stunning art direction, and while the tracklist had some bangers, the music never really effectively held consistent sonic textures which helped bring me into the setting as well as other titles from the time. I know this is likely blasphemy to some, but I certainly hope saying that 'Human Revolution' knocks it out of the park isn't. What a stunning video game. Very few games that come out these days look anywhere near as good as Eidos Montréal's depiction of Detroit or Hengsha. It's a perfectly constructed cyberpunk mood. McCann's score deserves every ounce of praise it has received and then some, with its hauntingly atmospheric synths and angelic vocals climbing up the dreary walls of the game's cities. Oh yeah, and the yellow tint actually looks kinda cool. The visual theming is really spot on, it does however have two major flaws. While looking cool, the prevalence of yellow is brought down by the fact that it is one of way, way, way too many references to the myth of icarus, an allusion the game flaunts as the axom for its really underwhelming message—which I'll get to in a bit—and the sharpness of all the designs—which again, yes, look cool as hell—breaks visual continuity a bunch. It's really hard to believe this game is a prequel with how technology is handled visually. Neither of these complaints prevent me from feeling confident in praising the visuals however, especially considering that the "glow of the sun" yellow is far from the most irritating way the game connects itself to Greek myth. This all, in combination with the absolutely fantastic voice acting and solid flow of dialogue makes it very easy to think that 'Human Revolution' is a very smart game, but sadly it is all style over substance here.
The overall design makeup of 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' feels like a very surface level reading of what the original game was doing. This is due to execution of level design as well as game systems and mechanics. Things start off really great, which is why I say the game could have been great, in the first five hours—barring the weirdly wanky "cinematic" opening—we see here a vision of what an early 2010s Deus Ex game could be. It's not as clever or ambitious in scope as the original, but it's accessible for those not into immersive sims while still maintaining the spirit of the genre. I cracked a big smile when doing the 'Lesser Evils' side mission where I had to break into the apartment of one Brian Tindall, seemingly through a one way gate locked by a keypad Adam wasn't skilled enough to hack, and I simply ran around the level to find some physics objects to stack some boxes and vault clear of the gate. Of course, this is pretty bog standard as far as emergent gameplay goes, but the lack of invisible walls was showing that this environment was put together with the right attitude. Sadly, this is about as close as the game gets to being as stimulating as the original. Proper levels do have possibilities for simplistic emergent gameplay, but what really needs to be considered is the way this game views the idea of a level being 'open ended.' The original 'Deus Ex' invited players to approach the environment in any way they chose as well as find ways to explore it to discover new alternatives. 'Human Revolution' does this but to a far less interesting extent. The removal of lockpicking as a mechanic means hacking becomes the only skill gatekeeping certain pathways—and, in one of the weirdest, most annoying choices Eidos Montréal made, is sometimes the only pathway. No I'm not kidding lol, it is super weird—and vents have become glorified shortcuts to objectives rather than strategic traversal tools. While this prevents the game from ever really intellectually stimulating like the original and occasionally makes it pretty annoying, most levels do have a variety of thoughtful access points, like openable windows, roof entrances, back doors, and vent shafts that actually makes logical sense. hidden inside walls which you can enter from the outside. It's like a popcorn immersive sim, because those access points are great icons of good design, but most other elements of traversal have been sanded down too much to really have the player think. Getting in is the interesting part, because when I'm actually sneaking through a building in 'Human Revolution', I don't make an infiltration route based on the game's simulation logic in my head, like a good immersive sim should be making me. Instead, the thought process is "lol where's the next vent hidden so I can just skip straight to where I gotta be because I know it will always take me to where's most convenient, I hope there's no mandatory hacking this time." This is the caveat of making your immersive sim more accessible, was it worth it? Maybe, given how many people were introduced to the genre and series because of this game, but it sure as hell don't see this game ageing well. The more superficial aping of the 'Deus Ex' formula is what will make or break the first half of 'Human Revolution' for you, that is, before the game completely shits itself in the second half. As soon as you leave Montréal, 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution'' goes from cool but kinda superficial cyberpunk immersive RPG to annoying, posturing stealth cover shooter. This collapse into more bog standard, less open ended levels isn't uncommon among the genre—I still love you, 'Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines', or, at least I try...—but no less saddening here. This did, however, make me realise just how overpowered guns are in the sandbox. Despite being an ex-cop turned security guard, Jensen is a master of all weapons right from the get go for some reason, unlike Denton—who, being just a cop—knew his way with a handgun but little else firearm related if the player didn't specialise otherwise. It makes sense for Jensen to be able to brandish a 10mm pistol decently, not have deadaim with a fucking plasma rifle from the get go. Get a red dot sight? A revolver? You beat gunplay. There are zero downsides to the upgrade and it makes it easier to dome your opps from across a high level research lab than sniping a guy from the same distance with rifle mastery in the original 'Deus Ex' ever was. I don't like playing this way, but it was so efficient that it took effort to not just resort to it. Oh and uh, speaking of standard combat, all that shit you've heard about the boss fights? Yeah it's all true, these are—no hyperbole—the worst boss fights I have ever played in a video game. Forced combat in an RPG like this is already pretty lame but it doesn't help that the fights themselves just play awfully. I was willing to forgive all this, these are mistakes immersive sims past which I love make, but there's another thing about 'Human Revolution' that's frustrating in how it could have been better, and that's the handling of the core views and values.
