FOR THE DEVS: What was wrong with TDS you may ask? [Archive]

GmanPro

05-14-2009, 06:19 PM

It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:

The levels were too small
>Missions in Thief 1 and 2 were enormous. There were no load screens splitting the levels up causing havok to the AI whenever you left one area and came back to it to find nothing had changed since you left.
>Missions like The Lfie of the Party, where you could explore a huge portion of the city and the entire interior of an epic castle all in one level and without load screens splitting it up were great. We want more of that.
______________________
Third Person Camera
>This is not what Thief is about. You as the player are supposed to assume the role of Garrett. Put on his boots and become him. You are supposed to feel like YOU the player are inside the mansion trying not to get caught
as opposed to sitting in your comfortable chair sipping Dr Pepper and chomping down on Twinkies enjoying a casual gaming session. If you don't like playing games that way, stop shouting that we are selfish for wanting Thief to be the way we like it and go play games that you like. Go play any number of other games that are stumbling over themselves trying to accommodate your needs.
>I now also think that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky and generally uncoordinated feel of the first person mode in TDS. Whatever the case may be, the movement in this game is not a fluid or precise as in the first two games. Some call it "body awareness", but I don't think that's it. Technically, Thief 1 and 2 had a sort of body awareness as well, but it was done so much better.
______________________
No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
>Rope arrows were one of the coolest features of The Dark Project when it first came out. It was exiting being able to go to places which in previous first person shooter games would have been blocked off and inaccesible. Not only that
but it felt right. Its something a master Thief would have in his arsenal. The TDS engine couldn't handle them for whatever reason and so they were replaced with climbing gloves which were practically useless because they were
only usable on a tiny fraction of the surfaces in the game. And usually there was nothing to be gained from climbing any of the walls anyway. Not a bad idea, but poorly implemented.
______________________
No more Sword?
>Some people think the dagger was more suitable for a Thief. I can see where this view comes from, but I for one would like to have my trusty sword back. At least a short sword in any case. Its a good tool for breaking wooden boards
and repelling the undead.
>Not much to be said for this one, just meet us in the middle here EM and give us a short sword. Or a dagger AND a short sword.
______________________
City hubs
>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.
>The Thieving equipment was probably too cheap. I always could afford to load up my arsenal to the max for each mission (later in the game) and still have some gold left over.
______________________
Nerfed blackjack
>This is the most annoying aspect of the entire game for me. It feels broken. Why should I have to get right behind somebody and wait for the blackjack to be raised signaling that my strike will incapacitate my victim? Why can't
I smack said victim in the face?
>Why is it that when I flashbomb somebody, and they cover their eyes and stumble blindly about etc, I am not allowed to knock them out? They are blinded, they don't know where I am, so why can't I blackjack them? Why does their vision
magically come back to them instantly when I smack them with the blackjack? Then they spit some snarly comment about how weak I am with my soft blows. ITS COMPLETELY RETARDED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTICED BY THE QA TEAM!
>Also, why are guards impervious to the blackjack when they have their weapon out? They enter search mode and begin slowly scanning the premises for me (OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM) and yet a knock to the head from my
blackjack does nothing to them. Even from behind. I cannot get over how bad the blackjack feels in this game.
______________________
No more cutscene briefings
>Why take these out? They were awesome. Bring them back EM.
______________________
Immersion breaking loot percentage system
>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average value? Or
that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?
>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was also unnecessary.
______________________
No Burricks!?!?!?
>Where'd they go?
______________________
Garrett forgot how to swim?
>Come on Garrett. Get it together...
______________________
Less items for the arsenal
>I already mentioned rope arrows/vine arrows, but there were other items as well. TDS introduced the oil flask, which came across as clumsy to me. Hardly the delicate precision instrument that a master Thief would use.
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc
______________________
Factions
>Another good idea but poorly implemented.
>Shooting dust mites? Buying pagan respect by pouring my resources into their shrines? W. T. F.
>Why didn't you just hold on to the game for another year and make actual missions for us to do for these factions Ion Storm? Your faction system was sloppy and lazy and unprofessional. It felt like it wanted to actually be something
but was instead just thrown in there half finished just because...
______________________
Poor choice of engine
>Thief was never about being the next prettiest game. It didn't try to dethrone the king-of-the-hill of graphics because it knew that in another six months a new title would come along and nab the spotlight. Take away the pretty
graphics of TDS and what are you left with? Ion Storm should have picked an engine that can handle large environments. Besides that, the engine was too hardware intensive for what it provided.
______________________
The story/plot
>Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.
>The world was believable in Metal Age. There was more to do in the game world. More to interact with. Like that tip you could get about searching through people's trash because you might find some interesting info.

________________________________

All of this being said. I still found TDS to be an enjoyable game in its own right. For all its faults, at least it didn't feature regenerating health, an alternate protagonist and multiplayer.

One of the things I really enjoyed about it was that it added just a hint of RPG flavor to the mix. Exploring the city at your leisure, visiting fences to sell loot and black market shoppes to purchase your gear. Doing side missions like that blacksmith job, where you gotta nab the golden dagger. It was a good idea, but poorly implemented. All of this could have been fixed and polished and made perfect if only Ion Storm had held on to the game for another year.

I would say that I'm sorry for the long post, but I'm not. This needed to be said. If anyone else had some problem with TDS that I didn't. Feel free to add it here.

DarthEnder

05-14-2009, 07:08 PM

I agree with most of that.

The few points I disagree on are:

City Hubs: I agree it was poorly implimented, but I don't even want them to try and do it better, I want them to drop the idea entirely.

Loot Percentage System: It's not that much different from the stats screen in T1 and T2 that told you exactly how much loot there was in a level, and how much of it you found.

The story/plot: I thought it was fine. Not as interesting as T2's, but it fit in well with the series I think.

That said, T3 had 3 things going for it that I liked. Better lockpicking. Holy Water and Oil Flasks. And wallhugging.

GmanPro

05-14-2009, 07:11 PM

Loot Percentage System: It's not that much different from the stats screen in T1 and T2 that told you exactly how much loot there was in a level, and how much of it you found.

Huh, I guess I never really noticed that stuff. I was too eager to skip that stuff and move on to the next mission.

I'd prefer that it go back to just "grab 1500 worth of loot" I know it still assumes that Garrett (you) knows the average market value of each and every piece of loot in the mission. But its still better.

AntiMatter_16

05-14-2009, 08:02 PM

You forgot that First Person was available, though not on the xbox. Don't worry though, it was god awfully implemented. The camera liked to skip about slightly when you strafed, and it lurched about when you jumped.

The loot percentage popping up was annoying. They should have just gone back to the Thief I and II inventory system, so that loot appeared as one item, detailing the types and total loot. They could have placed the percentage down there.

Another problem I had with the loot was that it didn't look much like loot. You wouldn't have been able to tell it if it weren't for the loot glint. A lot of people seemed to dislike that for some reason. I don't really care either way. Luster wouldn't be so bad to have on loot. But the object hi-lighting system looked really bad. They should have gone with what the Thief I and II engine did, fully light the texture of the selected object...

vasanx

05-14-2009, 08:02 PM

______________________
Nerfed blackjack
>This is the most annoying aspect of the entire game for me. It feels broken. Why should I have to get right behind somebody and wait for the blackjack to be raised signaling that my strike will incapacitate my victim? Why can't
I smack said victim in the face?
>Why is it that when I flashbomb somebody, and they cover their eyes and stumble blindly about etc, I am not allowed to knock them out? They are blinded, they don't know where I am, so why can't I blackjack them? Why does their vision
magically come back to them instantly when I smack them with the blackjack? Then they spit some snarly comment about how weak I am with my soft blows. ITS COMPLETELY RETARDED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTICED BY THE QA TEAM!
>Also, why are guards impervious to the blackjack when they have their weapon out? They enter search mode and begin slowly scanning the premises for me (OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM) and yet a knock to the head from my
blackjack does nothing to them. Even from behind. I cannot get over how bad the blackjack feels in this game.

Wow, reading your post really brought back all of those bitter memories.

I loved the blackjack and TDS totally fu*ked it up. I mean how the hell do they explain the blinded guards being able to see again when you hit them?

Is the blackjack enhanted or somethin?

And what's with the waiting for the blackjack to be raised? God that was moronic! Just let us hit em already.

And when they are searching, the blackjack doesn't work. How does that make sense? You know someone is around and you tell yourself you won't faint?

Arrrrggggghhhhhh! TDS was such a lame attempt and there are people here who are actually defending it.

______________________
Immersion breaking loot percentage system
>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average value? Or
that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?
>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was also unnecessary.

I really don't get the whole shiny loot sh*t. You're a thief! You need to look for the damn loot by yourself! Not be directed to it!

Remember looking for that ring behind that pot. I had to look everywhere until i finally realized i didn't look behind the damn pot. I cannot describe the sense of achievement i used to feel after searching for a loot for half an hour. That was totally lost in TDS because people are impatient.

You can see the bloody loot a mile away! Just enter a room, and oh, there it is, in the corner to your right. Was the loot sprayed with UV dye and Garrett mechanical eye acts as an UV lamp?

In the real Thief game, you'll only see the loot when you get really close to it. That's how it should be done! That's how it must be done in T4!

Good job GmanPro. Let them see the ridiculousness of TDS and lets see what they have to say.

And please don't give that lame, "Oh, it's not perfect but it was still not bad" bullsh*t.

The game was not perfect because it was BAD!!! Can, u, GET THAT?! :mad2:

Belboz

05-14-2009, 08:48 PM

anyone noticed that the ceiling in the museam floats above the walls, and you can see the sky between the top of the walls and the ceiling, totally ruins the museum level for me.

xXFl4meXx

05-14-2009, 08:57 PM

>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc

Dude... there were mines in TDS.... Did you not play it all the way?

GmanPro

05-14-2009, 09:44 PM

I must have forgotten. Silly me

VIKTORIA

05-14-2009, 10:46 PM

This is a good thread for the devs to look at and hopefully it will remain on topic and address the points specifically made in first post. :thumb:

Subjective Effect

05-14-2009, 10:50 PM

Mostly excellent points GmanPro.

I'd like to add one very important, err, modification.

Gameplay Mechanics

This is a fairly encompassing issue and covers:
General movement - which was lurchy and not as smooth as in T1 and 2.
Sidestepping/lean - lean was broken and made you a.visible and b.likely to fall of edges.
No swimming.
No rope arrows.

(Interaction with the AI via the blackjack was another issue that could be lumped into the same category but its more of an AI design issue.)

Everything else I've listed and many of the things GmanPro has listed are due to, or contributed to by, the engine choice.

In the TDS editor we can see that rope arrow implementation was attempted. Its actually been hacked in now, but its not properly functional (as I understand). Before anything else is decided on EM need to make sure that the engine is up to scratch. Having played TR: Underworld on PS3 it looks likely to me that the engine can be adapted to work very well for a Thief game. But the engine is the foundation and poor foundations = bad everything else.

As we see in the TDS case.

GmanPro

05-14-2009, 10:58 PM

^^ You know, I am convinced that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky first person movement in TDS. So I've edited the first post - included a note about it under third person.

ElizabethSterling

05-14-2009, 11:13 PM

Don't forget the respawning guards. I ghosted my first playthrough for the 'full experience' but when you're bored and just want to bust some skulls the fact guards keep respawning if KO'd or killed was ridiculous.

GmanPro

05-14-2009, 11:18 PM

^^ You are referring to the guards in the city hub areas respawning yes? That's really more of another problem associated with the engine. And that Ion Storm released the game too soon.

What I mean is that if they had more time to make bunches more models of guards (the engine might not have been able to support more models), get more voice actors for them and make up some new patrol routes etc, then it wouldn't have felt like it was the same exact guards come back from the dead. Because really, there should be guards back there patrolling again. A day was supposed to have past in between major missions and all that. It was just another example of sloppy work and no attention to detail at Ion Storm imo.

ElizabethSterling

05-14-2009, 11:23 PM

No, guards actually respawned in missions after being put to sleep or even killed. You could empty a mission map of all life and ten minutes later it'd be crawling with guards again.

dda

05-14-2009, 11:59 PM

ElizabethSterling

05-15-2009, 12:06 AM

Climbing gloves not usable in enough areas? Personally I thought they were too effective as it was. They were a solve-all tool for hiding when you messed up and should at least have made some kind of noise when using them. The faction system felt like a corny RPG tack-on too.

More... Ion storm increased the size of levels? Maybe compared to another non-Thief game but compared to Thief 2 they were tiny so that really doesn't fly in my mind. The art direction was questionable too as everything was a noticeable shade of blue, the thrown together 3D cutscenes were awful and generally it was a big step down from the gritty, colourful, immersive visual quality of Thief 2. Even the Cradle, a brilliant exercise in level design was pretty flat and ugly.

Oh, and lest we forget Thief 3 was noticeably easier than the other Thief titles to its detriment even on maximum difficulty post patch. I got my most satisfactory result using a difficulty level trainer on my first playthrough, (prior to the patch) and cranking AI awareness up well above what it was supposed to be in even the hardest mode on Thief 3 and ghosting.

Tiptoe

05-15-2009, 12:38 AM

It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:

I'm so glad you made this thread Gman. I've been wondering why you guys didn't like Thief: Deadly Shadows, because I loved it and I couldn't understand why you all hated it so much, so this thread answers some of my questions.

Now, I know we tend to butt heads over this subject, but it seems to me that your biggest beef with TDS is the 3rd person view.

So before I get into it too much, let me just say this, I suffer motion sickness, so 3rd person mode is the ONLY way I can play.

With that said, I really can't understand why all of you are so vehemently opposed to the very idea of having a 3rd person view available.

But this statement throws some light on it:

I now also think that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky and generally uncoordinated feel of the first person mode in TDS. Whatever the case may be, the movement in this game is not a fluid or precise as in the first two games.

I didn't know that. If this is so, then I can now understand why you all hate the 3rd person view so much. If something like that had messed up my gaming experience, then yes, I'd hate it too.

But, let me ask you this, if the 3rd person view didn't impact or effect the first person view in any way, would you all still passionately oppose it?

I know some of you are a bit like religious zealots "There is no way to play but my way, and anybody who thinks otherwise will be burned at the stake!".

But truly, if the 3rd person view didn't effect your gameplay in any way, would you all really care if it was available?

