Deus Ex: Invisible War (2003 Video Game) User Reviews

A Question of Evolution

[another_awakening · 7/10 · 4 April 2008]

Hard core gamers are hard to please when it comes to sequels. They tend to be overzealous in terms of design choices, expecting new games in a franchise to follow the basis laid down by its predecessors. When games try and break the mold, forums get packed with angry hard-cores that slam mouth every new design choice, with little, if any, reason for their complaints (think FFXII or Oblivion). Curiously enough, these are the same that spend most of their time ranting about EA's repetitive publishing politics. The result of this conservatism is well known, franchises tend to follow a pretty strict formula: avoid innovation. Look around, how many game series keep reinventing themselves, title after title? Surely not "Final Fantasy", "Resident Evil", "Tomb Raider", "Metroid Prime", "Halo", and so on; though these are hugely successful games, they tend to be filled with uninspired concepts. That is why whenever a sequel tends to push the envelope, it deserves praise for its courage and creativity. And if the game is better, then great… if it's not, at least something different was tried. "Deus Ex: Invisible War" is such a game: 3 years after the success of the first "Deus Ex", Warren Spector created a new game that, while maintaining the spirit of its predecessor, didn't stick with its foundations. Needless to say, he got little praise from his undying fans.

The first thing that undermines the first game's concept is the game genre. Though "Deus Ex" used the first person perspective, at its core, was a pure RPG. Now, "Invisible War" embraces the FPS mechanics, even if it still has RPG elements beneath it all. Action requires dodging and aiming, and accuracy cannot be evolved; in fact, the only thing that can be evolved in the game, are the weapons and biomods (in similar fashion to "Deus Ex"). Still on the RPG side of the game, there are still side-quests to be performed, people to talk to, and an engrossing storyline to follow through. Still, it is important to ask: why the change of genre? Personally, I think Warren Spector understood that classical RPG's where losing appeal, and more action oriented games where on the rise. More so, in the three years gap between these games, game design had been somewhat streamlined to the needs of the ever crescent casual players. And though this is arguable, I believe it was the right choice; "Invisible War" feels modern, user friendly, dynamic, fun and easy to play, even though it is less challenging and less engrossing than its RPG predecessor.

Thanks to smaller, more cohesive levels, level design also comes out as more linear and intuitive (thank God); unfortunately, this also means the game's environments are more claustrophobic, which stops the world from feeling alive and organic. Smaller levels also allow players to easily choose a path that is more suitable to their gaming style, avoiding the needless wandering that occurred in the first "Deus Ex", whenever the player had to search for a specific venting crawl or door access. All of these elements contribute to the more action oriented nature of the game, and are well intertwined with the FPS mechanics of the game.

On the narrative side, the second "Deus Ex" also feels like a mixed bag. Dialogs are much more consistent in terms of writing quality, giving a more mature tone to the plot and its thought-provoking philosophical ramblings. However, this just isn't enough to save the story that, besides remaining overly ambitious and somewhat ridiculous, is filled with plot wholes and disastrous, monotonic voice-acting. Choices in terms of narrative have again been neglected, and even though this time around there are a few more possibilities in terms of story, it is difficult to find them encouraging, since their consequences are not, in any way, experienced by the player. You could say that you can "imagine" the consequences, but even that pleasure is denied by the game, since characters and situations are so boring and one-sided that your brain will feel too numb and sleepy to give a damn about consequences. This is even truer, since the game is slightly more polarized in terms of "right" and "wrong", making it less morally provoking than its prequel.

The art behind the game is basically identical to its forefather, featuring dark moody backgrounds and colors, now adorned with some nice dynamic lighting effects that add a welcome contrast to the sets. "Blade Runner-like" synthesizer based music also makes a comeback, providing the appropriate sci-fi ambiance to the game. It is a shame that so little progress was made in this area, but even so, the game manages to be above average in this regard.

But it all comes down to: is it better than "Deus Ex"? The answer is no. It isn't better, but it can hardly be described as worse. It's like a different approach to the same motif. Even so, I remain true to my convictions: Warren Spector tried to create a new formula, instead of developing a cash-making, easy-to-produce sequel; in some aspects he succeeded, in others he did not. Like the first "Deus Ex", "Invisible War" is as promising as it is disappointing, a realm of possibilities that are never fully developed and that would only be fully fledged in future games… But, if you think about it, that's what sets Warren Spector's games apart from the rest: they are a visionary testament of what is to come.

