Saturday 2 May 2020

Why Deus Ex Human Revolution and Mankind Divided do not work as Prequels

 

Why Deus Ex Human Revolution and Mankind Divided do not work as Prequels


I'll be honest and say that Human Revolution was my first introduction to the series and I didn't start PC gaming until late 2013. I didn't even play the first Deus Ex game until 2016 and it's sequel Invisible War until 2018. I'll admit that I did kind of like the story of Human Revolution when I first played, I thought Adam was an interesting character to some degree and I did kind of like the conspiracies it had in it's story or at least from what I remember. It came around a time where so many franchises had prequels and you couldn't go a year without there having at least one.

Now after playing Deus Ex 1 and IW, I have to say that as prequels, Human Revolution and Mankind Divided don't work at all. It adds in more retcons to the overarching narrative of it's series than the whole Big Boss saga of Metal Gear Solid. And none of these retcons are particularly compelling either.

For me while prequels tend to be hit or miss a lot of the time, I think 2 aspects of what makes one work are this: the first being that it should answer questions that the lore or the media property of that it's a prequel of has or it can recontextualize how you first saw see the said media property.

Does the Deus Ex prequels do either of these things? Well no. First of all, the character of Adam Jensen was never once mentioned in Deus Ex or IW. The closest thing to a possible mention is when Illumanted Saman mentions an "ideal individual" when talking to Alex D in IW and even then that is a vague detail at best. Is he clone of JC or Paul? Is he prototype for the augs that characters like Gunther Herman and Walton Simmons uses? Well I am not even sure. Then there is fact that his blood is supposed to be immune to the drug augmentations requires. If he has that why was this never mentioned in the other games? Why are the villains in HR or MD never mentioned in the games after? Or Janus? Or Sarif Industries? Okay yeah it has FEMA in it but the game never makes you think of them in a new light, they just a generic evil bad guy group to oppose the player. The only important details you get from these games are the scenes involving Bob Page and the Illumanti and even then they are short and brief and don't and a whole lot. Cliff Stephens is great in the role as he always is so I'll give Edios Montreal that they never recasted him. And the funny thing is, Bob Page is the only thing that really links these prequels to the original game(it's sequel was mostly ignored due to the hate it got). Also Megan Reed creating the Gray Death but once again the previous games never mention her either. Take out Bob Page, the Illumanti and to some degree Megan Reed and there's hardly anything that links HR and MD to the overarching series.

And then there is the overarching narrative of Adam trying to stop Bob Page and the Illumanti. Well, being spoiled is a topic that is much of for debate, I think playing Deus Ex 1 already makes the conflict of Adam trying to stop them already boring because if you beat that game, you know Bob Page and Majestic 12 were the ones to disband the Illumanti. Adam has nothing to do with it. So now Edios Montreal has put themselves in a weird situation, give an ending that everyone who played Deus Ex 1 sees coming and lacks dramatic force due to knowing how it's going to end or add further and more uninteresting retcons to the Deus Ex story just to create some degree of actual tension and to create actual consequences in these games but who knows now. Edios is too busy helping Crystal Dynamics making a cash in Avengers game.

Now I want to compare this to two game stories that I feel does the idea of the prequel correctly and also to much derided Star Wars prequels.

First I will compare this to Halo Reach, while Halo in it's games have never told an amazing story. I feel Reach does it's job as a prequel mostly well. It's mostly very consistent with the timeline of the Bungie games minus the armor powerups. First of all, let's start with how it's introduced(I know Halo the Fall of Reach book came out before the game but I am talking about how Reach is introduced into the series of games). In Halo 2, the Covenant are attacking earth and Commander Boone mentions that "this isn't even as big as half the force that wiped out Reach". With that line, it now steps up a possible prequel in the Halo universe dedicated to the Fall of Reach and how it happened and it's introduced organically into the lore. Then there is the greater implications of the game's events itself, while Halo Reach's story is far from amazing due to mostly dull characters outside of Jorge, the events of that game does make you view Halo CE in a new light. When you play Halo CE, it's basically just a crew of marines, an AI and supersolider finding a ring world that just so happens to be a doomsday weapon, and they have to stop it from being fired by the covenant and 343 Guilty Spark. It's a pretty basic step up. With Reach now added you know the sacrifices that were made to get Pillar of Autumn running into space and the amount of hardships that were done to make sure the Covenant does not wipe out humanity. How Noble Team and everyone on Reach sacrificed themselves to get the Cortana AI out and make sure there can be some warning to Earth. The whole game gives you the feel that Noble 6 is basically in a mission where they won't come out alive. And makes you view CE in a new light. This could be a lot more dramatic if the characters were more interestingly written but as a prequel it's surprisingly effective.

Now let's look at a game where it's consistent with it's a game and has good characters to boot, Call of Juarez in particular, Call of Juarez Bound in Blood. In the first game, there is a monologue by one of the playable characters, Ray McCall, on how he used to be a hard headed cowboy and how his rashness during a heated situation caused him to shoot one of his brothers while he bringing out a bible. This perfectly sets up the prequel that is Bound in Blood because it not only organically introduces an event that is established in the lore but also it makes you curious on what on earth could've gotten a man who is a preacher and shouts the name of god to do such a horrible thing. I played Bound in Blood first because I had a PS3 and when I played the first game afterwards, it made me appreciate that game greatly like a good prequel should.

Now, I am might get shit for this since back a decade ago, the Star Wars prequels were the most derided movies around. But a sub par movie trilogy and other questionable Star Wars media later, I think the prequels work as prequels quite well for the most part. I think it's mainly due to how George Lucas kept things intentionally vague in the original trilogy. Like for example, how did the jedi get wiped out? How did the Emperor get to power? How did Anakin fall to the dark side? What were the clones wars? How did the Emperor gain so much power to the point where he could dissolve the Imperial Senate? How did the Empire form? With all these questions in mind, saying the prequels were "pointless" is stupid because Lucas deliberately planned the idea of possibly making prequels as early as a New Hope. This isn't what Edios Montreal where they introduced retcons on and plot threads because they knew they appealing to an audience who don't PC game. Lucas at least knew he wanted to make prequels. And the thing with the prequels that I think really work if you just view the movies is that that all these questions get answered and there are no characters that get introduced that serve no purpose in the timeline later. Darth Maul(back in the Phantom Menace days), Count Dooku, General Grievous, and the rest of CIS are just pawns for the Emperor and nothing more. There's no character retcons like Adam Jensen and Megan Reed here. They are pawns to be disposed of and nothing more. There is one retcon of Boba Fett being a clone but I argue it made a character that is super overhyped more interesting but that is a topic for a different time.

All in all, I have rambled enough and I say this, Edios Montreal should've went with Crystal Dynamics' route with the Tomb Raider series because I tend to think of Deus Ex HR and MD as reboots in disguise more than prequels.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment