Talk:Deus Ex: Human Revolution/Archive 1

Archive 1

Deus Ex 3 and E3 2009

It seems there is contradicting information available on the web. This source tells DX3 will be at E3: http://www.gameblog.fr/interview_86_eidos-montreal-et-le-defi-deus-ex-3

On the other hand, this source tells that it won't: http://pc.ign.com/articles/982/982148p1.html

Finerion (talk) 11:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion Objection

I think that this page, Deus Ex 3, should not be deleted. It serves to inform the community that a third game has been confirmed by the developers, and provides a reference for that with a bit more information. Also, I believe that this article gives us a good base to work off of when more details become available. I certainly don't think this article meets any of the conditions within the Deletion Policy, and should thus be kept. Andrew Morritt 16:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, but as the article stands right now, is it encyclopaedic? That is, does it provide any information that would be found in other encyclopaedias? I agree this article should be recreated when information becomes available but as it is right now the article has no purpose or function. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 05:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I simply believe it acts to tell people that a 3rd Deus Ex game is in the works- this article is the first time I'd heard of it. Also, it does show that Eidos Montreal is getting involved, something that's become referenced in the Deus Ex template and, I believe, a few other articles. Andrew Morritt 01:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

• It's not encyclopedic a true encyclopedia wouldn't have an article on Deus Ex or any other video game. (I checked my Encarta) Jamhaw 15:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)jamhaw

Try saying that to WP:VG. UnaLaguna 16:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• Okay I will. Have you ever seen an article on an individual game in say Brittanica or Encarta no you haven't. That is becuase they have limited space and are intended to inform people about important things anyway I believe I read something in use the rules that you can not use the not enyclopedic argument becuase quite simply Wikipedia is not a normal encylopedia. Jamhaw 18:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)jamhaw
• Since articles do not need that much server space on wikipedia, having this article does not really do any damage. However, having it enables people to add information so that when the game comes out, there will already be some information in the article. I suggest keeping it. --84.178.104.8 13:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

What fool requested a screenshot for a game that won't be out for at least five years? -- Crane

There is no indication this game will not be released for 5 years, its likely to be a 2008 or 2009 title. Take care. 72.49.194.69 21:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC) Joshua

Being realistic this game will not be out before 2010. Leushenko (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Release Date

somebody please add the source for the release date please! for the time being I'm leaving it as Q2 2011.

I have yet to hear a precise date, the only real evidence given by EM is from the extended trailer saying "early next year" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.109.127.211 (talk) 07:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Teaser trailer analysis

So should this be kept or not? --217.113.225.116 (talk) 21:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I feel that it goes into too much detail for an encyclopedia article. Even if the sequence does go by very quickly and it very difficult to see each piece of information, this information doesn't belong in an encyclopedia - see WP:NOT#GUIDE and WP:NOT#FAQ. More importantly, I don't see what's so notable about a single trailer: are there any independent reliable sources listing points from the trailer in the same level of detail as detail? If not, then I definitely don't see why we should. Una Laguna^Talk 21:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Notability: his is the only piece of info released about the game so it's the only thing to analise and these are the only images for the fans to speculate over. I guess the section will have to be deleted after the article grows. It's still a stub after all. And no, no site has yet made such detailed analysis- I guess they'll copy and paste what they find here. The trailer was released about 36 hours ago so it hasn't been analised so thoroughly. Fans of the series will speculate over this information and find it useful, as there are already links to this article on forums- so they don't need to watch every single frame of the video and try to find out what a certain image or symbol means. Wikipedia is supoposed to give people information they need. And I don't think this section applies to the 'guide' description. I have seen articles in Wikipedia cntaining such analysis and noone trying to delete them, trivia sections and such. So this should make no difference. Anyway, let's keep it until other users state what they think of this section. --217.113.225.116 (talk) 21:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Though I hate to be a policy-whore, I'll point you at WP:CBALL, WP:ABOUTEVERYTHING and WP:ALLORNOTHING. Though I agree that we should wait for another opinion before going ahead and deleting/not deleting it. I'll leave a messages at WP:VG. Una Laguna^Talk 22:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I guess there's no point in arguing. A vote then? --217.113.225.116 (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm going to have to agree with Laguna. While I can understand you enthusiasm about the trailer, Wikipedia is not meant to serve as a news outlet. And while there are plenty of similar articles with detailed accounts, analysis and trivia sections, that does not mean they are suppose to be there nor does it mean they are encyclopedic content. The first few two sentences are more inline with an encyclopedic entry.
Honestly, it's a shame to remove it because it is such a detailed analysis that you probably spent a good deal of time on. But it doesn't really count as encyclopedic content in the way it is presented and the fact it doesn't have any sourcing makes it original research. The game developers themselves could come on here and write an awesome detailed article about the development, but without proper sourcing it'd probably have to be removed. Sorry, but that's how Wikipedia's guidelines and policies are designed. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC))