A new take on synthesizing RPG and FPS

[Darklogic · 7/10 · 9 July 2008]

Warren Spector's Deus Ex: Invisible War, is quite simply inferior to the original game. While many aspects of it show a clear effort to refine certain dynamics and elements of gameplay, many of the old game's unique characteristics have been lost or dampened in the process.

Level design has changed a bit, with smaller, more compact maps that bring players into closer proximity with their enemies than in the first game. It has been my experience that this tends to limit the practical choice of weapons throughout gameplay.

Speaking of weapons, there are upgrades that can be performed to expand their usability and effectiveness, just like in the original Deus Ex. But whereas in the original game kick, reload time, magazine capacity, range, accuracy, and other factors could be improved upon, the new game primarily tends to focus the mods on giving weapons unique, new, James Bond-like capabilities. For hardcore fans of the original game, this might feel a bit contrived and unrealistic, such as the option to have your weapon disintegrate glass silently or have a bullet do EMP damage. It does make gameplay more interesting, but I found myself missing the ability to systematically enhance your preferred weapon of choice into a more dangerous and lethal instrument.

Ammo too seems to have been overlooked. In the original game each weapon had its unique ammo. In Invisible War, there is a certain nanotech ammo that conforms to different calibres and weapons. In accordance with the nanotech atmosphere that is pervasive in both the storyline and atmosphere, this is appropriate, but it seems to be less realistic or credible.

Ostensibly related to the refined game dynamics and a move towards being a truer FPS, Invisible War has also dropped certain other elements of the original game that might have seemed too extraneous. The leveling system of the original, where players could improve their skills with different weapons, computers, swimming, etc, is a thing of the past.

The storyline is a separate area for debate. I have a feeling most people will be quite satisfied with the plot, as it expounds upon a globalized world network with several dissident political, religious, and science-based factions. It takes place two decades after Deus Ex and features all the conspiracy and political philosophy present in the first game, though at times it seems much more morally ambivalent, with several choices of contradicting quests, none of which seem to be anything short of seedy and unethical. There seems to be less freedom to use your own judgment if you wish to uphold justice or attempt to do the right thing. No matter what group you choose to assist, you will find yourself performing questionable assassinations and subversive actions. On a separate note, though, there are several different possible outcomes to view, giving the game good replay value.

In the end, if you can enjoy this game as a cyberpunk FPS with elements of RPG, and just have fun seeing the different possible outcomes, Deus Ex: Invisible War has the capacity to provide many hours of enjoyable gameplay. I do hope, however, that Deus Ex: 3 will be an FPS-style RPG like the original, not an RPG-style FPS.

I know you're proud of your title... however, do you *have* to drop it constantly in early briefings?

[TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews · 7/10 · 7 May 2012]

