indeed, when looking at SR3 you can see how imaginative developers can be and what that will mean for the games they'll be putting out.

Syndicate was one of the best totally politically inappropriate games that did what it set out to and so well it grew to legendary status. As with many other games that pay homage to an ancient title, Starbreeze could do worse by that legend in making the game more appropriate for modern audiences by making it an FPS. They could have made a DL game exactly like the old one, much improved, selling it for $15 and having viewpoint, camera, and difficulties with controls (trying to use Kinect for voice commands for example).

It makes more sense to appeal to modern audience who own consoles and play with controllers and who are unfamiliar with an isometric view this generation (there were a few for Xbox, and still too few on XBLA) to have a squad based game in first person (like Mass Effect in a Mercenaries like game world), with a clearly defined mission structure, and story, that you can tackle however you like with as inappropriate tactics and load-out as you like.

Playing Syndicated by pointing and clicking would be inappropriate while these days you drive your characters and command semi-intelligent cohorts if not switching to them and taking over in a pinch.

FPS just means it's more hands on gives you a new perspective to play from and appreciate the mayhem. Split second planning and tactics might be harder to manage if you're driving your characters (and hopefully armored and weaponized vehicles) into the fray. But that slows down game play compared to pointing and clicking. Slowing down game play so it can be appreciated in modern glory isn't a bad thing.

again the question, how far can you go in adapting an isometric camera game (mostly so you get a bigger view of the map) to modern AAA graphics norms (including controlling the camera like in Syndicate Wars, getting an agents FPS perspective (probably for QTE and puzzles) and zooming in and out for a better perspective unlike Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light that allows more stuff on screen but still lets you get in there for certain parts, like Dungeon Siege III) while having it still be engaging to shooter fans and respectful to the old game? It really would work but would be a hard sell at full price even if everything in the game world was made of confetti and everything was rigged to explode.

They'd need a crap load of missions (and DLC), weapons, augmentations and online play for starters. And probably sandbox modes which would be like reverse Tower Defense. But it by no means needs to be dumbed down from Bullfrogs version or hyperfalutin like Deus Ex:HR or XCom.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

But 'technical limitations' might still hold back just upgrading the game to modern consoles for XBLA and PSN, all the explosions weapons and character movement and tactics we'd expect to see in a modern version of the game might be too much for consoles.

My thoughts exactly! Some kind of score chart I've forgotten about?

EA always let their PC versions fall by the wayside. The same thing happened with Dead Space 1.

Yeah, that's a bad one that is missing from the list

Most soldiers today wear goggles or tactical glasses so dirt on the lens isn’t that much of a stretch tbh

All those immediately get turned off when I load up my settings haha. Unless I’m going for screenshots it’s more than annoying

Depth of field is annoying. Along with most camera or lens effects.

But DoF will be cool in the future when they can track what you are looking at and apply DoF accordingly.

Absolutely. Beyond the distraction and obstruction, it looked unpleasant a lot of the time.