What is presently up there about the trailer is basically unencyclopedic: it says nothing about the game though begs for the user to analysis and synthesis their own opinions of what the game might be about. But then again, providing the link for that trailer will allow the user to see it for themselves and determine what the images are and what they mean. It's worth saying a trailer was released shortly after the game was announced, but any further speculative statement about the content of the trailer is (beyond a release date) should be left to the reader. --MASEM 22:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Laguna is simply right. 217, your position has been argued for many times, and I have to compliment you with display of rationality here. It happens that what you want to do here is, by consensus of the Wikipedia editors, not something we want on Wikipedia. See WP:NOT. An appropriate place would be a forum, or a gaming wiki. Please notice the fundamental difference between a) an article that is the most useful it can be to everyone that could possibly read it and b) an encyclopaedia article. User:Krator (t c) 22:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This argumentation is rationable enough. I still ask you to keep the section until the information appears on other sites and forums or this article grows enough to not be a 'stub'. From now on i shall not interfere in any change you make in the section, whether it's deleting or shortening it. Anyway, I'm trying to be bold ;) And do keep in mind that the images described appear during two seconds of the trailer and are not that easy for an average viewer to analise. I wouldn't do this if anyone could do it. --217.113.225.116 (talk) 23:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with user 217, infact he has already took actions to perserve it before its deletion, just give him time for his analysis to reach other sites. --172.212.240.156 (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Technically, even if it's removed it is still in the edit history. So you guys don't have to worry about it being gone for ever. That being said, I would like to reiterate that detailed descriptions of trailers does not really fall under the definition of encyclopedic content, regardless of proper sourcing. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 01:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC))

I agree with the arguments presented that the detailed summary is not suitable for Wikipedia, and I also wonder if there might be a copyright issue involved in having an article that's effectively a substitute for viewing the trailer. The current Deus Ex 3 article treats 3 seconds of video in 276 words, which would be enough to summarise a half-hour television episode. (Our guidelines for television plot summaries suggest "no more than ten words per minute of screen time".) EALacey (talk) 09:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The consensus appears to be to remove the analysis. I'll go ahead and do that. Una Laguna^Talk 19:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Platform

Removed the inclusion of "Microsoft Xbox 360" and "Sony PS3" because they failed to supply a cited source announcing this. And dear God I hope they never will.--172.212.240.156 (talk) 09:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Is there any source which announced that it would be for PC? I don't recall hearing ANYTHING about what platform it'll be on.