It has been decades since the events of the one before this, and it is a new, rebuilt(and again post-apocalyptic, gritty and bleak) world. Seattle is divided into the slums and the rich area, with clubs and the Tarsus academy, which you are a new graduate from. You are Alex D(with six potential appearances, covering both genders, hence the unisex name, and some ethnicity), a top-trained agent that is so formidable that *everyone* wants him to do something for them... and the choice is all yours(as are the distinct, long-term consequences!). From the very beginning, you're given good reason to doubt the various factions, as well as given the chance to choose between who to work for. While they will send you to the same places, their objectives soon start conflicting, and they *will*, on occasion, tell you to do things that will give you pause. "They" are the WTO, a global government and military organization accused of corruption(although there is a different group that kind of fits with that, that you don't work for), and The Order, who attempt to combine all of the faiths of the world(...so they got guts), and are offering introspection(and... there *is* a religious crowd who are as intolerant as these are claimed to be... is this having your cake and eating it, too(regardless of who you choose, you can still say "well, *this* one does it right" because you're fighting a similar type that are "evil"), or just making it more nuanced? You decide). This remains an RPG/FPS hybrid, with every location(most of them insignificant... it does get to be memorable and with proper set pieces(missions you find yourself deeply immersed in, also a rarity... where's the "taking back the statue of liberty from terrorists" that opens the one preceding this?), eh, too little, too late) having areas that you have to infiltrate to accomplish what you're sent for, and each with guards(on patrol or lookouts), cameras(and turrets that the former can activate, or that are turned on by alarms... and that you can hack and turn on their owners, even manually, aiming and pulling the trigger yourself!), and a few robots(of varying types, exceeding in number to the original, such as a bulldog-like one(that runs towards you!) with a shotgun on its back, a flying one with a gattling gun, etc. and they grow in size until they are several times the size of men, and their steps, when near you, causes the ground to shake... and they can all be gotten to your side by Scrambling(through grenades, that can bounce or explode on impact, or proximity mines, that can be set to a short timed fuse; this is true of the other kinds, as well, including Gas, Concussion, etc.), hacking a security computer(forget finding logins in this one), or potentially by using an ability(that is risky since it takes time(ten seconds or so, close to it!) and leaves you defenseless, Bot Domination, which gives you first person control, and it can't move far), and how you approach it is entirely up to you. Stealth? All-out war? An entirely third option? It's all possible. The graphics have improved, slightly... eyes remain dead(or zombie-like in their open, vacant stare... they really should have given the lead sunglasses, it helped before in covering it up), and, like the physical movements(that are also stiff and awkward), devoid of expression. Lighting can be strange, extremely bright or so dark that you can't tell if the object in front of you is something that will make noise when thrown(only way to put those down once you pick them up), or something for your positively tiny inventory(12 slots to begin, 6 of them on the belt, and hardly any chance to increase it... and everything takes up the same amount of space(whether a rocket launcher(that you can now guide the projectiles of! Awesomeness) or a soda can... something that, along with you not putting in numbers on keypads(you just "activate" them), makes this feel like a less "real" universe, and more like just an artificial interface). This is the oldest game I know of that employs clear streamlining. Multitools and lockpicks are combined, and worse, so is ammo. Run out, you're out, for *all* that use it(including the stun prod). Of course they spend it at different rates. Yes, I realize they wanted to limit how often you use the heavy arms... do what you did last time: Give less bullets for those. It's that easy. This, is just clumy and annoying. With that said, your arsenal is cool. Every one of them have an alternate function/fire(for some, it's just a scope... thankfully, that doesn't just go for the sniper, also the boltcaster, that uses a poison that knocks enemies out), such as firing flashbangs or EMP. Almost all of them are useful, and you seldom ditch your "piece" without thinking twice about it, even for a more powerful one. This brings me nicely to the biomods. They are a good example of this offering simultaneously too much, and too little, freedom. The former? Every possible use of them is available from almost the very start of this(it wastes no time tossing stuff at you that you have to deal with at first). The latter? You can't use very many of them. In Deus Ex 1(that this is such a tribute to, and continuation of, that it limits itself and shoots itself in the foot... and it is not newcomer-friendly), there are 9 possible augmentations slots, with two uses for each(that you have to decide between), so, 18 total. In this? Only 5 for the former, and with three for each, 15 to take from. The abilities are just about all left over from the 2000 outing, so... retread. They do offer great tactical opportunities(and some are fun). Plot is twisty, clever. There is bloody violence and disturbing content in this. I recommend this to those who want to see what happens after the ending of JC's adventures. 7/10

A disappointing follow-up to one of the best in the genre(s)

[OtisElevator · 18 February 2004]

Anyone familiar with the original Deus Ex should come to expect a certain quality in both the gameplay, in-depth user interface, and character adjustability. It SHOULD have been a no-brainer for such functionality to transfer over seamlessly to Invisible War, the sequel to a game that garnered Game of the Year (and honorary GOTY the year AFTER it was released, it was that stellar).

Unfortunately, the formula got diluted when console design was mixed in. The developers, in a stroke of silliness, decided to add ALL firearm ammunition into a single pool. Example: Use up all your ammo with the flamethrower, and you'll have no bullets to fire from your pistol or sniper rifle. Make sense? Of course not.

Likewise, the fluid upgrades given to the player have been watered down to an extent that you feel terribly limited no matter WHAT bio-mods you use. The voice acting is on par with the original, but the storyline is nowhere near as gripping. Likewise with Warren Spector's design. Combine it with a painful installation and performance akin to a mud-drenched hog, this game is one to avoid.

Reasonable game failing to be cyberpunk and with a contrived ending

[owen_twistfield · 7/10 · 7 July 2007]

Summary of article.

Invisible War is set in the near future. It is a role-play game with a first person shooter aspect. It has a reasonable story, with several options to solve an issue and no less then five endings. Yet it lacks in-depth character development, a fitting music score, the feeling of really being in a near-future earth and has an odd weapon system. The plot development is reasonable up to a point but the ending is to contrived.

Plot of the game: a contrived story.