I'm thinking about the game Oblivion here, because I don't think anybody had any complaints that it offered players a choice of both views. So I'm guessing Oblivion got it right.

So if they used the Oblivion engine to make Thief4, or even if they just used the Oblivion engine's game mechanics, would you guys be ok with that?

As for all the other issues you mentioned, I agree with you. Very well said! Your suggestions make a lot of sense.

I just can't agree with you about the first person camera, because if they scrap the 3rd person view, then I won't be able to play the game at all :(.

GmanPro

05-15-2009, 12:53 AM

Ok well, motion sickness is a very valid reason for not using first person. As for making third person in such a way as to not interfere with the first person ... it would technically speaking be an impossibility, but I know what you mean. I suppose its not all bad, but it has to be done better than TDS.

The whole Oblivion thing is iffy. I used that feature to check out how my character looked in his fancy new armor on occasion. But its different because I didn't feel like I was in the game world. It was like "Look what my character just did!" As opposed to "Look what I just did!" I feel like I go through about a dozen RPG characters a year, so I never really get attached to any of them.

I think that some games will let you turn off head-bobbing and that helps some people with motion sickness issues. But there's only really a handful of first person games worth playing anyway so you aren't missing out on much.

On a side note, I only ever got motion sickness from one game. Prince of Persia: Warrior Within. I dunno why. Something about the way it looked and felt. I couldn't even watch somebody else play it. It was third person btw. Go figure... :scratch:

vowdy

05-15-2009, 12:53 AM

One thing that really broke the mood for me was as mentioned before;

The bright blue item highlighting.

It was too harsh, just highlighting the item brightness wouldve been enough.

theBlackman

05-15-2009, 12:54 AM

For me third person is like watching a movie. I'm outside looking in instead of BEING Garrett. I can understand the necessity for you and others with a similar condition. And there are those who are epilyptic, in fact, some of the FMs warn persons with petite mal or Gran mal problems to not play them.

But Garrett is not standing looking at someone else in action (in fact the auto change to third when climbing ladders, just pissed me off), he has a single pair of eyes that see ahead and slightly to the side (peripheral vision). He isn't superman to see around corners, nor do his eyes have a "fisheye" lens like a camera, or some aquatic creatures who can actually see behind, to the side, and ahead at the same time.

So, third is not my bag. If it was selectable for such as you self, and was not an auto execute I could live with it. In TDS it was selectable, except for the "climbing ladders" etc. But as a full feature, on all the time. No thank you.

One of the great features of THIEF is that you MUST look, and SEE what you look at. You needed to use caution when rounding a corner, or passing an obstacle, because, you could not see around the corner. Nor did you get a "birdseye" view of an area. The "Scouting" orb made sense, but I never needed it nor used it. But within the context it fit (loosely).

Seeing every thing from the perspective of a camera with a global view is not conducive to "being IN the scene". You are a bystander. Just like the lookie loos at an accident.

1N54N3

05-15-2009, 02:30 AM

I agree with nearly all of that. I still really like TDS, just because it's a Thief game, but so much could be way better. I hope above all that EM keeps the Faction system, and perhaps even adds more factions or heavily expands upon what TDS did have. Letting you shape the way the city responds to your actions is something that can't be described with words, and it is a must have :)

Bukary

05-15-2009, 02:44 AM

Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
TDS story (history of Gamall, Lauryl, Inspector Drept; stopping time, fall of the Keepers) was great! It was probably the only aspect of the game that felt... right. ;)

I would be very surprised if EM sketches something as interesting as TDS story.

tender19

05-15-2009, 02:48 AM

Plot was ok, but I agree with everything. Also didn't like the swirling purple fog-effects.

Necros

05-15-2009, 02:56 AM

Third Person Camera
I say if EM can do it right, leave it in for those who might enjoy it better than the FPS view. If it takes too much time or whatever, drop it.

No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
Yes, bring them back, but maybe leave the climbing gloves (or at least the wall climbing) too, just design the levels in a way to make both useful.

No more Sword?
No long swords for me, thank you, but I could agree on a short sword. Or a short sword and a dagger, like you said. :)
City hubs
>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.
:thumb:
No more cutscene briefings
>Why take these out? They were awesome. Bring them back EM.
:thumb:
Garrett forgot how to swim?
>Come on Garrett. Get it together...
:D :thumb:
Less items for the arsenal
>I already mentioned rope arrows/vine arrows, but there were other items as well. TDS introduced the oil flask, which came across as clumsy to me. Hardly the delicate precision instrument that a master Thief would use.
Hey, the oil flask was cool and very useful, EM should keep it.
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc
I think too many items is a bad thing too. Perhaps some should be avalaible only at certain times?
Factions
>Another good idea but poorly implemented.
>Shooting dust mites? Buying pagan respect by pouring my resources into their shrines? W. T. F.
>Why didn't you just hold on to the game for another year and make actual missions for us to do for these factions Ion Storm? Your faction system was sloppy and lazy and unprofessional. It felt like it wanted to actually be something
but was instead just thrown in there half finished just because...
I don't think it was that bad but I'd like to see it return in Thief 4 but you are right, it should be improved.
The story/plot
>Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.
I think the story was just as good as in the earlier games.
>The world was believable in Metal Age.
Yeah, sure, the big talking metal robots made it believable. :)
There was more to do in the game world. More to interact with. Like that tip you could get about searching through people's trash because you might find some interesting info.
But I can agree with this. Give us more stuff to do.

Yes, Thief 3 had it's problems and faults but I still loved it. :) Go ahead, start flaming. :whistle:

tender19

05-15-2009, 03:02 AM

Yeah, sure, the big talking metal robots made it believable. :)

What is the main difference between big talking metal robots and big talking metal robots?

Thief 2: Believable, because of the industrial revolution, the big, steam-like structure, the pre-recorded speeches (they weren't computing-thinking machines, just advanced turrets), and the fanatism that lead to technical improvements in the city.

Transformers: well... I am Megatron.

See what the point of realism is?

(Te is magyar? :D Csak nem GSF-ről?)

Blue Sky

05-15-2009, 09:26 AM

No, guards actually respawned in missions after being put to sleep or even killed. You could empty a mission map of all life and ten minutes later it'd be crawling with guards again.

I don't think that ever happened in a mission, did it? Just in the city areas.

I agree with most of the points in the OP, though not always the wording...(I wouldn't have described the oil flasks as being against the "delicate precision instrument" Garrett would use, and then in the next sentence bemoan the loss of mines!)

But things which reminded you you were playing a computer game, like the loading zones, loot glint, arrow trails, everything frobbable glowing a hideous luminous blue colour, the per centage tally whenever you picked up some loot, the way that if you died the camera went into third person and rotated around your body... Not to mention the lousy framerate and clunky controls (due to the body awareness) just took away from you BEING THERE and continually reminded you that you were playing a game.

Which was most definitely a step BACKWARDS from Thief 1 and 2.

As for a City Hub and the factions and all that...obviously that was all really badly implemented in Deadly Shadows and I just ignored those segments really. If they were tried again, they'd have to be done REALLY WELL, but ultimately I'd much MUCH rather see ALL the development time put into twelve REALLY REALLY GOOD missions with beautifully created briefings and arty and non-clunky buying loot screens / stats between those missions.

If in doubt, keep it simple. Deadly Shadows tried to come up with a whole new way to experience Thief, and forgot to concentrate on recreating that original gameplay in the first place.

Neb

05-15-2009, 09:59 AM

For me third person is like watching a movie.

When we consider that Thief is practically voyeuristic in its play-style, it seems absurd that the entire game should be spent watching Garrett watching enemies.

Alex50

05-15-2009, 10:55 AM

I wonder how much is people do not love TDS. The Play was released in 2004 And playing possibilities then were others. The A few play live more 2-3 years. I played in all three parts of the Thief. And their own value and defect were in each.
- a small cards - a mistake of the creators chosen multy platform. But they were executed with love and pervaded glamour and different secret. Their size they were not mansion Ramires less and lord Bafford and other small cards from T1 and T2.
- blackjack - in T1 he was fit only for deafenning, and was of no use if guard was vstrevozhen. in T2 him possible was deafen mildly alarmed guard, also bat and pair(vapour)s flash bombs possible to deafen the groups of ten chasing after for you strazhey. in T3 were deafened only not alarmed guards, but blinded enemy began to attack, blackjack acted as weak weapon and him possible was kill.
-Third Person Camera me ïðèÿòíåå to play from the first person, but there is much people loving this. Why they must not play. Will Let be a choice. Additionally, there was pleasantly see body Garrett, feel his motion, rather then be "flying sight"
- a dagger? what difference between very short sword and long dagger ;)
- a factions - add the intrigue in play and give the choice a player.
- Burricks - their was not and in T2. I shall pleased if they appear
- a communicating city - a good system of the approximation to realism. The System bathed-sale allowed to collect necessary equipment, without restriction by initial choice subject. The Pocket thefts allowed to correct the finance. The Den Garretta this remarkable decision.

GmanPro

05-15-2009, 11:07 AM

Yeah, sure, the big talking metal robots made it believable. :)

I thought it was more believable than big talking rocks :rasp:

sasarmauk

05-15-2009, 11:13 AM

Excellent post. Im a massive Thief fan and even though I really liked DS i do share some of your views.

'The levels were too small

This is correct. The levels should be much bigger. They were too easy to complete since this meant that you only had to follow one route to complete the mission.

Third Person Camera

Yeah they could really do that getting rid of this.

City hubs

I really liked this idea, I thought it was a nice touch. Like you say though they need to be bigger. I found that the town people and the city watch were very entertaining. I would often stand in the shadows for a good while watching the city watch fight the hammers or the pagens - it would be funnier knowing I instigated it.
I think it was nice to take time out from doing serious missions to go to a place where you can relax more and just cause some mischief.

Nerfed blackjack

I totally agree, that was appalling!

Immersion breaking loot percentage system

I agree that they can be done a different way. Your right, it takes the realism away because in the real world you wouldnt have a clue how much loot they had and what kind of loot they had.
I think they should structure it better with the city hubs. So garrett rents a room out, why not have the mission brief say you need to steal so much to pay for the rent and other essentials and then any loot you take after that is your pocket money for weapons etc. So technically you could just steal enough to pay for rent but it will hinder you if you need more weapons (forcing you to steal more). So thiefing actually does pay for his living.

I didnt particularly like the physics on the characters much. When guards etc fell to the floor their bodies would do some wierd folding thingy which was unrealistic. Their back bones would bend the wrong way. Wierd. Did anyone notice this? :rolleyes:

GmanPro

05-15-2009, 11:31 AM

Their ragdoll's did do some funny things I remember. :lol:

I would often stand in the shadows for a good while watching the city watch fight the hammers or the pagens

I always thought that was a bug. By the end of the game the streets were a damn war zone every time I played the game.

sasarmauk

05-15-2009, 11:32 AM

Yeah i think it was a bug to be honest but a very entertaining one at that LoL.

Aceyalone7777

05-15-2009, 11:38 AM

Totally agree with the blackjack part

Nate

05-15-2009, 02:43 PM

1) Thief DS City Hubs were WAY too small....I would like them to try again and make them much bigger.

2) Loot Glint...get rid of it. Make valuables simply look more valuable instead.

3) Get rid of 3rd person view...making maps will be easier for the devs and the game will be more immersive.

4) No load zones while In-Mission. I understand that this was due to the original Xbox limitations, but the Xbox 360 is more capable....of course, I am a PC gamer.

5) Swimming is always cool, but not critical.

6) Rope Arrows AND Gloves would be cool....in fact, I would love to see Garrett have a larger choice of equipment to choose from.

7) ....Which leads me to my next selection, I'd like to see a weight/encumbrance system introduced to the game where each piece of armor/weapon/equipment is given a value. The more Garrett brings with him, the slower/noiser/more visible he becomes.

8) Get rid of the magic light gem. Instead make the player have to actually watch where they are going in order to remain in the shadows.

That's about it for now......I am so looking forward to this!

Blue Sky

05-15-2009, 03:46 PM

8) Get rid of the magic light gem. Instead make the player have to actually watch where they are going in order to remain in the shadows.

Boo! Hiss! Off, off, off, off...

Prince_VLAD

05-15-2009, 03:56 PM

I agree with some of your points but not entirely...
The third view for a THIEF game it's benefic I'd say.It can save you from some difficult situation in a mission. It did for me...
A sword it's some big guns for a ..thief who is supposed to walk in the shadows..don't you think ? I doubt that a good thief (in reality) would be a good sword master in its time, as well.You can't have both here...so I'd stick with the knives and the blackjack.

Thieffanman

05-15-2009, 04:22 PM

>Missions like The Lfie of the Party, where you could explore a huge portion of the city >and the entire interior of an epic castle all in one level and without load screens >splitting it up were great. We want more of that.

No arguments there, but then, I found the load screens to be only a minor inconvenience.

>You as the player are supposed to assume the role of Garrett. Put on his boots and >become him. You are supposed to feel like YOU the player are inside the mansion >trying not to get caught as opposed to sitting in your comfortable chair sipping Dr >Pepper and chomping down on Twinkies enjoying a casual gaming session.

Agreed also. I've played the "Thief" games in first-person mode; I like them that way. That's the way it should be.

>Rope arrows were one of the coolest features of The Dark Project when it first came out. >It was exiting being able to go to places which in previous first person shooter games >would have been blocked off and inaccesible. Not only that
>but it felt right. Its something a master Thief would have in his arsenal. The TDS engine >couldn't handle them for whatever reason and so they were replaced with climbing gloves >which were practically useless because they were
>only usable on a tiny fraction of the surfaces in the game. And usually there was nothing >to be gained from climbing any of the walls anyway. Not a bad idea, but poorly >implemented.

Disagree. I found the climbing gloves to be much better than the rope arrows, not to mention a little more believeable: I'd rather have the protaganist scaling walls with climbing gear rather than scaling a rope attached to a stick with a metal point on the end :). I know I'm in the minority here, but I found the rope arrow physics to be pretty poor, in my opinion. I say keep the climbing gloves . . .

or have the player opt to buy either climbing gloves or rope arrows in T4.

> City hubs
>>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in >this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this >idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.

Agreed. Bigger city portions --or bigger cities-- would be pretty cool :).

>>The Thieving equipment was probably too cheap. I >always could afford to load up my arsenal to the max for each mission (later in the >game) and still have some gold left over.

Disagree. I say leave the costs as they are; I've always found myself running out of potions, arrows, etc. when missions sometimes went wrong. I'm for leaving costs as they are, and the amount of stealable loot to fence to buy said gear, the same.

> Nerfed blackjack
>>This is the most annoying aspect of the entire game >for me. It feels broken. Why should I have to get right behind somebody and wait for the >blackjack to be raised signaling that my strike will incapacitate my victim? Why can't
>I smack said victim in the face?
>>Why is it that when I flashbomb somebody, and they >cover their eyes and stumble blindly about etc, I am not allowed to knock them out? >They are blinded, they don't know where I am, so why can't I blackjack them? Why does >their vision magically come back to them instantly when I smack them with the >blackjack?

Agreed. Garrett should have been able to blackjack a stunned/blinded person as easily as an unsuspecting target who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time :).

>Immersion breaking loot percentage system[/COLOR][/B][/FONT]
>>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the >suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there >is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average >value? Or that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?

Disagree. I like the idea of knowing --or at least, having an idea-- of how much loot there is to steal in a mission's target zone, and I like the idea of knowing that there is special loot to be found. I assumed this was info automatically given by your source; it helped motivate me to grab as much as I could while I was on a mission :).

>>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was >also unnecessary.

Disagree. Shining loot gave a good indication about what Garrett knew what to steal, versus what was junk. I say keep the shiny loot :).

>[FONT="Lucida Console"][B] Garrett forgot how to >swim?>]Come on Garrett. Get it together...

Agreed. What was up with that?!?

>Thief was never about being the next prettiest game. It didn't try to dethrone the
>king-of-the-hill of graphics because it knew that in another six months a new title would >come along and nab the spotlight. Take away the pretty graphics of TDS and what are >you left with? Ion Storm should have picked an engine that can handle large >environments. Besides that, the engine was too hardware intensive for what it provided.

Agreed, but I liked the pretty graphics. TDS's graphics in the TDS story was *good*, but TDS graphics with a "Metal Age" storyline would have rocked :).

>All of this being said. I still found TDS to be an enjoyable game in its own right. For all >its faults, at least it didn't feature regenerating health, an alternate protagonist and >multiplayer.
>
>One of the things I really enjoyed about it was that it added just a hint of RPG flavor >to the mix. Exploring the city at your leisure, visiting fences to sell loot and black >market shoppes to purchase your gear. Doing side missions like that blacksmith job, >where you gotta nab the golden dagger. It was a good idea, but poorly implemented. All >of this could have been fixed and polished and made perfect if only Ion Storm had held >on to the game for another year.

Agree, big time. There's nothing I can add to this.

Well written :).

--Thieffanman

TeoRocker

05-15-2009, 10:10 PM

It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:

Great thread! If no one else had started this, I would.

The levels were too small
>Missions in Thief 1 and 2 were enormous. There were no load screens splitting the levels up causing havok to the AI whenever you left one area and came back to it to find nothing had changed since you left.
>Missions like The Lfie of the Party, where you could explore a huge portion of the city and the entire interior of an epic castle all in one level and without load screens splitting it up were great. We want more of that.

Agreed. With modern hardware, it's perfectly possible to have massive environments and pretty graphics. Thief will be perfectly capable for pulling that out, since the areas aren't meant to be very open anyway, and most of the game takes place indoors.

The loading screens were one of the major drawbacks.

Third Person Camera
>This is not what Thief is about. You as the player are supposed to assume the role of Garrett. Put on his boots and become him. You are supposed to feel like YOU the player are inside the mansion trying not to get caught
as opposed to sitting in your comfortable chair sipping Dr Pepper and chomping down on Twinkies enjoying a casual gaming session. If you don't like playing games that way, stop shouting that we are selfish for wanting Thief to be the way we like it and go play games that you like. Go play any number of other games that are stumbling over themselves trying to accommodate your needs.
>I now also think that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky and generally uncoordinated feel of the first person mode in TDS. Whatever the case may be, the movement in this game is not a fluid or precise as in the first two games. Some call it "body awareness", but I don't think that's it. Technically, Thief 1 and 2 had a sort of body awareness as well, but it was done so much better.

I hated those clunky controls. Thief I and II had a great solid feel about them. They were perfectly operational and rarely buggy (I say rarely, because I don't remember getting stuck... ever). I believe the ragdoll physics are mostly to blame, however. A modern game shouldn't lack physics, so I urge the developers to spend a lot of time balancing good controls with physics. Also, KEEP THE LEDGE GRABBING.

No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
>Rope arrows were one of the coolest features of The Dark Project when it first came out. It was exiting being able to go to places which in previous first person shooter games would have been blocked off and inaccesible. Not only that
but it felt right. Its something a master Thief would have in his arsenal. The TDS engine couldn't handle them for whatever reason and so they were replaced with climbing gloves which were practically useless because they were
only usable on a tiny fraction of the surfaces in the game. And usually there was nothing to be gained from climbing any of the walls anyway. Not a bad idea, but poorly implemented.

Rope/vine arrows were of the most innovative tools I've seen in a game. They have been very useful, given endless possibilities, and fitted the game perfectly. I disliked the climbing gloves.

No more Sword?
>Some people think the dagger was more suitable for a Thief. I can see where this view comes from, but I for one would like to have my trusty sword back. At least a short sword in any case. Its a good tool for breaking wooden boards
and repelling the undead.
>Not much to be said for this one, just meet us in the middle here EM and give us a short sword. Or a dagger AND a short sword.

Short sword all the way! But I disagree with having both.

City hubs
>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.
>The Thieving equipment was probably too cheap. I always could afford to load up my arsenal to the max for each mission (later in the game) and still have some gold left over.

I didn't like the city parts at all. Maybe if there had been a better implementation, I would. The parts that had different factions that were hostile too each other were horrible, unrealistic, ridiculous, and ruined the feel of the game. The AI suffered the most. One discovers a dead body (even one that wasn't your doing, even if they SAW who killed him), and everyone suspects of Garrett. It doesn't matter if you were at the opposite side of the area, the next time that civilian sees you he'll just know it was you.

Also, the City Guards shouldn't be THAT suspicious of Garrett. Sure, they know him, but they way they reacted was always as if Garrett was the only person around. They'd never jump on a civilian walking on a metal surface. Do Garrett's boots make a special sound the guards don't like? I don't think so.

Immersion breaking loot percentage system
>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average value? Or
that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?
>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was also unnecessary.

I didn't mind that at all, to be honest.

No Burricks!?!?!?
>Where'd they go?
I didn't really miss Burricks, but I liked it how there still were other beasts in the game. However, the beasts have always been too human-like in their behavior.

Less items for the arsenal
>I already mentioned rope arrows/vine arrows, but there were other items as well. TDS introduced the oil flask, which came across as clumsy to me. Hardly the delicate precision instrument that a master Thief would use.
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc[/INDENT]
Someone else mentioned that too many items is just as bad as a few items. I'd have to agree with that. That being said, I also didn't like the oil flask. The items items I'd use were the blackjack, normal arrows (whenever I got lazy :P), water arrows, rope arrows, moss arrows, gas arrows, flashbombs. I'd hate to see any of those disappear, but mostly all the rest of the items would come in handy sooner or later.

Factions
>Another good idea but poorly implemented.
>Shooting dust mites? Buying pagan respect by pouring my resources into their shrines? W. T. F.
>Why didn't you just hold on to the game for another year and make actual missions for us to do for these factions Ion Storm? Your faction system was sloppy and lazy and unprofessional. It felt like it wanted to actually be something
but was instead just thrown in there half finished just because...
I have already mentioned that when commenting on the city areas. Pagans should never be visible in the City so easily. Sure, they probably have their hideouts, but only in very isolated areas. Actual missions for the factions is a good idea.

The story/plot
>Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.
>The world was believable in Metal Age. There was more to do in the game world. More to interact with. Like that tip you could get about searching through people's trash because you might find some interesting info.
I still liked the story, even though it was indeed not as powerful as the two first Thief games. I think it has more to do with how it was told, rather than the story itself.

One of the things I really enjoyed about it was that it added just a hint of RPG flavor to the mix. Exploring the city at your leisure, visiting fences to sell loot and black market shoppes to purchase your gear. Doing side missions like that blacksmith job, where you gotta nab the golden dagger. It was a good idea, but poorly implemented. All of this could have been fixed and polished and made perfect if only Ion Storm had held on to the game for another year.

It will be nice if this is done well, but I'm still very skeptical. I really, really don't want this to be Grand THIEF Auto. Focusing on this openness might distract the developers from focusing on the actual missions. However, truth be told, they also have to sell. Openness is what will attract new players. The story and actual gameplay is going to determine whether they'll like the game eventually.

Keep it open, but not TOO open. The actual mission design is more important and should follow the same footsteps as the previous games.

I would say that I'm sorry for the long post, but I'm not. This needed to be said. If anyone else had some problem with TDS that I didn't. Feel free to add it here.
This is a great thread, thanks for starting it!

vasanx

05-15-2009, 11:25 PM

Grand THIEF Auto

Why didn't I think of that? :lol:

comy

05-16-2009, 05:38 AM

I though TDS was brilliant, but not without it's flaws.

I liked:
- The story - grabbed me by the short and curlies till the end
- Art direction
- Seeing Garretts body in first person and the feel and mechanics of his movement
- The fact that Ion Storm managed to increase the size of levels compared to DXIW
- Dynamic shadows!
- Mission design (omfg the Cradle!!!)
- Garretts apartment
- City hubs were cool in concept
- Faction system
- Merchant system
- Sound design and soundtrack
- AI reactions to snuffed lights, open doors etc (although AI was pretty flakey at times)

I didn't like:
- XBOX!
- Textures before installing John Ps texture mod
- Level size was a couple of percent below awesome, but far from being horrible. As I said above I do admire what Ion Storm managed to do re this
- CIty hubs could have been better - more rooftop areas
- NPC animations
- Generic appearance of NPCs
- Climbing gloves not usable in enough areas
- Lack of briefing videos
- Inconsistent appearance/features of Garrett in cutscenes
- The music during the intro!

That's all I can remember atm

I agree completely.
TDS was, to be honest, quite a brilliant game, defenitely a worthy sequel.
I agree it had certain flaws, but mind you so does any game out there. I find it funny how people put the first two games up there on a mighty throne, and nothing else can reach them. Its like a totem that everyone idolises. :whistle:
If I was a game developer I wouldn't want to make the same thing the same way EVERY time. So IMHO TDS was a successful attempt at modernising the series (with minor failures of course). I hope T4 continues this trend and improves the new aspects of TDS (open city, fraction/merchant system, etc.) and keeps the good old feeling of the series.

Im I the only one who kinda learned to appreciate that certain maps in TDS weren't humongous? Sometimes you need it short&sweet. Im not saying big maps are bad. Of course there must be some quite large maps, but within certain limits. I'm all for balanced design, not too open, not too closed.

Maybe my attitude towards TDS is influenced by the fact that I was majorly dissapointed with Deus Ex:IW, and was very pessimistic about TDS, but in the end I was really suprised (positively) at the outcome...... nah :D

Matuzzz

05-16-2009, 06:15 AM

esme

05-16-2009, 06:27 AM

I agree with the first post but I'd like to add a few things

the dagger as an automatic choice of weapon
Garrett is a thief not a killer, hit the fire button when Garrett isn't carrying a weapon and he should have got a blackjack
respawning AI in the city hubs
this is pretty much the same as having the AI wake up and while I think that might be worth trying on ko'd AI (which is a completely different debate and I'm not going to go into it here) just having the body vanish and reappear somewhere on patrol isn't the way to do it, especially if you've killed the AI, if they are dead they are dead and should stay that way
mugging AI
this just felt wrong, the worlds best thief, a master of misdirection and stealth, stands fully visible waving a cocked bow in the face of an AI to get them to hand over their valuables, puhlease
ladders
when climbing a ladder garrett is somehow welded to the taffing thing, he can't turn round, he can't go halfway up, turn and jump to another surface easily it's more a jump to let go the ladder and then while in the air turn to the right direction and run like hell while in the air (shades of wile e coyote) to try and land on the target, even I with my massive gut can climb halfway up a ladder and turn round and jump (I have the scars to prove it :o) but there's no way I can change direction and speed mid air, it was a clumsy system and an immersion breaker for me at least

vasanx

05-16-2009, 07:00 AM

I really dont understand WHY everybody complain about third person mode...when I first played TDS I didnt even realize that there is 3rd person mode. When you dont like it, then just dont use it.

Allow me.

It's really simple. Ion Storm focused more on the Third Person View when they did TDS and this in turn hurt the First Person View.

The movement in first person was weird. Did you not experience that?

We really don't care bout the Third Person View if the First Person View was not tempered with. That's all there is to it.

We are not saying TDS suck just for including Third Person View. Heck, they could have had isometric view ala Diablo for all we care. Just don't mess up the First Person View because Thief is a First Person Sneaker first and foremost.

I dont know what version of TDS you played, because I used flashbomb + blackjack many many times.

Ok, now I'm really confused. Which version of TDS did you play because in my version the blackjack was completely useless.

You flash em and when you knock em, you're actually helping them! The guards are no longer blinded and they start killing you. Didn't that happen to you?

TDS made it such a way that flashbombs can only be used to make an escape. That's not what we did in TDP and TMA. You blind em and go for the knock, so to speak.

That was one of the fun things to do and when you change that for no reason, how do you expect people to respond?

Please try to understand that we are not unreasonable. Our frustration is totally justified.

All in all TDS had some bad changes(small maps,absence of rope arrow,cutscenes...), but it was still great game.

I'm sorry but 'great game' is really pushing it. A 'Not so terrible game despite pissing all over the legacy of its predecessors' is more fitting IMHO.

vasanx

05-16-2009, 07:04 AM

Its like a totem that everyone idolises. :whistle:

Crap! Now he knows bout our weekly prayers.

Who's gonna do it? I'll get the map and supplies ready.

ToMegaTherion

05-16-2009, 07:08 AM

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom

05-16-2009, 08:02 AM

I think I agree with most of this thread. I think for the most part, my BIGGEST problem with TDS was the awkward, clunky movement. It was something you always had to put up with. ugh the leaning was terrible. There was quite a bit wrong with TDS, but that movement ruined it much more for me.