Yes, there is.--172.213.139.57 16:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

None of the articles in the References section give any mention of what platform it will appear on. The only evidence we have are the platfroms that Tomb Raider: Legend appeared on (PC, PS2, 360). I'm going to replace "Microsoft Windows" with TBA. -- Lines open 15:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Further: In this article, D'Astous says that Eidos Montreal will be working on next-gen consoles & PC, but he does not say which platforms Deus Ex 3 will appear on. Rather than assume what he's implying, let's just wait for official confirmation. -- Lines open 15:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

The third Reference link is Dead, sorry not familiar enough with wikipedia editing that I could create a seperate section on the talk page for that. JFSOCC (talk) 00:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Rumors

So stuff like this is probably a bad idea: "There has been speculation on many game forums that you may play as Paul Denton and that the year 2027 will start the game off in a flashback, teaching the player more about the evolution of the augmentations." --Lines open (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Setting part of the article

I'd edit it myself, only I don't exactly know how to word it.

The thing is, I checked the "subliminal" part of the trailer myself, and the ballot box spotted actually said "Biopolitic Vote", not "Biopolitic 2027". There is still evidence that supports the "prequel" hypothesis, though.

The frames in the beginning of that part show pictures of human anatomical features and paintings about old anatomical lectures, the kind where the instructor actually cuts open the body and stuff. A couple frames after that show a person with a robotic prosthetic arm, and a bin of various types of such arms. Then comes the ballot box, then after, an entrance sign typical of places of entertainment. The title of the place is obscured, but the text under it says "Augmented People Enter From the Back". After that, a frame of what looks like a shop sign that says "We Do Not Welcome Augmented People Here". The next comprehensible frame is an image of a city street, followed by an image of what looks like riot police marching, then another city image, only it looks like a crowd of people is running from something. A few frames follow before it resumes the 3D graphic.

Kind of reminds me of images from the era of racial segregation in the United States. Maybe the plot has some such influences. -Tajik24 (talk) 04:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

As discussed above at #Teaser trailer analysis, we can't include any analysis or original research by extrapolating information from the trailer ourselves: we need analysis from reliable sources. As it happens, my copy of PC Gamer (UK edition) popped through the door a couple of days ago, and it has dedicated a whole page to analysing the trailer. I should be able to write some trailer analysis now, though I'm not sure if there will be enough information to justify a Setting section. Una Laguna^Talk 08:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, I forgot about the original research aspect. -Tajik24 (talk) 18:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Warren Spector

Would it be relevant to include the fact that Warren Spector is not involved in the development of this game? The first game was, after all, his brainchild, and he had a heavy hand in the making of the second. It could be somewhat important to mention - it's like someone writing a sequel to Romeo and Juliet without Shakespeare's involvement. And Spector has stated he is concerned about the sequel's development without any of the original creators. Article from computerandvideogames.com --71.245.250.220 (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes it would. Thanks for the source: someone should definitely put this information in. Una Laguna^Talk 16:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Media

Where was it revealed that it would be using Blue-ray discs and not CD's? I have not seen information on disc types anywhere. Jamhaw (talk) 18:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)jamhaw

Info from a Czech website

I've replaced the source of the new info with the original Czech article, as it contained an unverified claim of being able to visit the metropolises in any order. 195.47.47.35 (talk) 23:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

regenerating health model

In a controversial departure from previous titles in the series, Deus Ex 3 will use a regenerating health model.

Will there be an option to have health as the other games ? I understand this new model (regeneration) when enemies are powerful and relentless like in Halo but it haven't been the case in Deus Ex, plus it break linearity (historic progression). This is a turn-off and could have me wait until there's a mod to get the game. --DynV (talk) 06:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Controversial seem a bit of an understatement, maybe universally condemned would be better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.83.18 (talk) 22:13, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Unless we found valid sources for this, as always, it can not exist in the article ;) Hervegirod (talk) 02:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Human Revolution

I don't see anything in the cited news article saying Human Revolution is actually the sub title, just that it's been registered as a trade mark is is not concrete. It should be moved back to Deus Ex 3 until we know for sure. We're not meant to act on predictions or rumour on Wikipedia now matter how much of a sure thing they seem to be. Or is there a more concrete source that I'm unaware of? Rehevkor ✉ 14:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