You play Alex D. in the game, a member of an elite school. When the game starts the school is under attack(actually twice!). You escape to freedom and then start on a journey to find out what is going on. It is the future of humanity that is at stake here and no less then five parties are involved in the struggle.

In theory the complexities of all these parties working to their own ends should make for a good story. In practice it results in oddities. For instance: you can actually defer the choice of where to put your final loyalty up to the end and join a side even despite the fact that you have massacred dozens of their members and destroyed their assets.

Another weakness of the plot is the contrived ending. I find it ludicrous to suppose that one choice by one person at one given moment in time determines the course of humanity. Nevertheless the game works towards this end, actually pressuring you in making one particular choice in preference over others.

Setting of the game: cyberpunk.

Invisible War is supposed to be a cyberpunk game. Cyberpunk revolves around the idea that the state fails it's primary function, which is to dispense good to all. It either is powerless, being eclipsed by non-democratic organizations. Or it is powerful but has become undemocratic. The drive behind this development is supposed to lie with the multinational organization and their supposed use of dehumanizing technology.

One essence of cyberpunk is that the main character, although capable in their specific field are basically small fry. But Alex D doesn't fall into that category. Alex D is from a elite school, being family to that other famous D guy and the high and mighty crave her loyalty even forgiving wholesale slaughter of their members. Alex D isn't the Chase from Neuromancer.

The world of Invisible War, although visually drawn in dark overtones, hardly gives you the feeling of a world dehumanized by technology. The cities don't give you the idea that they are ant heap like urban sprawls. There are no masses milling about: the few streets lined with small buildings are sparsely populated. There are no different types of transports buzzing to and fro to give you a frantic bee hive feeling. The music is adequate but hardly supports the cyberpunk mood, it is just the wrong category.

The game is supposed to play a rough 70 years in the future, apparently the only noticeable changes between the now and then are the robots used to patrol some of the streets, the availability of biomods to improve yourself and life-size holograms. There is no cyberspace and what hacking can be done is useful but hardly gives you the feel of virtual world that coexist next to the real one. Of course there is one party which clearly shows what the extreme use of biomods will do to you but only at the end the dehumanizing nature of radical adherence to technology is shown.

The game-play: a mixed bag.

Before you start the game, you can select to play a man or a woman and then slightly adjust the way your character looks. Not that it matters to the game, because people react the same to you. One thing you can't choose is your name: Alex D. You apparently don't know you surname and this feels like a cheap trick to hide something important and indeed it is. Players from the first game will have guessed it at once what the D stands for. It spoils the game somehow.

The first thing you notice is that there is little character development. There is no experience and you can't buff stats. The only way to actually improve you character survivability is by biomods. While the proper use of biomods can give you an edge, they are balanced in such a way that are limited in how long they work and what they can do.

The oddest implementation of a weapon system is made in this game. While you can have different weapons, they all share the same rather limited ammo supply. Ammo is hard to find and what you can carry is not much. The effect is that, while you can use a machine pistol or flamethrower, you think thrice in using them as the expend precious ammo at a rapid rate. You can by the way modify you weapons so they expend less ammo, which is a nice and welcome feature.

The conclusion: reasonable game with weak points.

Beside the hefty dose of criticism above I think there are many redeeming qualities in this game. The most interesting is the different ways you can handle a situation. You can use sneaking, shooting, hacking or pick locking to get around an obstacle. Although not always are all options available, in general at least two are. Conversations are a strong point in this game and these are interesting and to the point. The fact that there are no clear right choices in this game is interesting although probably somewhat unnerving.

The game is a reasonable good game, but it just has to many weak points to make it remarkable.

I Agree play it at your peril

[ratcat0 · 13 April 2005]

I played up to where the 'demo' starts but a better newer game came out so I dropped this and came back to it later. I guess one should take into account the fact that it,s a couple of years old now, but even for back then I feel the graphics were only average. The amount of objectives, dialogue, sub objectives etc soon had me begging for a way out. The most laughable, is the way Characters turn to look at you like they are all robots, you can jump up on a bar in a hotel and a character will look up at you, as if its natural to do that and the ammo count goes toward all your weapons if you had 100 worth of ammo and used 50, then you would have 50 left for your flamethrower. shotgun. pistol etc etc...I mean c,mon what chance has a person got? I only finished it so I could say I,ve played it. But I don't think I.ll play it again, not when you have the likes of 'Far Cry' 'Half-life 2' and 'Riddick' to keep us entertained. Sorry, but I cant think of a single redeeming feature. Email me at [e-mail] if you want a particular 3D review 4/10