I miss the forward lean button from TDP.

vasanx

05-16-2009, 08:32 AM

The flashbomb/blackjack combo was, let's be honest, overpowered in the first two games, so it wasn't a bad idea to remove it and turn flashbombs into their (presumably) intended use as a distraction rather than an efficient offensive weapon.

Maybe you're right but what they did was still asinine.

I mean, knocking them actually clears their vision? Cmon!

If you wanna "fix" it then come up with somethin logical.

I don't really remember much but wasn't it hard to get flashbombs in the game?

But then again you get so much loot and you don't know where to throw all that gold. You could buy a lot of flashbombs from the store, rite? But you can't carry a lot or somethin. I don't really remember.

If you wanted to make it more fair, make the flashbombs really expensive or somethin.

Or improve the AI in such a way that they'd scream for their comrades when they are blinded and more guards appear.

Or the guards take out their weapons and start swinging like mad so it would be impossible for Garrett to get close and blackjack them.

He'll be forced to either kill them with his arrows, you can't do that if you're on Expert, and so he has to flee.

Wouldn't that have made more sense?

ZylonBane

05-16-2009, 08:48 AM

I found the load screens to be only a minor inconvenience.
I say keep the climbing gloves . . .
I've always found myself running out of potions, arrows, etc. when missions sometimes went wrong.
I like the idea of knowing that there is special loot to be found.
I say keep the shiny loot.
I liked the pretty graphics.
People like you are exactly why we can't have nice things.

vasanx

05-16-2009, 08:54 AM

I miss the forward lean button from TDP.

Totally! Remember how you can lean forward and see what's inside the barrel or somethin.

That is what so aggravating bout TDS. You don't remove stuff that was not broken when you make a sequel!

If anything, you improve on it. I think a lot of the people who defends TDS didn't play TDP and TMA. Or even if they did, they didn't take it all in like the rest of us because it's impossible to not feel ripped off when you're playing TDS.

Again, Ion Storm is to be blamed here. TDS was such a departure and for all its failings managed to create a following that simply do not think like us.

I can't think of a franchise to compare this sticky situation to at the moment but you get the picture.

Looks like we gonna be arguing about this for the next 3 yrs since people from both sides refuse to acknowledge this.

TDP and TMA fans should exercise more restraint I guess and TDS fans should be a little less defensive and be a bit more respectful IMHO. TDP and TMA did come out first after all.

It's only decent to not attack us with this whole zealot bullsh*t thing.

DarthEnder

05-16-2009, 08:59 AM

One of the things you guys have to realize about how the third person view messed up the gameplay of T1 and T2 is how the 3rd person view altered the way the 1st person view played.

The situation is very much like the different between plays Super Mario Bros. and playing Prince of Persia(the original 2d one). In Mario, the controls are very smooth and very precise because the animation is very clipped. In Prince of Persia, there is a lot of animation to the character that causes him to move more realistically, but much less precisely, constantly being a slave to foot positioning and his own momentum, just taking into account the huge about of time it takes him to go from running on one direction to running in another.

This is very applicable to the situation in T1 and T2, where your character is nothing more than a camera with an arm sticking out of it. Garret moves very precisely in those games, he jumps exactly when you want him to, he turns on a dime if you so choose, he strafe's easily.

But once T3 came out and added third person view, all of a sudden, everything Garrett does has complicated animations attached to it. Turning around actually involves him shifting his weight around, jumping isn't as precise. And 1st person view in T3 moves in the exact same way as 3rd, the camera is simply moved to the character's face.

So I would say that the way Garrett moves in T3 is more realistic that in previous Thief games, but it's not as precise, or responsive. For people who played the original games, it's like going from a game that plays like Halo, to a game that plays like Gears of War.

I can't think of a franchise to compare this sticky situation to at the moment but you get the picture.That's easy. Fallout.

Fallout 3 is a great game, but its very different from the first two games. And now there's the rabid fanbase of the first two games that despises FO3. And then there's the legion of new fans that never played FO1 and 2, and wouldn't like those games if they did because FO3 is what they know and love.

Then there's the reasonable people who actually realize that both games are great, they're just very different.

vasanx

05-16-2009, 08:59 AM

People like you are exactly why we can't have nice things.

:lol:

kaekaelyn

05-16-2009, 10:20 AM

I love TDP and TMA. I wish TDS had been more like them, but I still enjoyed the game because I just relaxed and played it. There were definitely a lot of things I missed, but if I didn't think about them, I still found it a fun experience, and didn't whine.

Now that T4 is in the works, it's time to bring out the nitpicky things. Still, TDS wasn't a bad game at all, if you just let go and took it for what it was. I think some of you guys just need to relax--no offense.

Gorephazer

05-16-2009, 11:18 AM

I liked the "clunky" movement. It made the game more immersive rather than making me feel like some floating disembodied awareness.

I thought the blackjack was fine too. You complain about it being unrealistic that you can't knock anyone out when they are in search mode but it is just as unrealistic that you can't knock them out when they are fighting you. It has nothing to do with realism, but is more about gameplay decisions, and I think it was a good idea because it emphasized the fact that the blackjack is purely a stealth weapon. I think it should be you can only blackjack when the enemy is completely unaware but you can backstab when they are in search mode--this would solve the issue of backstabbing being completely useless (which I always thought was odd)

Thieffanman

05-16-2009, 11:30 AM

People like you are exactly why we can't have nice things.

. . . so take someone else's. You've had experience playing this game, after all :D.

--Thieffanman

P.S. Note to self: Must get that electrical field in TDS for my apartment. :D

vasanx

05-16-2009, 11:36 AM

Well written DarthEnder. :thumb:

That was exactly the kind of analogy I was looking for.

I think some of you guys just need to relax--no offense.

I'm actually offended. Here we are explaining why we feel they way we do and it's disregarded simply because we can't relax?

First of all, we are very, very relaxed since we present our arguments backed up by logical reasonings without goin all apesh*t on the naysayers.

We do go apesh*t or at least I do when there are personal attacks. Self-defense. Plain and simple.

We feel betrayed. You must understand that. If you don't feel it, then congratulations. You are the lucky ones.

I'm actually sick of this sometimes. Here we are, fighting for a game 9 yrs on, wanting to relive the moment, when we know deep in our hearts that T4 more than probably gonna be along the lines of TDS.

Do you know how frustrating that is?

Just look at all the efforts that have been made by the community. There's T2X. An unofficial and very professional expansion pack that was 5 yrs in the making.

There's The Dark Mod being built on the Doom3 engine for years now.

And lets not even talk bout the hundreds of fan made mission on ttlg.com.

Don't you people see what the fans want? We want continuation. A true continuation.

Just as how HL2 felt so natural to play.

Please don't take this the wrong way but when you and every other TDS fan out there tries to "talk sense" into us, it just comes off as offensive.

It's not like we can't talk bout it. Just don't brush it off as something trivial. That's adding insult to injury.

kaekaelyn

05-16-2009, 05:10 PM

kaekaelyn

05-16-2009, 05:12 PM

By the way, I'm not trying to "talk sense" into you. I want T4 to be miles better than TDS and more of a throwback to TDP and TMA. I like TDS, but it got a lot of things wrong that TDP and TMA got absolutely spot-on. The thing is, I just wonder why you're so hostile toward it instead of just merely pointing out its flaws.

BlooferLady

05-16-2009, 06:01 PM

Hi all, LOOOOONG post alert!

I can't seem to find it in me to agree completely with either side, so I guess I'll just straddle the gap here. (I might encourage a bit less hostility in both camps, after all, we're both trying to get a great game out of this company, yes?) As I said in my intro post, I've been a fan since I played TMA and couldn't for the life of me make it through the Ambush mission. It took me a while to get used to the mindset these games need, but I never left stealth gaming after playing TMA. :)

When I heard about T4 I pulled out my games for another play-through. I have to say, Thief 1 and 2 were practically perfect. THAT being said, I feel that most of my complaints with TDS are continuity/common sense issues. So here's the two bits from someone who has a foot in both camps.

Problems with DS:
1. Why can't Garrett swim? He swims in an upside-down river in TDP! Seriously.
2. Blackjacking guards used to be swift, silent, and effective, as long as they weren't looking right at you. Although I liked the fact that in DS you couldn't blackjack servants any time, any place. That always kind of bugged me about the old games. Were their skulls thinner? Why would they drop like a sack of potatoes at the suggestion of being hit over the head?
3. Inconsistency of Garrett's appearance. That's bothered me throughout the series, though. Pick a concept and keep it. I've downloaded all of the wallpapers for these games, and there are 3 different master thieves there.

Changes I liked:
1. The dagger. Oh dearie me, I'm going to defend the lack of sword. I really never used it in the first games. EVER. Today I played through RTC, and backstabbed my first Hammer Haunt. Amazing. I'm more of a fan of ghosting missions, I guess. But truly, it makes little logical sense to have a great big sword hanging from your belt when you're trying to be stealthy. That thing would be banging into walls and knocking stuff off of tables... I could go on, but I know that the combat aspect is near and dear to many people's hearts. I agree with one of the earlier posts, give the player an option. Short sword and dagger, or something like that. Thief may seem like a straightforward game, but there are many, MANY ways to play it. Letting players choose their weapons would help to accommodate personal playing preferences.

2. Climbing gloves
They were ok. I'm a terrible platformer, though, so I didn't miss having to jump from rope to rope. I did like the freedom that the rope arrows gave you, so my vote would be to have both in the next game.

3. City hubs
Good idea! I personally like the ability to go and fence my own goods, and buy what I need. Going back to RTC, you realize that holy water is not available to buy in the pre-mission supply menu? WHAT? You've been there once before, Garrett! Why would you waltz in without that VERY essential item? If you had been able to access the city hubs, you could get whatever you needed. I thought it was nice. I would have liked to see more side-quests, though. Like the golden dagger and the guy who tries to stiff those thugs with the diamonds. I love listening to the guards and servants talk about what's going on in their lives, and I feel like the city hubs make you feel more like a part of the world.

4. Third Person: I never noticed that it affected first person play. But then again, I get very distinct Thief-induced nausea if I play TDP or TMA on an empty stomach, so probably it felt smoother to me. The third-person option does bring in new fans, though. My roommate loves it, and it got her to try the Thief games, since she wasn't willing to put up with the nausea-inducing head bobbing of the first two long enough to get to love the games themselves. Now she's a fan. :P Though, if it is noticeably affecting gameplay for some people, find a way to have both.

Stuff I'm iffy about:

1. Sparkly loot. I personally play games for the story, so loot requirements are merely an annoyance to me. In that way, I appreciated the sparkly loot. Especially in the Cradle. I didn't want to have to go into every dark corner on that level. On the other hand, I miss the feeling you get when you pick up a silver/pewter plate and realize "crap, this isn't worth anything, now I have to go find something soft and squishy to drop it on." It keeps you on your toes, and, really, it's not that hard to find the loot in the first couple of games.

2. Arsenal/Tools:
To me, the more the merrier! I liked oil flasks and the extra tidbits you get in TDS. I personally enjoy setting up traps to snare those pesky guards, and watching them slip and slide down stairs makes me giddy with glee. Yes, I'm a bit of a sadist. And? Conversely, I also liked those frogbeast eggs. Although it's not really reasonable for them to be sold at your corner grocery store, so perhaps they should only have been available for purchase from the pagans? Say, there's an idea for a use for your faction function.

3. Factions:
I didn't have any problem with having faction status in this game, but I was pretty confused as to why anyone wouldn't befriend both. Or, considering our protagonist's personality, why you would befriend either. It just didn't make a whole lot of sense, nice as it was to be allowed into areas where the city watch wasn't present. Plus, I felt that the Hammers should have gotten irritated if you started doing the pagans favors, or vice versa. There should have been a give and take. Very keeper-esque, now that I think of it.

Anyways, it appears that my two bits went and had children and multiplied into 12 bits, but with so much emotion surrounding this topic, I felt the need to elaborate on my opinions. Really, I didn't feel that TDS was a blight on the franchise. There were things that could have been improved, yes, but I thought it was a strong game, and I thoroughly enjoy it, personally. The only aspect that I can really protest with the vehemence I've seen here is: For the love of Mike, LET THE TAFFER SWIM! For my final say in this very long post: Let's try and play nice kids. If you have a complaint, also bring a suggestion to the table. Come up with a compromise. It's the only way any of our ideas/suggestions will be truly heard by the developers, who will otherwise merely see a big hissy fit.

BlooferLady

05-16-2009, 06:11 PM

Oops, double post. The site lied to me. ;) Sorry!

kaekaelyn

05-16-2009, 07:53 PM

I just want everyone to know once again that I'm sorry for being so snarky. I just want everyone to enjoy themselves the best they can! We ARE talking about games after all :)

vasanx

05-16-2009, 10:26 PM

I want you to talk about it. I'm talking about it too. There were definitely a lot of things I didn't like from TDS. I just don't like the "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude I see from some people. I love looking at things with a critical eye, and I do expect that some people will disagree with me. I am sorry for offending you. I stated my opinion in a closed-minded and condescending way--I didn't mean to say exactly what I said.

Any reasonable TDP and TMA fan will not have your aforementioned "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude.

That would be simply wrong. I'm all for T4 using whatever that did work from TDS so long as T4's design is strictly based on TDP and TMA.

This is why people are butting heads here. People who like TDS wants to see that style continue but the TDP and TMA fans want the game they never got.

Like I said before, we are gonna be arguing over this for a very long time.

The debt to us TDP and TMA fans is long overdue. Which is why we're doin all we could to get the devs attention here.

9 years. We have waited that long. Surely, you can symphatize?

Apology accepted by the way. We're cool.

By the way, I'm not trying to "talk sense" into you. I want T4 to be miles better than TDS and more of a throwback to TDP and TMA. I like TDS, but it got a lot of things wrong that TDP and TMA got absolutely spot-on. The thing is, I just wonder why you're so hostile toward it instead of just merely pointing out its flaws.

Hostile? Haha.

I guess passion can be misconstrued as hostility. Trust me when I say I don't blindly hate TDS. I believe I have written quite extensively on why TDS was a poor successor to TDP and TMA in a very, civilized manner.

If you really must know, TDS ripped me off twice. I actually upgraded my graphics card for TDS.

I just bought a PC with a GeForce MX 4000 and when I tried to install TDS it spits out an error saying that my GPU doesn't support Shader Model 2.0.

I didn't even blink when I saw that message. I bought the FX5200 and what did I get in return?

A parody of my beloved TDP and TMA. :mad2:

There you go. Now you know why TDS holds a special place in my heart.

Hypevosa

05-16-2009, 10:53 PM

Any reasonable TDP and TMA fan will not have your aforementioned "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude.

That would be simply wrong. I'm all for T4 using whatever that did work from TDS so long as T4's design is strictly based on TDP and TMA.

This is why people are butting heads here. People who like TDS wants to see that style continue but the TDP and TMA fans want the game they never got.

Like I said before, we are gonna be arguing over this for a very long time.

The debt to us TDP and TMA fans is long overdue. Which is why we're doin all we could to get the devs attention here.

9 years. We have waited that long. Surely, you can symphatize?

Apology accepted by the way. We're cool.

Hostile? Haha.

I guess passion can be misconstrued as hostility. Trust me when I say I don't blindly hate TDS. I believe I have written quite extensively on why TDS was a poor successor to TDP and TMA in a very, civilized manner.

If you really must know, TDS ripped me off twice. I actually upgraded my graphics card for TDS.

I just bought a PC with a GeForce MX 4000 and when I tried to install TDS it spits out an error saying that my GPU doesn't support Shader Model 2.0.

I didn't even blink when I saw that message. I bought the FX5200 and what did I get in return?

A parody of my beloved TDP and TMA. :mad2:

There you go. Now you know why TDS holds a special place in my heart.

I did the same thing... I bought a new graphics card to play TDS... It did it's job it was entertaining - but really nothing to TDP and TMA - it was just pretty to look at.

vasanx

05-16-2009, 11:24 PM

I didnt particularly like the physics on the characters much. When guards etc fell to the floor their bodies would do some wierd folding thingy which was unrealistic. Their back bones would bend the wrong way. Wierd. Did anyone notice this? :rolleyes:

You can make balloon animals of them guards.

DarthEnder

05-16-2009, 11:34 PM

Yeah, T3's ragdolls were ridiculously loose.

Fortunately, we have Euphoria and whatnot these days to take care of things like that.

Platinumoxicity

05-16-2009, 11:38 PM

They tried to choose an engine for TDS that was pretty, but the limits in level size caused not only the problem that levels had to be divided, but it also prevented the use of large structures, 3d skyboxes and it made the levels feel like they were only levels, not actual areas in a real world.
-For example, the clocktower was just a set of rooms piled on top of eachother, with no windows or outside climbing/exploration, and no amazing view of the city from outside the tower. And the tower itself seemed to be smaller than St. Edgar's towers or Angelwatch, so it couldn't have been the tallest building in the city.
-The Kurshok citadel didn't look at all like it used to be a city on land but rather a complex of rooms dug in the soil, because they didn't have these "vistas" showing the structure of the buildings collapsed underground. (The streets and plazas and general city structure of Karath Din is a good example)
-The levels also didn't have those numerous side rooms and maintenance areas that were out of the way and might have had some loot or secret passages. Everything was in plain sight or just en route. "No, we don't have toilets or cleaning closets here."
-The areas in the city hub were supposed to represent different classes of the society, but they all looked the same. The Old Quarter didn't really look so old and Auldale looked just as crappy as the Docks. It would be reasonable if everything in the rich district would be bigger and brighter but it looked exactly the same. There wasn't room in Stonemarket to actually have a marketplace convention there, so it looked like a regular set of streets.The New Market's -marketplace in T2's "Ambush" was probably bigger than Stonemarket plaza and Stonemarket proper combined.

Platinumoxicity

05-16-2009, 11:39 PM

DBL pst

vasanx

05-17-2009, 12:20 AM

I don't think that ever happened in a mission, did it? Just in the city areas.

I agree with most of the points in the OP, though not always the wording...(I wouldn't have described the oil flasks as being against the "delicate precision instrument" Garrett would use, and then in the next sentence bemoan the loss of mines!)

But things which reminded you you were playing a computer game, like the loading zones, loot glint, arrow trails, everything frobbable glowing a hideous luminous blue colour, the per centage tally whenever you picked up some loot, the way that if you died the camera went into third person and rotated around your body... Not to mention the lousy framerate and clunky controls (due to the body awareness) just took away from you BEING THERE and continually reminded you that you were playing a game.

Which was most definitely a step BACKWARDS from Thief 1 and 2.

As for a City Hub and the factions and all that...obviously that was all really badly implemented in Deadly Shadows and I just ignored those segments really. If they were tried again, they'd have to be done REALLY WELL, but ultimately I'd much MUCH rather see ALL the development time put into twelve REALLY REALLY GOOD missions with beautifully created briefings and arty and non-clunky buying loot screens / stats between those missions.

If in doubt, keep it simple. Deadly Shadows tried to come up with a whole new way to experience Thief, and forgot to concentrate on recreating that original gameplay in the first place.

:friends:

vasanx

05-17-2009, 12:32 AM

You complain about it being unrealistic that you can't knock anyone out when they are in search mode but it is just as unrealistic that you can't knock them out when they are fighting you.

Really?

Cmon. How can that not be realistic? You knock a fellow's head a few times, he's bound to drop.

When the guards are aware of you, the only disadvantage in knocking them out is that they can swing their sword at you. You lose your health or possibly die if you don't knock them fast enough.

Or worse, knocking on the guy's head too many times actually kills them and you gotta restart your Expert level again.

I kinda remember that happenin in TDP and TMA.

ToMegaTherion

05-17-2009, 12:36 AM

I think a big problem with Deadly Shadows was that it tried to fiddle around with too many different things a little bit. I don't think that's the right approach for Thief. We have, in Metal Age, a good base of how to do things well. I think it would be much better to take that base, not play around with too much of it, but choose a few elements (for me it would be AI and a well-developed system for the world responding to your body count/KO count/times spotted) and really make massive improvements on them.

Still, there are things in Deadly Shadows that we could include in the base, so there's no need to throw everything out, but the designers should avoid tinkering with little things because it's not likely to make big improvements and they're probably no more likely to make things better as they are make things worse.

vasanx

05-17-2009, 02:09 AM

Changes I liked:
1. The dagger. Oh dearie me, I'm going to defend the lack of sword. I really never used it in the first games. EVER. Today I played through RTC, and backstabbed my first Hammer Haunt. Amazing. I'm more of a fan of ghosting missions, I guess. But truly, it makes little logical sense to have a great big sword hanging from your belt when you're trying to be stealthy. That thing would be banging into walls and knocking stuff off of tables... I could go on, but I know that the combat aspect is near and dear to many people's hearts. I agree with one of the earlier posts, give the player an option. Short sword and dagger, or something like that. Thief may seem like a straightforward game, but there are many, MANY ways to play it. Letting players choose their weapons would help to accommodate personal playing preferences.

Seriously? No love for the longsword?

Of all the arguments I've heard so far for not having a longsword, I gotta say, yours opened my eyes.

It was only for a second or so. I closed my eyes back soon after. :D

Here's what I have to say. What do you do when you're caught and the guards come at ya like you're a pinyata?

How do you parry a swing from a longsword? With a dagger? I know you can do that in Assassin's Snore. But Altair is one crazy mofo and he's also short of one middle finger, if you catch my drift.

The reason why Garrett carries a longsword is to block those kind of attacks.

That's a very reasonable argument right?

And what's with this shortsword business? A real man doesn't carry a shortsword and Garrett is a man's man! It's either the longsword or a battle axe. No sissy shortswords for my man Garrett! :D

I was kidding in the above paragraph by the way. Not bout the longsword though.

I almost fell for the "banging into walls and knocking off stuff" argument but this is Garrett we're talking about. A Master Thief. I'm of the opinion that he can carry a longsword without making much noise considering all those years of training behind him.

I dunno how he does it. He holds onto the sheath when he's moving around?

Anyways, I guess in the end, it shouldn't matter if we are given the choice to choose our weapons. But the longsword gotta be there though. They can have the shortsword, tinysword, retractablesword, lightsaber for all I care. Just give me my trusty longsword back.

The guy did spend an entire mission looking for one so, you know he's into longswords.

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/4443/longsword.th.jpg (http://img198.imageshack.us/my.php?image=longsword.jpg)

ToMegaTherion

05-17-2009, 02:34 AM

As long as it isn't possible to beat 50 guards simultaneously any more, it doesn't matter that much what stabby weapon the player has.

Platinumoxicity

05-17-2009, 02:59 AM

Garrett's sword is a short sword, just like every guard's sword in TDS. The Kurshok's large one-sided sword is a two handed longsword. A short sword can be used to parry attacks, but it's quite ineffective in a fight with an opponent that's wielding a longsword. Garrett's short sword is so small that it doesn't make sneaking any harder but it can still be used for protection.
http://filesmelt.com/Imagehosting/pics/8edbb4f10543d58ba417d53f2acc7285.PNG

Matuzzz

05-17-2009, 03:45 AM

All three Thief games were great games. All have their pros and cons. But I see that large number of people here want to see remake of the old ones rather than sequel.

ToMegaTherion

05-17-2009, 04:35 AM

Something from Deadly Shadows that I haven't yet noticed anyone comment on directly is the result of the City Hub concept on mission equipment compared with previous versions. It is true that money is too plentiful in Deadly Shadows, but even reducing that wouldn't solve what I feel is a big problem here: the departure from the clever design feature from Dark Project and Metal Age, where your equipment was for the current mission only. That really leaves you more free to use your tools without worrying about conserving them for some potentially difficult times 20 play hours in the future, and also frees the designers from worrying about balancing loot and equipment over the whole game.

I have been trying to think about some way to merge both the City Hub concept with the equipment philosophy from the first two games, but have yet to come up with anything particularly impressive. Any ideas? It should be kept fairly simple, I think. Overcomplication of abstract game mechanics doesn't seem very fitting for Thief.

OnionKnight

05-17-2009, 08:52 AM

While can get behind most of the critique for TDS, I cannot understand why the story was so bad. I think that the story was excellent and up to par with the rest of the games, and this is the reason I enjoyed TDS and acknowledge it as a Thief game. The story was a bit different, this time it was more mysterious and symbolical rather than being more of a thriller. I see no problem with this, and would probably have been put off it had followed the same formula again.
The Thief feeling remained intact with this game through the story and the aesthetics, but it was a shame that the Thief mechanics were nowhere near the quality of the previous games. I would also like to point out that while graphics usually are of less importance in games, with Thief I think it's very important since it's a very atmospheric game. Details would really improve the Thief experience.

I've seen criticism towards the demystifying of the Keepers. This strikes me as a bit unobservant, as Thief is pretty much a trilogy about the three factions.
Thief 1 = Pagans
Thief 2 = Hammers
Thief 3 = Keepers
With this in mind, the idea of a fourth Thief game is also a bit unsettling.

BlooferLady

05-17-2009, 08:53 AM

Here's what I have to say. What do you do when you're caught and the guards come at ya like you're a pinyata

I drop a flashbomb and run like hell. ;) No, I understand people's attachment to the sword. I think some customization would be the best road for Eidos to go down in this case. Really, Garrett would most likely have both, yes?

The guy did spend an entire mission looking for one so, you know he's into longswords.

It's what he was hired for. I think we can safely say he's into money! As I said before, the sword vs. dagger thing probably is very dependent on your playing style. Some people have pointed out its use in breaking boxes and boards, and I have to admit, I didn't even think of that. And then I remember how stupid I felt in TDS when I broke boxes with a dagger. Perhaps Gordon Freeman will lend him a crowbar. (JOKE! No crowbars please!)

Gorephazer

05-17-2009, 11:57 AM

Really?

Cmon. How can that not be realistic? You knock a fellow's head a few times, he's bound to drop.

When the guards are aware of you, the only disadvantage in knocking them out is that they can swing their sword at you. You lose your health or possibly die if you don't knock them fast enough.

Or worse, knocking on the guy's head too many times actually kills them and you gotta restart your Expert level again.

I kinda remember that happenin in TDP and TMA.

That was my point actually. I was under the impression that you couldn't knock guards out while they were fighting you in T1 and T2 (only when they were in search mode), but apparently I was mistaken! In that case, what was the point of having a sword anyway???

johny2211

05-17-2009, 12:41 PM

thief 3 was made for the Xbox and we all know it :hmm: thief 3 had to many restrictions such as no swimming, i guess because they spent all there time on the wall climbing trick which was awful (its thief not spiderman) plus the feeling that thief 3 missions had you mainly on a set train rail all the way through the missions which gave you no freedom of choice on how you was going to navigate through a building, for example life of the party in thief 2 or the haunted cathedral in thief 1 where you had several routes to pick from and each route had its own goodies and suprises to offer.

kaekaelyn

05-17-2009, 01:26 PM

Got it. Well TMA and TDP weren't exactly fresh in my mind when I played TDP, and I was just excited to hear Garrett's voice again, so I probably wasn't as picky as I should have been.

vasanx

05-18-2009, 11:29 PM

The guy did spend an entire mission looking for one so, you know he's into longswords.

It's what he was hired for. I think we can safely say he's into money!

It was a joke by the way. :)

vasanx

05-18-2009, 11:44 PM

That was my point actually. I was under the impression that you couldn't knock guards out while they were fighting you in T1 and T2 (only when they were in search mode), but apparently I was mistaken! In that case, what was the point of having a sword anyway???

I just fired up the Lord Bafford mission again.

You can knock the guards when they're fighting you but they won't lose conciousness. They die.

I actually thought you can put em to "sleep" when you're fighting them. Rusty memory again.

What's the point of having a sword? To deflect them sword swinging at ya.

What bout fighting all those zombies? When you run out Holy Water, a longsword is really effective in keeping them at bay.

I still don't get the dagger people though. I rather run than face a zombie with a tiny ass dagger.

But then again they were no zombies in TDS was there? No wonder they don't miss the longsword.

Nate

05-18-2009, 11:52 PM

I've been thinking the City Hub over quite a bit.

I've come to the conclusion that I'd like to see a city hub, but NOT if it is at the expense of the mission maps.

I could easily do without the City Hub and simply have Garrett go from mission to mission with a stop at his fence to sell the prior missions loot, a stop at his supplier to replace his equipment, and then a stop at his apartment to change up any equipment (for example, he could leave his short sword behind = weaker but better stealth stats). From that point, he would proceed into the mission.

Hell, you could forgo the Fence and Store stop overs, and just have Garrett at his hideout with a screen that allows him to swap out his gear (depending on how Garrett wants to balance stealth versus combat) and purchase replacement gear.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like a City Hub...but just not at the expense of the mission maps.

vasanx

05-19-2009, 12:32 AM

Got it. Well TMA and TDP weren't exactly fresh in my mind when I played TDP, and I was just excited to hear Garrett's voice again, so I probably wasn't as picky as I should have been.

I totally recommend you playing TDP and TMA again. I guarantee you that you won't see TDS the same way again.

I have to emphasize here though that I don't blindly hate TDS. I'm no TDPist or TMAist.

There are stuff from TDS I enjoyed. They are few and far between but I did nevertheless.

I have decided to be more objective in my TDS skewering and that's why I'm playtesting it now.

I have 3 full pages of comments already. Only a quarter of the first page holds the pros so go figure.

I'll be posting it soon.

ToMegaTherion

05-19-2009, 12:55 AM

Is there a lot of value in adding up number of pros and adding up number of cons and then seeing which one is higher? I've never really trusted that very much. I really loved Dark Project but I can easily write down a load of bad things about it (maybe not too great example since I can't imagine playing Dark Project again).

My favourite game is Baldur's Gate 2. I could write you a long and detailed list about all the things that are wrong with it. The list of things that are good about it would most likely be much shorter. But it would contain more important things.

vasanx

05-19-2009, 01:21 AM

Is there a lot of value in adding up number of pros and adding up number of cons and then seeing which one is higher?

I won't say a lot necessarily but I'd say there's an appreciable value. :)

I get what you mean by concentrating on what's important and all.

Just as you can say that's BG2 short list of pros is more important, I'm saying that TDS' long (or short depending on who you ask) list of cons is more important because it really did ruin the experience for me.

Again, this is my opinion. If you can convince me that I'm wrong, I'll take it like a man. But I have yet to see such an argument.

Besides, we are not saying that TDP and TMA are flawless games despite how our comments are made out to be.

Anyone who wants to dicuss TDP and TMA's flaws, please do. I have my own complaints too.

We are simply responding to people who think TDS flaws are not flaws. But then again, isn't that the point of an argument?

Matuzzz

05-19-2009, 01:29 AM

of course there were zombies. but not as much as in TDP

ToMegaTherion

05-19-2009, 01:31 AM

I guess I think that the reasons why we enjoy a certain game are usually very hard to really pin down, and by listing pros and cons we construct an illusion of understanding... but we don't really understand. And then we try to make decisions based on this illusionary understanding, and it doesn't really lead anywhere useful.

I'm not saying that it isn't worthwhile to consider what we like and what we don't like. But we should be fairly cautious about things we say, and be very cautious about thinking we can easily identify the mysterious quality that makes great games great,

Matuzzz

05-19-2009, 01:45 AM

I won't say a lot necessarily but I'd say there's an appreciable value. :)

I get what you mean by concentrating on what's important and all.

Just as you can say that's BG2 short list of pros is more important, I'm saying that TDS' long (or short depending on who you ask) list of cons is more important because it really did ruin the experience for me.

Again, this is my opinion. If you can convince me that I'm wrong, I'll take it like a man. But I have yet to see such an argument.

Besides, we are not saying that TDP and TMA are flawless games despite how our comments are made out to be.

Anyone who wants to dicuss TDP and TMA's flaws, please do. I have my own complaints too.

We are simply responding to people who think TDS flaws are not flaws. But then again, isn't that the point of an argument?
Everybody here complain about a LOOOOT of cons about TDS. Okey, you couldnt swim,there were less items to obtain,different movement...but such great ideas in making levels and such nice architecture is more important to me. And of course shadows, which was thing that this game missed. I dont think TDS changes too much from his predecessors. It maintain its spirit. I played for example Settlers 5:heritage of kings and THAT is the game, that people should complain to beacuse it has nothing in common with his predecessors even though it had nice graphic etc...

I absolutly agree with you, that one thing may be more important than 10 another aspects.

Darkplay

05-19-2009, 02:12 AM

Hi!

I'm fan since the release of Thief 1998, frist time poster on this forum ...

Best post in this forum so far GmanPro !!!
Make this post sticky!

I second most all of your thoughts GmanPro!!!

... and want to add:

TDS was okay and had it's moments (the Story, Cradle) but felt like a "game".
I want Thief IV feel like "being part" of a immersive world. This make Thief standout ...

So EM ...

please do NOT try to make Thief IV a compilation of aspects you like in other stealth games. These have their own right of existance and may be entertaining for what they are. But we do not want Thief be casual entertainment, another fast action assassin game or treated like unintelligent players. We love Thief for being a immersive, mature, slow and rich First Person Sneaker as it was invented from LGS...! :wave:

please make it unique, original, dark, witty, not breaking it's roots (T1/T2) in game mechanistics, lore and feel and always remember:

Treat Thief as Spearhead which other stealth games can "learn" from (not vice vera!).
Make THief IV silhouetted against all those other interchangeable stealth games.

... and oldschool-Taffers will be sold and new players interested for experiencing a different, rich pure stealth game.

Unfortunatly producers and decison-makers of Ion Storm did forget about that in TDS for most of GmanPro's listed aspects ...

Best wishes in that & Thanks.for reading ..

oceanclub

05-19-2009, 03:20 AM

It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:

Some of this appears to rationalising things simply because they were originally done that way. For example, the idea that a stealthy thief would be carrying around a large metal weapon that would make clanging sounds when brushed against objects and that would cause the victim to make loud ARGGGH sounds when used.

Nostalgia - heroin for old people.

P.

Dragonera

05-19-2009, 03:32 AM

Well TDS was just differend than T1&2, but i did like it. Sure it was bad when u didnt have sword or etc etc but anyway i did like TDS, just because it was differend. If it did suck, why u even play it?

Necros

05-19-2009, 04:56 AM

Well TDS was just differend than T1&2
Somewhat different but I still loved it.
It's really simple. Ion Storm focused more on the Third Person View when they did TDS and this in turn hurt the First Person View.
Could you show me a source to that? I've read in an interview that they were only doing the FPV at first and then later added the TPV after some devs hacked it in.

And I liked the loading screens (not the smaller levels!) and if there will be some kind of loading screens in T4, do it like in T3. I liked the art and the quotes.

Oh, and keep the light gem!

VIKTORIA

05-19-2009, 05:18 AM

Best post in this forum so far GmanPro !!!
Make this post sticky!
.

I agree, it is an excellent post/thread, so I've made it a sticky. :)
Please try and keep discussion on topic and contribute relevant points only so that the devs don't have to plough through off-topic conversation. This is very important, right? ;)

Jamesy

05-19-2009, 07:06 AM

The main problem TDS had was the bad choice of an engine. I think they had re-used the Deus Ex Invisible War one, and it was kind of flawed. If any of you have played it, DXIW also had some major frame-rate issues. TDS was born with the same genetic defect, so to speak.

Bonus stuff like 'climbing gloves' that were badly implemented can easily be added at a later date via download content/expansions.

If EM uses a 'home-baked' engine it should turn out a lot better. Leave a lot of time for testing as well. TDS felt like it was a beta release they put on the market to keep in sync with the deadline. If you run out of time, push the release date back. Its done all the time in this industry, so I wouldn't mind it if the end product was better because of it.

Remember, if you can't see yourself sitting down and enjoying this game its not quite ready.

pha

05-19-2009, 07:15 AM

I agree, it is an excellent post/thread, so I've made it a sticky.

Thanks.

I hope GmanPro's very valid points will be noted during development and you won't have to ninja-unsticky this in order not to make EM look bad.

oceanclub

05-19-2009, 07:17 AM

The main problem TDS had was the bad choice of an engine. I think they had re-used the Deus Ex Invisible War one, and it was kind of flawed. If any of you have played it, DXIW also had some major frame-rate issues

The Unreal Engine 2 - with, according to Wikipedia, an in-house "flesh renderer" - I don't know if the Unreal Engine 2 itself has frame-rate issues, maybe the in-house customisation was at fault?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_Engine#Unreal_Engine_2

According to this, Deus Ex 3 is using something called the Crystal engine, which was originally used for the new Tomb Raider games:

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50146

I'd be highly surprised if Thief 4 therefore doesn't use it.

P.

Jamesy

05-19-2009, 07:43 AM

Ah, I see. UE2 didn't have issues like that when I was using it, but maybe I didn't notice it. In house changes could have been the problem, but they should have noticed and fixed it at least. Maybe it was also the jumbled level design? The city hub had a lot going on in it, so that could also be the source of frame rate death.

I played a demo of Tomb Raider Underworld, and it was alright. Not sure if that was the Crystal engine at work, but the water and everything looked nice. Movement felt a little weird, but I was never interested in Tomb Raider all that much and it seemed to handle the same as any others in that series.

Belboz

05-19-2009, 08:26 AM

This is my taking on the problem with the blackjack as explained via a gun, you have a gun in a game, you can't fire it until you get in range of the monster you want to kill, you cant fire it just to shoot other things that arn't monsters. How frustrated would you feel if you had a gun in a game and you wern't allow to use it until the game decided you could. (hl2 friendly fire is another game that uses some type of restriction, how many times have you wanted to shoot alyx cause her scripted movements have shoved you off a platform in the citadel, and you've fallen to your death.)

Loot glint was added because the game testers at ionstorm couldn't find the loot, the solution there would have been to fire the testers and hire testers that could. Apparently the art department for t3 had gone overboard with the textures on loot and other frobbable stuff, you can't see that though as its spoilt with that horrible blue shimmer. The easest solution with a frobable object is to make it a bit brighter than the surounding objects so that you know its frobbable but still see the nice texture on it, and not completely spoil it with some horrible blue slimy slick of a surface. I thought this was a horrible idea when it was first mentioned on the ttlg forums by someone at ionstorm.

The other thing thats kind of bugging is the factions thing, Garrett in the first two games worked for himself, and was extremely reluctant to take sides with anyone, he shunned the keepers, avoided the thieves guild when ever possible, thought the Hammerite were a bunch religious fanatics, only worked for Viktoria because he didn't like the idea of the mechanist killing defenseless people, but didn't really want to side with viktoria, didn't like the mechanist because they were an even more fanatical than the Hammerites, and didn't like the pagans because they worshiped the trickster who he had killed in the first game. The faction thing in t3 felt like garrett had betrayed himself by siding with factions he didn't like. I mean you can have the faction thing in game but the game should not force you into siding with one faction or another faction just to finish the game, there should be an option to not side with any faction.

The loot percentage thing, in the first 2 games you were expected to loot a certain amount of loot in a mission depending on diff lvl, you didn't find out how much loot was in a mission until the status screen at the end of a mission, a screen you could not access during the mission level, so throughout that mission on a first time through it, you had absolutely no idea how much loot there actually was in the mission. The loot percentage thing in t3 is just stupid, there's no way you would know how much loot there was in the mission, or that there was a special loot object either, special loot objects are usually found by reading something in the mission that tells you of special loot, then that is added as an optional objective to get, it wouldn't be 'you've found 1 of 5 special loot objects' how do suddenly know its special loot if you haven't read about it, it would look like normal loot.

ToMegaTherion

05-19-2009, 08:33 AM

I thought the JohnP loot glint was rather nice. I never played the game with any of the blue horror but I imagine it was brutally ugly. That's what often confuses me. It's not that someone thought "let's have a loot glint", but rather they thought "let's have a loot glint, and make it look absolutely horrific".

oceanclub

05-19-2009, 08:35 AM

Belboz

05-19-2009, 09:02 AM

Yes but graphical updates usually mean that there was something glaringly wrong with the original.

Rostere

05-19-2009, 09:06 AM

My main issue with Thief: DS was the whole faction thing. I also thought that the older Thief games usually allowed for more exploration - I thought there were more optional and hidden areas to be found, despite the "free- roaming" ambitions of Thief: DS.

So, to sum things up:

-Include meaningful exploration
-Don't have the protagonist ally up with anyone (or become too familiar with anyone). In Thief, the player takes on the role of an anonymous master thief, not some kind of hero.

VIKTORIA

05-19-2009, 09:47 AM

Thanks.
I hope GmanPro's very valid points will be noted during development and you won't have to ninja-unsticky this in order not to make EM look bad.

I understand but let's play fair and not assume or demand conditions, it abuses the purpose of making this thread a sticky. It now sits in a prominent position on the board so we can highlight our thoughts as to why the 3rd game of the series fell short of fans' expectations (some fans, not all...). It will never be a case of the devs 'looking bad' as they must make the final decisions in the end; all we can do is express our opinions as best we can, and hope that they take some (or all) of what we say on board.

So, good luck, Taffers! :)

Matuzzz

05-19-2009, 09:53 AM

GmanPro

05-19-2009, 09:55 AM

Yay, my thread is stickied! :D
My main issue with Thief: DS was the whole faction thing. I also thought that the older Thief games usually allowed for more exploration - I thought there were more optional and hidden areas to be found, despite the "free- roaming" ambitions of Thief: DS.

So, to sum things up:

-Include meaningful exploration

Probably the one area I really want EM to improve upon with Thief 4. And I think they will based on what they've said about Deus Ex 3.

-Don't have the protagonist ally up with anyone (or become too familiar with anyone). In Thief, the player takes on the role of an anonymous master thief, not some kind of hero. :hmm:

Well ... In Thief 2 Garrett reluctantly sided with Victoria and the Pagans, but by the end of the game he appeared to become quite attached to her and her cause from what I could tell. So, when she died at the end, he evolved further to become even more cynical, jaded, and/or world-weary. It was an important step in his character development.

We love Thief for being a immersive, mature, slow and rich First Person Sneaker as it was invented from LGS...!

^^ This. Its the number one reason why I love Thief so much. Because every other game out there tries to saturate your senses with nonstop fast-paced action. I love Thief BECAUSE it is slow.

WVI

05-19-2009, 10:20 AM

I agree with everything in the opening post, believe it or not(well, I do kind of prefer the dagger).

That said, it's still my favorite Thief game.

Maethius

05-19-2009, 12:10 PM

Thinking back on what I did and did not like in T3, I would say that I did enjoy Garrett's apartment. I like the idea that there might be a huge list of items you could find, but not carry all at once. Perhaps you can find potions and holy water, arrows of this kind and that, and keep them in your safehouse. If Garrett can find Keeper caches, why not place them in city streets (I do like the hub concept, if it were reworked a bit). Let the player use caches to stow extra gear. While I wouldn't be too wild about an encumbrance system, Perhaps he could have a limit to inventory items aside from treasure. Could you really lug around 100 arrows, 8 healing potions, 10 holy waters, 3 slow-falls, 4 extra eyes (yes, bring back the cool T2 eye gizmos!), 8 gas traps, 10 trip mines... etc. etc. etc.?

I think that there is room for both rope climbing and gloves, though a large part of their effectiveness depends on level designs. It was always frustrating in any Thief title to have way to climb up and see something interesting but the level designers (probably for the sake of simplicity) made no way to use these items. Roofwalking is a huge part of Thief, and I would love to see it come back in earnest.

Oh, how about Garrett being able to buy a diamond window cutter that allows him access to some areas through the glass? (too hard to implement? Just brain-storming!)

-edit

Oh, and just a note on art direction... I really felt that The City was gone in T3. This was some cramped medieval town, but it lacked the architecture, rises, steam/magical motor tech that really made The City what it was.

And don't flash my loot and doors like a flamin' neon sign!

huzi73

05-19-2009, 01:00 PM

Agree with ya taffers!There couldnt be a better thread to sticky.While the bulk of the TDS story was good,and felt like a fusion between T1 & T2's stories,(politics between factions,retrieving valuable artifacts of untold power,betrayal,chaos,etc etc)However the 1 thing which totally ruined the game for me was the final part of the story involving Gamall.My main grudge against the game was because ION STORM tried so desperately to make the TDS story seem waaay more epic than the previous games.For me,making 4 more artifacts in the league of the Eye was plain B.S!Thats equivelent to making the One ring from LotR part of like an entire jewelry set belonging to many powerful kings who made Sauron seem like like a hobbit.Make an Epic story,no problem!But DONT MAKE AN EPIC STORY WHICH UNDERMINES PREVIOUS GAMES IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR VERSION OF THE GAME SEEM MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS ATTEMPTS.

OnionKnight

05-19-2009, 01:39 PM

While the loot glint is dumb, it did serve as a fix for another problem; that you can't pick things up without making a noise when putting them down. With the glint you did not have to try picking things up to see if it was loot or not.
A silent way to drop items is required.

GmanPro

05-19-2009, 01:44 PM

There has always been a silent way to drop items. Just hit the drop item key. Not the throw item key

pha

05-19-2009, 02:07 PM

Hey Vik, sorry if I sounded rude.

I understand but let's play fair and not assume or demand conditions, it abuses the purpose of making this thread a sticky. It now sits in a prominent position on the board so we can highlight our thoughts as to why the 3rd game of the series fell short of fans' expectations (some fans, not all...)

Of course not all, but many fans I'd say.

It will never be a case of the devs 'looking bad' as they must make the final decisions in the end; all we can do is express our opinions as best we can, and hope that they take some (or all) of what we say on board.

Their time, their project. I just hope they make right decisions. I just wanted to say that it'll be kinda awkward if -god forbid- they'll ignore the very accurate concerns in a stickied thread in their official forum. Imagine that!

WVI

05-19-2009, 02:57 PM

There has always been a silent way to drop items. Just hit the drop item key. Not the throw item key

Still makes noise. I talk about this in another topic.

Rostere

05-19-2009, 05:08 PM

Well ... In Thief 2 Garrett reluctantly sided with Victoria and the Pagans, but by the end of the game he appeared to become quite attached to her and her cause from what I could tell. So, when she died at the end, he evolved further to become even more cynical, jaded, and/or world-weary. It was an important step in his character development.

True. However, to clarify my point: the player should never have to do things in order to gain the respect of some "faction"; if the player does align with any group or person it's because they are forced to or because you use them for your own purposes. I also thought Garrett became a little... attached to Viktoria at the end of T2 but not necessarily to her cause. He's still a cynical loner, not the Pagan's errand boy.

Ice1019

05-19-2009, 05:08 PM

Some solid points, Gman.

There are some things about TDS I liked, but I think you've illustrated pretty well the essence of the first two Thief games that you want to see included in Thief 4. I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of a slower-paced, open-ended game that keeps the complexity of the original games, but I also feel that we are setting ourselves up for some trouble if we are not open to the idea of adding to the Thief experience. TDS tried to introduce some new stuff, and didn't succeed. But, let's make sure we are offering some original ideas in addition to the stuff we want put back in from the originals.

Master Taffer

05-19-2009, 05:31 PM

True. However, to clarify my point: the player should never have to do things in order to gain the respect of some "faction"; if the player does align with any group or person it's because they are forced to or because you use them for your own purposes. I also thought Garrett became a little... attached to Viktoria at the end of T2 but not necessarily to her cause. He's still a cynical loner, not the Pagan's errand boy.

A point I agree whole heartedly with. It seemed very out fo charecter to me for Garrett to care at all what the faction's opinions of him were. Especially considering he's a criminal who preys on others, he is bound to royally piss off the Hammers and Pagans at some point. I'de think he'd just chalk it up to the hazards of his profession.

Pest removal and corner stone gardener don't seem like activities or chores Garrett would engage in, no matter what faction was breathing down his neck.

Master Taffer

05-19-2009, 06:15 PM

Here's my list of gripes for Deadly Shadows:

Major Problems I had with DS:

Lack of sprawling levels.
Audio aspect of stealth was broken. When being crouched meant I was silent no matter what, it pretty much killed that dynamic of the game and made moss arrows pointless.
Garrett's horizontal leap was severely lacking.
Faction chores. I swear, i thought they would be asking me to mow their lawns by the end of the game.
Climbing gloves. They were a poorly implimented replacement for rope arrows. I wouldn't have been as annoyed about their absence if the climbing gloves weren't so poorly designed.

Minor problems I had. These were more annoyance than game breakers:

Lack of flavor based reading material.
Loot percentage statistic. How Garrett would know the exact amount of gold left in the level is strange as hell to me.
"Steal 3 unique loot items." Just give me the names of the other objectives like in Thief 1 & 2, rather than this ambiguous objective.
Getting blamed for the other people's dirty work in the City sections. It completely killed my stats screen for the game.
Clunky blackjack/backstab mechanics.
Poor transition from animation to rag dolls during blackjacks.
Garrett forgot how to swim.
The lack of briefing cutscenes.
The 3d cutscenes. They looked like trash and just felt out of place in the game.
Black Market Bertha
Kurshoks. *Shudder*
Why are the Haunts so short?

Things that didn't bug me at all that seems to send everyone else into a murderous psychosis:

Loot glint.
Arrow trails.
The different "E" in the title.
3rd person. Yes, I know it made the first person clunky. But I was indifferent to it.
The fact it was on the Xbox.

Things I liked:

The story.
I liked the City sections. They were poorly implimented and made the City feel like a tiny fishing village, but I think with some work they could be really fun.
I liked having to fence my loot from a mission.
I liked the lockpicking mechanic, but it still could use a lot of work.
The Cradle. One of the best and creepiest experiences I've had in a game for a long time.
The lighting engine was stellar. Being able to hide in a shadow of some boxes I stacked made me drool.

And one big head scratcher: Why were the locks in the center of all the doors? Made no sense to me. And it was made all the stranger on the first level in a Hammer cathedral, when the locks were on the side of the doors. That meant it was perfectly possible to put the locks in a rational position on the door, but they chose not to anyway. That had me scratching my head for days. Didn't hurt the game in any way, just was weird.

Thugo

05-19-2009, 07:32 PM

Master Taffer did a great job with what was good/bad/neutral with Thief DS.

The only point i respectively disagree with is that I didn't like having 3rd person in the game.

Also, I didn't really like how much Garrett carried. Garrett really shouldn't be able to run/jump/climp/swim/hide/sneak while carrying so much equipment...at least not very well. I know some others have been over this already, but I would like to see Garrett's carry capacity seriously reduced.

Skaruts

05-19-2009, 09:14 PM

I only read the 1st page of this thread yet, but here's my 2 cents anyway.

I loved TDS.
I loved the way the movement felt and being able to look around without actually turning my body there. Movement would be perfect, imo, if only it wasn't for garret making a circle when turning around and you would fall from a ledge for that.

Loved the level design (but I agree some of them could've been heavily improved)

But I missed the sword, found the gloves a clumsy tool (in both terms of usefulness and implementation, I'd wish that garret could be as good in clibing on his own as Altair), and I hated not having many doors or windows to barge into just for fun (had some, but so few... and so little to steal from there)
I didnt' miss rope arrowss that much, for some reason (maybe cuz no levels had much where to need some).

Can't remember anything more, don't play it for a long time now.

As for the 3rd person view, I can't understand why most games are just bound to one view, ffs. I indulge imersion and I use 1st person view whenever it's available, but I respect other tastes and so I wish games could have evolved in to something more than fancy top-notch graphics (which in most cases aren't top-notch (i.e. Oblivion ), and that having more that 1 choice would be a (one of the) standard(s) in everyone of them. But not as in TDS. I think 3rd person gamers did felt the same when shooting arrows (being swapped to 1sr p) as I felt while climbing ladders (vice-versa), big mistake there.

(just a thought kind of offtopic. I wish games had evolved into more on game mechanics too. For example, 99.9% of FPS main characters are too retarded as to jump over a 50 cm wall (about 25-30 inches), and in fairly the same percentage, you are just a flying camera with a stretched arm with a weapon, popping out from it. It makes me sick to see this after 10 (TEN) years from the release of a game where you could climb something almost twice as tall as you, and you could see yourself from your eyes pov (Thief 1). Among other things... Anyway, I just had to let this out.)

GmanPro

05-19-2009, 09:19 PM

Lol, yeah. Not being able to climb atop a 2-foot ledge in Deus Ex was incredibly frustrating. And there is no excuse for not properly balancing that stuff in a modern day FPS

Skaruts

05-19-2009, 09:36 PM

that's what I'm talking about.

Next Gen!!!!

bah

:hmm: :scratch: :mad2:

DarknessFalls

05-19-2009, 10:22 PM

I think if EM deviates too far from Thief 2, the other stuff should be options for the rest of us to turn off. I don't want to have oil flasks, climbing gloves, city hub, RPG elements, loot percentages, etc. I've never understood how anyone could be satisfied or even like TDS, with all that was "worse" in it than Thief 1 and 2, which came out years earlier.

Master Taffer

05-19-2009, 10:40 PM

I've never understood how anyone could be satisfied or even like TDS...

It's simple. People have different standards and tastes than you.

Not to mention it was a good game, it just didn't live up to its predacessors. It's kind of like Alien3 in the Alien movie franchise. As a stand alone movie, it's actually a really good watch. But it's a very bad sequel when you compare it to the previous 2 movies in the series.

The game has a lot of merit, it just didn't live up to your high expectations. And because of that you view it as a piss poor game. Not all of us have as high expectations as you. Hell, if I put a game in any of my systems, the only factor I truly judge it on is, "Am I having fun?" And I had a hell of a good time playing Deadly Shadows. It has a lot of flaws, and doesn't live up to the previous games, but is still a good game on its own.

sapud83

05-19-2009, 10:53 PM

It's simple. People have different standards and tastes than you.

Not to mention it was a good game, it just didn't live up to its predacessors. It's kind of like Alien3 in the Alien movie franchise. As a stand alone movie, it's actually a really good watch. But it's a very bad sequel when you compare it to the previous 2 movies in the series.

The game has a lot of merit, it just didn't live up to your high expectations. And because of that you view it as a piss poor game. Not all of us have as high expectations as you. Hell, if I put a game in any of my systems, the only factor I truly judge it on is, "Am I having fun?" And I had a hell of a good time playing Deadly Shadows. It has a lot of flaws, and doesn't live up to the previous games, but is still a good game on its own.

Finnaly somebody told what i supposed to yell soon:)
I see only many complains about TDS but you people forgot maybe that TDS is one of the best game ever!! ( i don't remember to play as good game as it is since last 2 years)!!.
I agree that TDS is is worse than previous Thief 1 and 2 but people these games were almost genious at least incredible damn good:)
So please stop complain "ohh TDS is not good and etc"
TDS is good as it should be!
The end.

GmanPro

05-19-2009, 11:06 PM

TDS was bad for me mostly because I played Deus Ex before it. But then ... everything is bad after experiencing Deus Ex

Rahl

05-20-2009, 12:06 AM

I have to agree with all points of the original post, except maybe for the one with the city hub.
I don't think it was a good idea. Just give us some missions where you have to stalk the streets, like in thief DP/MA.

Sorry for my bad english.

Skarsnik

05-20-2009, 12:54 AM

Since this is just a matter of pure and simple taste my opinion will probably differ alot from others. I liked DS just becouse it was a breath of fresh air from the other two games. The storyline was intrigueing and really well plotted out and I liked the return of the eye.
Sure it had a few flaws but so had the two earlier games. How the hell could the blackjack be the most effective weeapon vs the apparitions for example? Yea that made sense, beat the living crap out of the ghosts of the hammers with a blunt object..

ToMegaTherion

05-20-2009, 02:40 AM

Does anyone have an opinion about the Deadly Shadows maps not highlighting your current location? Or the fairly sketchy nature of these maps?

My favourite maps were in Metal Age, where you could easily tell where you were, where you wanted to get to, and the obvious options for getting there if you couldn't find secret routes. I can see though that some people might consider these maps too detailed.

esme

05-20-2009, 03:21 AM

I do agree that Deadly Shadows was a pretty good game in it's own right, it was just a poor sequel, it left out too many things that weren't broken from it's predecessors and introduced too many new things to be a good sequel, the general story behind the game wasn't too bad as a sequel though it was mainly the implementation that was the problem

regarding the last point on maps, I do like maps but to have your protagonist go in with full map information is at times rather unrealistic, how about have him map the areas he's been to, or start with a rough sketch of a map and improve it as he explores, as for current location well I guess he could keep a thumb on the area he's in if he's not too busy dodging guards

Drackulis

05-20-2009, 04:59 AM

lot9h

05-20-2009, 05:23 AM

There are so many things to do to improve the franchise over TDS but I shall thoroughly read through these forums before I say more than the first one.