UNATCO.org

I've just noticed that www.UNATCO.org is active again. Is this supposed to be a viral site for the new game like it originally was for the first one? 86.186.200.141 (talk) 19:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the above is linkspam. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 10:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

The site is registered to a certain Robert Skinner who lives in Shropshire, UK. If it's a viral site set up by Eidos they've gone to a hell of a lot of effort! --Tom Edwards (talk) 14:25, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

there is one viral which is known @ http://sarifindustries.com/

Square Enix also has another website registered called http://www.humanityfront.com/ however whether or not it's deus Ex related has yet to be known although doesn't appear to be active yet, Evidence: http://whois.domaintools.com/humanityfront.com

Novel

I saw in a bookstore today a novel made to tie-in with Human Revolution. Could someone with a bit more knowledge of this put it in the article?--Codenamecuckoo (talk) 19:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit war on OPM review

Regarding this edit: I want to be clear that I'm not taking sides or dictating which version of the text is necessarily correct, but I reverted the article back to the version supported by Headbomb because the text in that version matches the cited review, and when we quote reviews, it is very important that our text quote the sources as accurately as possible. The cited summary article does not mention either Call of Duty or Fallout, but it does mention loading times and boss fights as issues of contention.

If the people supporting the comparisons to Call of Duty and Fallout can provide a proper citation for a review that makes those comparisons, then it would be appropriate to add that to the article as well, but it would not be sufficient reason by itself to remove or change the existing review. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 04:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 24.246.160.198, 24 August 2011

Spelling error; "Controversy" is misspelled in the section titled "Gamestop Controversy." 24.246.160.198 (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Already done Topher385 (talk) 22:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Summary Improvement

I gave a shot at improving the summary. I'm don't contribute very often though, so if somebody more experienced has any feedback or can give a better shot, go right ahead! IndigoAK200 (talk) 06:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks really good, and it follows the standard format for video game lead sections to a tee. Thanks for doing it! Gary King (talk · scripts) 07:43, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Release date for non-US regions

As of 25-08-2011 (august 25, 2011) the game is still not released for European customers on digital distribution platforms such as Steam. It is expected to be released on 26-08-2011 (aug 16, 2011). Perhaps the information about the release date could be a bit more clear about the fact that it was released earlier in the US than in other regions. And it is absolutely silly by the way, and makes no sense with a digital distribution platform. It would seem "content provider" companies like Square Enix still prefer strict control over legal sales and happy customers... Because of the delay the game is being pirated-to-hell currently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.59.85.94 (talk) 12:42, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks like someone recently changed it in the lead to say "in August" rather than "on August 23" to imply that there are different release dates for different regions, but that they are all in August. The more specific release dates can be found in the infobox on the right-hand sidebar. Gary King (talk · scripts) 17:51, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Reviews

The game has unreadable fonts on a non-HD TV. This is not the first game which has this issue - Mass Effect 2 has the same problem. The issue should be made visible so that the companies address it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.106.103.249 (talk) 00:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

This entry reads like a plug for the game. Have any of you actually played it? The facial animations are beyond dated. Fallout 3 has far better animations. The gameplay is wooden. Citing Gamestop as a source for its review is a bit weak. There are far better sites that provide arguably the same if not better reviews. Game reviews aren't exactly the be all and end all, considering the clout media companies have with advertising dollars for these review sites. 184.175.0.187 (talk) 01:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Well your opinion shouldn't be the whole reception section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.155.54.180 (talk) 03:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm tired of people like you, and your biased arguments. Fallout 3 is an entirely different game. It has nothing to do with Deus Ex. You're comparing two completely different companies. Bethesda deals in mostly roleplay games, and beautiful landscapes. Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Elder Scrolls, Skyrim, Fallout 3..Those games may be highly acclaimed by the general public (Except for Skyrim, but in my opinion, it's going to be great!), but they are of a different company! Square Enix/Eidos Interactive has developed highly acclaimed games too, but nothing with superb over the top graphics like Bethesda. They developed Hitman(The first game to use the ragdoll physics that so many games today have), Timesplitters, and Tomb Raider. Each developer has his own unique style when making video games. Compare Bioware and Bethesda for example. They deal in the same thing..Roleplaying. But their style is just different. Don't compare Deus Ex to games developed by Bethesda. The game is unique in its own ways, and I think it has pretty awesome graphics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.171.83.41 (talk) 08:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention DE:HR actually is receiving critical acclaim. A lot of people consider it GOTY material. I don't know what your personal vendetta against the game is, but it sounds like your opinion is being influenced by something external to the game. Regardless, it's certainly your right to feel that way, but game reviews are the the "be all and end all." There is literally no other way to gauge the success of the game. Aggregate score reviews have been posted, I believe, that reflect an overwhelming public acclaim, and numerous reviews have been posted that reflect an equal love from critics. The game is good. Deal with it. 64.253.217.55 (talk) 01:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Faridah Malik