This is where Eidos Montréal solidified their prequel as more strikingly ostentatious rather than seriously intelligent. Transhumanism as a topic is just handled so badly here. Now, Ion Storm's classic was never subtle I'll grant you, but it escaped mockery by being both considered and relevant. Here's a little microcosm to look at, the opening shots of the games.
In 'Deus Ex' the first thing you see is the iconic—but pretty cartoonish—image of a statue, a huge hand over the Earth, sitting before two men aiming to rule the world. In 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' you see a statue of Greek legend Icarus, coming up from his physio-typical legs to his fleshless wax wings, right before one man aiming to rule the world. Both these symbols tie into the games themes, 'Deus Ex' was a game about many things, the uncertainties of who really controls the future of our civilization? Who wants control? Why do they want it? Why is it that we crave the idea of god so much? Is it because we should want to be ruled over, because the fate of mankind is so impossible to dictate in a way which won't in some way harm a part of it? Is it because we have an integral want for something to recognise our existence? Look up at a hand over the world, see it embody both the socioeconomic and theological values that this predictive fiction has put on the table. As 'Deus Ex' became more and more prophetic, this handfisted symbolism only became harder to mock.
In 'Human Revolution', the Icarus statue symbolises that, um, transhumanism is just like that, you know with the wax wings! It might be bad, what if we fly too close to the sun and, like, bad things might happen because of it?? You know???
The myth of Icarus is really trite already in most media but it's made all the more damning by the fact that 'Human Revolution' doesn't really bring any interesting or relevant ideas about transhumanism to the table, I'd be less condescending if it did.
The best predictive art forms their dystopic visions from extrapolations of already existing societal flaws, 'Human Revolution' tries to do this, but it doesn't really work. There are hardly any tangible arguments against a transhumanist future in our current socioeconomic that the game decides to bring up in passing when it should be focusing on them more focally. The increase of the homeless in Detroit because they've been fired for refusing to modify their bodies to work more efficiently is pretty powerful, especially when you find the workers who have replaced arms with literal tools later on. And that's it, the way capitalism could impact transhumanism just ends there. Remember how one of the most powerful things the original 'Deus Ex' presented was economic disparity? You know, something directly related to the world at the time and today? Yeah, this is like the only place where something even remotely like that comes up. All anti-augmentation arguments are just stupid, vague moralistic stances about how it's 'not human' instead of anything that is tangibly, directly related to our real world. Just weird posturing which put me off the story by the end.
There is a lot to like about 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution', but ultimately, while I'm hopeful about what 'Mankind Divided' could do, I doubt the Adam Jensen story has the maturity to deal with the topics that made the original 'Deus Ex' so interesting to begin with. A 'baby's first' immersive sim with a pretentious story sounds bad, but at least 'Human Revolution' knows that if you're gonna be style over substance, keep some of your good ideas around and make sure it's really stylish. I respect the shit out of this game for trying in a time where games like it were dead in the dirt, but I can only wish that I had been there to see it in 2011, because Eidos Montréal's effort here doesn't hold up today, despite everything they got right.