![deus ex invisible war endings deus ex invisible war endings](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51E0FN2SSPL.jpg)
Invisible War was released in 2003 for the PC and OG XBOX. Deus Ex was a long, involving game that executed a number of fantastic ideas very well. I hope my comments are of some use to you.Deus Ex: Invisible War is the sequel to the original Deus Ex, which was a very widely acclaimed cyberpunk RPG released in 2000 on PC (and later ported, poorly from what I understand, to the PS2). But I am skeptical that either can be taken as a true skewed projection of perceived reality–by which I mean, I think all the conspiracy stuff and wheels-within-wheels plotting is vastly entertaining, but I certainly don’t give the actual powers-that-be in ‘real life’ enough credit for the kind of cleverness that these games suggest such governing bodies have or even aspire to. I myself am a neophyte when it comes to consideration of game theory (I don’t know much about theory, but I know what I like to play), and I liked Deus Ex because it tied in so well with my preference for stories like those presented in the X-files television series. I realize that the gamespace relation to reality is most likely only playing out in a subconscious level (perhaps shared?) with the majority of players, but I still have to question how much such consideration actually enters into it to derive entertainment from playing the game. In creating his design, I don’t think a reasonable designer will incorporate one more whit of theory than is necessary to maximize appeal. I think the game designers set out to create a thoughtful game with more depth than one might expect from many games, however it behooves the player (and perhaps the theorist) to keep in mind that the main objective of the designer was to provide a piece of entertainment with broad enough appeal to sell to many potential players. However, it seems to me after having read it, I question whether you are not reading too much into the symbolism of the game itself. The personal is political, but the impersonal is political, too.Īs someone who has completed the first Deus Ex several times, but never played the sequel to any meaningful depth, perhaps I am not qualified to comment on what you have written. Here the ends of gamespace are an agon between a democratic relation, in which all bodies communicate equally with machines versus the hierarchical, where all communication passes via a controlling power. It is about something not personal, something that is perhaps political.
![deus ex invisible war endings deus ex invisible war endings](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/73o_c-9lfBc/maxresdefault.jpg)
The other pair of endings - Illuminati and ApostleCorp - is less about the immediate relation of body to machine as something ‘personal’. Along this axis, the problem of where gamespace is heading is ‘personal’, a question of the boundaries of the body and its other. The first pair of endings - Templar and Omar - masks an agon between the complete assimilation of the human into the machine (Omar) versus the complete rejection of the intercourse of body with machine (Templar). Behind the final four powers - Templar and Omar, Illuminati and ApostleCorp - is at least one more unmasking. This chain of unmasking can be extended even beyond the game.
![deus ex invisible war endings deus ex invisible war endings](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ye68o5tRgLI/hqdefault.jpg)
For instance the neo-liberal WTO and the religious fundamentalists of The Order, which appear antagonistic to each other in every way, turn out in classic conspiracy theory style to be but masks secretly controlled by the Illuminati. Some of the organizations who at first appear so powerful are just fronts for others.