I have seen some beta footage of DX 3 and it was just what i expected. A dumbed down console game with 70% movie and the rest is poor shooting with some augementations to add some flavour. Exploring ? Tacitics ? It is not there as far as the eye can see, a typical console game.

o.0

You got all that info from a just some beta footage? And you didn't even play the demo? I think your opinion is dumbed down.

It's actually kinda appropriate, considering the industry.

Ah yes sorry i mean the demo as the beta footage.
But it was just as expected.

Oh, right, that's OK then.

Just hate people that see one image and get all riled up how this pixel is too brown and that corner looks too bright and thus the game sux.

I do not care about the graphics but more about the gameplay. I talked about gameplay not graphic/style which is quite good. But does graphics really save a game ?

all i know of is what i read in a Q&A with the developers earlier in development.

what i remember was the devs saying that there would be no more multitools, no more lockpicks, even fewer modifications, no more clutter in the environments because the xbox 360 apparently cant handle it, and health regenerates automatically like in COD 4

Sometimes. A good chunk of the market is more into graphical than gameplay excellence. What that means is if you want a return from your investment you need to at least ensure some enhanced eye candy. After that you have precious little resources to assign to other fields, like story structure and level architecture and such. In any case, the things that go into exclusive pictures are not story and atmosphere and such.

It's called a game not graphic demo/ movie. So the gameplay counts for almost 70% of a game. Graphic wears off after 2 hours of gameplay.

Depends what you played already ^^.
For me it looks like a console game with a poor AI behaviour in the shooting part.

Did you actually play it? I wouldn't call it a console game when there are clearly more than one ways of finishing an objective, especially in the hub, when there's plenty of exploring and alternate paths.

As for the AI, can't really call it stupid; it was decent, and at times proved to be a challenge when I screwed up in my stealth playthrough.

What exactly are you referring to when you call it a console game?

*disclaimer: The voice acting in DE1 is, in fact, not horrible. It might be cheezy and awkward on occasions, but it's hardly the same as, say, a multiple homicide.

An example of HORRIBLE voice acting: GTA4, voice actors for Niko and Roman, when trying to speak Serbian. Yes, it's easily the same as multiple homicide.

Also: a bomb!

"A bomb's a bad choice for close-range combat."
Well, duh!

Deus Ex was/is one of the best games I've ever played, but it still has some funny bugs and stupid logic.

Regarding DE:HR.
I personally ain't worried that game is simplified or otherwise dumbed down.
My local magazine (finnish Pelit) gave it 91pts, recommandation and said that it's worthy sequl/prequel for the original. Only minor problems they found worth mentioning were the slightly stiff facial animations and simple boss fights.

They gave the original Deus Ex the same 91pts, recommendation and declared it as classic right away. Nowadays they consider original Deus Ex as one of the best games ever made.

From everything shown so far, there definitely is a strong console influx when you compare it to Deus Ex. If that's synonymous for "simplified" and/or "dumbed down" is a question that opens cans of worms by the dozen.

Employing region locks to enforce (higher) regional prices is inexcusable, and one of the main reasons why I remain suspicious of content control tools such as Steam.

And it is even a steam game so i will not even bother with it no matter what.