it is stated that she dies in the crash but it is possible to save her life i dont have any source to back this up other then my own experinces playing the game if anyone know a source for this i would very grateful for youre help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.86.21 (talk) 14:26, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this is true. I don't know how to regard either result as canon to the Deus Ex storyline, because it's up to the player whether or not to let Malik go down with the ship. Personally I opted to save her. 64.253.217.55 (talk) 00:59, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Sales

Dear wikipedia editors, can you please add some data about sales of the game? I can't find anything (except this). - Ewigekrieg (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I looked around and didn't come up with much. Keep in mind that the game was released a week and a half to two weeks ago; I don't know if the company publishes individual sales reports, but from my understanding of business, I'd assume they'll post the sales figures for individual products and the company as a whole closer to the end of the quarter (later December). Hell, Altria posts up their figures on the 31st of December. 64.253.217.55 (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Plot

Just a small little nitpick, I know, but I've noticed it states in the article

Adam confronts the Purity First leader Zeke Sanders, who denies any knowledge about the augmented hacker, leading Adam to believe that Purity First is being manipulated by a third party. Zeke can either be killed, or allowed to escape.

I know it seems somewhat silly, but the player is also able to use the tranquilizer gun to knock out Zeke, if you do this then later when you have to enter the police station he'll be in the holding cells and will have a conversation with you. Didn't know if this was really worth altering or notCharos (talk) 00:34, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

In-Game Advertising

As of the September 15th patch, in-game advertising has been launched. Star Wars ads on the loading screens. In a story- and immersion-based game. The game shipped with the support, but they decided to be sneaky dicks and didn't actually add in advertisements until this recent patch, AFTER the bulk of sales and reviews for the game. Of course, their Twitter account has also been quite sneaky about the issue, saying such things as "The ads have nothing to do with the latest patch." and "The new patch contains nothing of the sort." Of course the patch doesn't have anything to do with the ads! The ad support was already there, but dormant like a friggin' Trojan Horse! Anyway, could someone find a suitable way to add this into the article? I'm way too pissed off and biased to do it myself. Cesue (talk) 02:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

If we wait a few days for the reliable sources to comment on it. Is it all versions? as the patch was applied to my PC version last night, and I didn't see any adverts. - X201 (talk) 13:38, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

It's taking a while for most people to even notice. Only a few gaming blogs here and there. You probably won't hear all the screaming until Monday/Tuesday.

As a side note, it doesn't appear to be related to a patch, because the PS3 version suddenly started getting Star Wars ads without a patch. 72.88.68.252 (talk) 17:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I still haven't seen any on the PC version? Where do they appear? On the loading screen? - X201 (talk) 19:40, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I've not seen them on my PC version. It could be region based too. Яehevkor ✉ 20:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

There are definitely ads in the game, why has no one added this in the article? Just see this or this. IMagainstYOU (talk) 04:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Because, as Rchevkor said above, they may be region based. Would be wrong to say "Deus Ex has adverts" as a general statement, if those adverts are only in console versions, or only in North America. Once we have enough reliable info, it will be added. - X201 (talk) 07:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Although OR, I'll throw in my confirmation as a North American PC player that the game is displaying Star Wars ads on loading screens. Are Joystiq and Destructoid not RS enough to begin a section? ferret (talk) 11:59, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Seems reliable enough to me. Яehevkor ✉ 12:11, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

USK rating

The game's USK rating is 18 and not 15. There isn't even a 15 USK rating. See here: http://www.usk.de/en/search-for-title/search-for-title/?tx_uskdb_list[action]=search&tx_uskdb_list[controller]=Title&cHash=b702b0e569fc0b029fa8a704e0a58d1b

Furycake (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Star Wars

On the loading screen, there is a tiny logo that says "Star Wars" and maybe some other text that is too small to read. Why is this? What does Star Wars have to do with this game? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afley94 (talk • contribs) 07:33, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Check out the section above about In-Game Advertising. ferret (talk) 11:58, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Failcube, 28 September 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

In Reception section for Deus Ex: Human Revolution, add review from Game Rant: http://gamerant.com/deus-ex-human-revolution-reviews-robk-101302/ Failcube (talk) 16:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by 'add review'. What should be added? We certainly cannot paste in the entire review! Possibly, you think we should quote something from it? If so, please re-request - but, also, please explain why inclusion of info from that specific review aid understanding of the topic. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  17:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from EidosMontreal, 28 September 2011

David Anfossi is listed as a Designer, should be changed to his actual title, Producer. Source: http://www.eidosmontreal.com/teams EidosMontreal (talk) 21:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. The fee is - that providing you really are Eidos Montreal - you keep in touch with the The Wikipedia Video Games Project, its hard enough getting developers and publishers to talk to us, so when they do, we like to keep hold of them :-) - X201 (talk) 08:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Boss Fights Were Outsourced to GRIP Entertainment

• That Explains A Lot: Deus Ex's Boss Fights Were Outsourced.84.152.49.153 (talk) 23:28, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The Missing Link DLC

New storyline and characters should be added to main article? Raul Bloodworth (talk) 10:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Mac release date - onlive

It is already possible to play Deus Ex 3 on a Mac with onlive. If you can actually legally play a game on a platform, then it's released for that platform. Hence the info that it's going to be released to Mac 2012 is problematic.

The apparent consensus here is that OnLive is not really an independent platform (the games they run are usually optimised Windows versions) and thus won't be considered an actual Mac release. Яehevkor ✉ 16:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Sound Track

there is no mention of the games multiple award winning sound track (well it's mentioned in the section about the different marketing editions but only that the augmented edition comes with one)

it should be added that the augmented edition does NOT come with the full soundtrack that is available on amazon and itunes the augmented edition comes with 12 tracks and the full soundtrack is 25 tracks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.7.33.78 (talk) 22:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Bob Page

I added Bob Page to the character list, since is present in the game and a very important figure to the Deus Ex story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.131.17.70 (talk) 10:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

But is he really relevant to this game? He's an important character in the series, but he's got little more than a cameo in this game. And only then we only know it's him at the ending because it's the same voice actor (I think). Яehevkor ✉ 10:53, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Is there a link to source for latest patch?

The latest patch is 1.4.x ish. I cannot find a link to any info anywhere that says what the latest version is. Eidos really hides it well or just won't say publically. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 22:50, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps the only way to get it is via Steam? Яehevkor ✉ 10:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Deus Ex: Human Revolution Film

I have seen reports that CBS Films are developing a film about DE:HR. http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118056377 http://www.computerandvideogames.com/357324/deus-ex-human-revolution-movie-on-the-way/ http://www.videogamer.com/xbox360/deus_ex_3/news/deus_ex_movie_rights_secured_by_cbs_films.html Lacon432 (talk) 13:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Then what are you waiting for, add it as a section on the page.--Packinheat2u (talk) 05:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)