NO RESPAWNING GUARDS! My favourite moment in metal age was to take out all the guards in a mansion and then dump them on his lordships bed. He might only have been reacting to the one corpse but while watching from the shadows as he walks in, sees everyone else who should have been in the house with him piled up dead and subsequently runs out screaming is a very satisfying reward for some sneaking well done.
So... NO LOSS OF DECALS or whatever it is called. I want the people I kill to stay killed at least until i've left the area/finished a mission. I don't always want to go butchering, I love the ghosting too, but you shouldnt limit players in how they use the gift of stealth.

PS.. Had a bit of a look at the other posts now and glad to see im in good company. :) Part of my issue with TDS over the first two was also that I went out and bought a new computer just to play it. I didn't feel like I got decent value, but I wouldn't even have thought about it if it turned out more TMA.

Last comment for now.
MORE THE BETTER. Sword, Short Sword, Dagger models are still only three models. Basic ones. Give each a different reach value, damage, and effect on movement speed and let people choose for themselves. Maybe a nice enhanced version or two of each to be earned after lots of loot. (Dagger can be thrown? Short/long swords made faster or holy vs undead?)
Lots of kit. Tripwires and appropriate falling down stairs damage. Grappling hook to attach to top of stone (rather than underside of wood textures) but make it expensive. Mines/bombs/proximities, why not if they're rare? We have been through the Metal Age here people.

Drackulis

05-20-2009, 05:57 AM

clock12345

05-20-2009, 06:05 AM

please if you gona create thief 4 then please make it 3th person and 1th person cuz some people like 1th person and some people like 3th person so make them both please or you can make your choise at the start menu when you only start the game you can chose 3th person or 1th person please just dont change the 3th person dont delete it this is the best game ever.

Skaruts

05-20-2009, 07:12 AM

Thief Deadly Shadows is actually the game that introduced me to Thief, so it is my favourite game. The only thing was that it was really boring to wait, if the guards were in search mode, to blackjack them. I would like good graphics with a good game. THANK YOU FOR THIEF 4 EIDOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only 2 things:

1- Thief 3 didn't have good graphics??? o ma god!!

2- Boring to wait? That's what the game is about. Taking time, making your strike at the perfect time, lurking, watching them as they are unaware that you are about to decide their fates: blackjack, stab in the back, or simply let loose.

But since you speak of that, one major improvement I noticed in DS was that guards wouldn't stay looking for you for all eternity, as happened in DP and MA. That made the game more real in a way, and less painfull to comit mistakes. I think I went up to the end of the game with some mistakes, but all in one go, except for in the cradle, where I had to load it again a few times.
;)

Now, to everyone that is talking like "DS was crap, DP and MA were perfection", I tell you this:
I had my doubts about both DP and MA when I played them. Many aspects rly got me disapointed at the time, I even skiped some of the last missions in DP cuz I thought they were stupid as hell. But in the overall I loved them cuz they put me in the part of a thief in FPS, and in a very fun way. Also the conspiracies that made the plot caught my attention in the good way.
Same happened to me in DS, except it had no stupid missions. I had a better time playing this game than I had in DP, maybe not as good as in MA, but still had rly rly good time with this one.
None of them was perfect, and all of them were good and fun. Imo, thief 3 was much better in terms of movement, graphics, and realism. And some stuff I can't remember anymore.

Does anyone ever gonna mention that water arrows are a bit questionable too, in terms of realism? Or is everyone just pointing out things they would do otherwise and leaving some unrealistic/questionable stuff forgotten just because?

I ask this cuz many ppl here sounds like those metallica fans when they let out their black album. They just said it sucked because it was diferent (tho not that much). Not that they had actually listened to it.

Maethius

05-20-2009, 10:01 AM

Water arrows that leave puddles on surfaces would be interesting, especially if you stepped in them and left tracks. What if you had to pick up the arrow shafts left by a water arrow? Heck, what if you had to take regular arrows and "apply" or use what you find to fletch your special weapons? In other words, you find a water crystal (a staple of the world, not just a mechanic) but you can merely THROW it to douse a torch. However, you can combine the crystal with a broadhead arrow to have a water arrow in your quiver, giving you the classic range and effectiveness of the previous games. Ever wish you could just light a torch with a fire crystal rather than explode it? Or squeeze a gas pod right behind a guard's head to put him out rather than shoot it at him, or use a gas grenade? Why not have a base arrow and a base bomb object so you can make your own gas trap? Or set a noise-maker trap that goes off if a servant bumps it with an open door?

I still like the idea of a "blackjack" arrow that hits a guard in the back of the head with a hollow "bok!" and sends him to the floor. :)

Too different for Thief, or a fresh concept?

Skaruts

05-20-2009, 11:03 AM

lool

I only think the water arrows are a bit questionable cuz I never rly seen an effective way of replicating it in real life. But I would be sad if they would be removed, since they are very funny to use. I love using them. But I'd like to have an alternative way of putting out torches. Or that water arrows would be the alternative.

Matuzzz

05-20-2009, 11:54 AM

Any reasonable TDP and TMA fan will not have your aforementioned "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude.

That would be simply wrong. I'm all for T4 using whatever that did work from TDS so long as T4's design is strictly based on TDP and TMA.

This is why people are butting heads here. People who like TDS wants to see that style continue but the TDP and TMA fans want the game they never got.

Like I said before, we are gonna be arguing over this for a very long time.

The debt to us TDP and TMA fans is long overdue. Which is why we're doin all we could to get the devs attention here.

9 years. We have waited that long. Surely, you can symphatize?

Apology accepted by the way. We're cool.

Hostile? Haha.

I guess passion can be misconstrued as hostility. Trust me when I say I don't blindly hate TDS. I believe I have written quite extensively on why TDS was a poor successor to TDP and TMA in a very, civilized manner.

If you really must know, TDS ripped me off twice. I actually upgraded my graphics card for TDS.

I just bought a PC with a GeForce MX 4000 and when I tried to install TDS it spits out an error saying that my GPU doesn't support Shader Model 2.0.

I didn't even blink when I saw that message. I bought the FX5200 and what did I get in return?

A parody of my beloved TDP and TMA. :mad2:

There you go. Now you know why TDS holds a special place in my heart.
Why do you divide fans into two groups:TDS fans and TDP,TMA fans. I think largest group is Thief fans. I play it from very beginning in 1998 and every part was great, with some cons of course, but nobody find it perfect. I think if they tried to make TDS just old Thief with some minimal improvements, it could end up badly.

Skaruts

05-20-2009, 12:22 PM

I think no matter how good TDS could've been it would always be a potential flaming target. Unfortunately that's how it goes in everything in life. Many ppl just can't handle a change and this happens all the time with every game, every music band, every tv show, every business company, etc...

Maybe the biggest problem is expectations. I didn't expect thief 3, I only gained the knowledge of it's existence some time after it's release. So I played and see what it had. Some ppl may have been "dreaming" for some time how good it could come up to be, according to this technology or that one, the game could come up to beat the hell outta every other game and still beat the series. When they found out that tech used wasn't state of the art (or whatever level they had in mind), the rest felt like just mere details with no great value for apreaciation.

If it wasn't this, I believe it might have been something analogous.

The same WILL happen with thief 4. And the same may have happened with thief 2: I remember being disapointed cuz it didn't have any significant advancement. It seemed just like T1, only with new missions and one or two diferent items. But since I always make the math to see if the good takes over the bad (before I say "this game is the biggest crap ever"), I loved the game anyway. The same way I loved T3.

Like I said, happens all the time. Unfortunately.

But T3 isn't bad enough to flame it and point errors. Oblivion is, T3 is not. T3 is a game that needs criticizing rather than flaming. The 1st post is a good criticizing post, even though some agressiveness is in it, and that is what I mean. Saying "I can't even understand how anyone could even like T3" comes from someone that didn't realize that it was an improvement attempt rather than a sell out attempt, and won't help devs doing any better.

orderofthestick

05-20-2009, 01:26 PM

Well that's my first post, but since I've heard about the announcement of Thief 4 while playing Thief: Deadly Shadows a fifth time or so, I thought it would be logical to start by implicating the points that I find a little bit restricting in TDS. Here we go :

MORE SPACE, FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND ACCESSIBILITY
* One of the things that I felt I missed in the old games is bigger maps. Especially city maps are quite tiny..
* I also don't feel so good, when the "thief's highway" in the Old Quarter consists of a few "must go this way" routes. The map limits can be extended to include every roof and wall.. Please keep in mind that a character that can climb walls can easily walk over some triangle shaped roof. I personally don't like it when Garrett has to share the same old means of transportation with everyone else.

MUCH MORE ADVANCED AI
* The brand essence of Thief is secrecy and sharpness. This is the idea that seperates Thief series from the others. But most of the time AI just ruins this "uuu that's really clever of me" feeling. A few more patrolling or searching skills must be integrated in the game for every character (City Watch, Hammerites, Pagans etc). For example, a guard can take the initiative to ask his friend to come to his search (he may just talk, he needn't to run and ask for help, it can add more reality) and search a room in a more "sweeping" manner. If they find out that some loots are missing, ask for additional guards to stand in front of that section etc...Its kind a boring to watch every man do the same thing, give up after some time and then return to duty as if nothing has happened (like one of his friend is killed) and let us club them...briefly, MAKE OUR JOB TOUGHER!
* And they definitely must light the blown out torches up! What sort of a guard tries to patrol in darkness?

CROSSBOW??
* A good upgrade in the arsenal can be the addition of the crossbow. If it can shoot rope arrows I'd be extremely grateful :) Some rope climbing in horizontal direction would be awesome..(like I can shoot a crossbow to the roof of the other building and by anchoring the other end of the rope to my roof, I could climb from building to building over the street when the guards below are searching for me on the street).

KEEP THE MYSTIC ELEMENTS
* Mystic and original elements like magic, glyphs (or are they totally destroyed?), fire arrows, water arrows, gas arrows and zombies add some action to the game. Its guite logical to keep these mostly unchanged.

THE STORYLINE
* Whatever the new additions you make, please don't forget that the story line really matters to the Thief fans. I personally wonder how it will be connected to the Deadly Shadows's end, and I really would like to hear something fascinating after all these years. I know its hard, with all those people having expectations at the size of a mountain, but I hope you pay the adequate amount of attention to the storyline...

Thats all I could advise for now, hope it helps the Development Team a bit. ;)

Psychomorph

05-20-2009, 01:47 PM

I can clearly see that the first two Thief games had many aspects done better than the third Thief installament, but all in all, personally I experienced many (way to many) frustrations in Thief 1 and 2, some caused me to stop playing for several weeks(!), like it was the case with Thief 2.

The clumsy movement got me some frustrations, when I wanted to somehow climb on a ledge of an open window and instead Garrett jumped making a loud sound with his step dancing shoes, many things didn't work well in T1&2. In T3 I don't even remember such moments, while T1&2 was better in many ways, it was T3 that gave me (personally) a 100% immersive and satisfied experience, it was such a blast that I still consider it beeing the best gaming experience I ever had.

So, when we start a Thief 3 bashing thread (I know, it is meant in a constructive way and I see it as that), why not to make the same with Thief 1&2? Oh, I will indirectly do, actually (when I get all my suggestions put in words).

However, don't get me wrong, this thread is a good one. I just think we have to be fully objective and see it as "T1,2,3 - pro vs. T1,2,3 - contra" instead of "T1,2 - pro vs. T3 - contra".

Stath MIA

05-20-2009, 04:18 PM

DS wasn't all that bad, just not up to par with the original games. I personally enjoyed its plot as well as Thief 1 and better than TMA, but its gameplay was rather weak. I'm 100% for repairing the failings of DS for Thief 4.

BlooferLady

05-20-2009, 04:44 PM

Back to maps:

I do agree that it is unrealistic to have every single room and toilet shown on your map. The maps should range from being very vague, to completely filled in. In TMA, in the Framed mission, you have almost every bit of info you need, and Garrett lets you know that his employer is "unusually resourceful." So we know that he doesn't always have the luxury of that level of detail.

HOWEVER. I liked having the map show me where I am. Especially in large levels like Life of the Party and Ambush. I know that, yes, in real life, you would not have a little light showing where you are on your map, but it was helpful! Call me a sissy. :)

hellwalker

05-20-2009, 06:10 PM

I agree with most of the points, but I think glowing loot was a necessity.
Thief 1&2 levels were more lit, and the way textures were made, it was easy spotting item surface next to another items surface.

In deadly shadows it would be near impossible to spot say gold piece in some dark alcove, the glowing effect sucked I agree, but there just had to be some way to draw players attention towards activable objects. It was a correct design decision, but they needed to find some way that didn't contrast so much with the rest of the game. maybe just a little bit brighter surface when you were near an item? dunno but completely removing this effect would turn looting to 3d pixel hunting, and pixel hunting was always enough pain in the ass in 2d adventure games as it was.

oh and one more thing I missed, were the funny dying noises guards made, when you knocked them down and then dropped them to water or fire. It was said to see this little things that gave so much character and style to thief 1&2 so carelessly removed.

Skaruts

05-20-2009, 06:39 PM

I totally agree with orderofthestick and Psychomorph (except for the weak gameplay part)

* And they definitely must light the blown out torches up! What sort of a guard tries to patrol in darkness?

:lol: it was a blast to see how stupid they were. They definitely must make characters in general more natural and smart. Having them with sense of space so they don't run against a wall untill they realise they can't run that way or running away calling for help when there's plenty of guards around them.
We could use combat skills in Thi4f also. A master thief has no excuse to not know how to wield a short sword well, but also making the enemies extremelly hard to fight with so to lead players to try and be stealthy or face the concequences.

I rly wish this next one could bring all the good stuff the others missed
with refined combat, stealth, lockpicking/ pickpocketing
having more to learn from big mouths (sidequests or so)
having greater agility to climb stuff (I rly wish he could climb without needing gloves, like anyone can)
supreme AI
bigger outdoors. Huge, if possible. I think it is nowadays without forcing ppl to buy NASA's PCs)
Lots of doors/windows to barge into, for fun or for sidequests.
a few daylight missions for some (good) reason (he could go out dressed in a keepers robe)
plenty of rooftops
Sidequests with a meaning (usually their meaning is useless to both the player and the plot)
keep the rpg thingy on it.
I think I could go on forever...

dunno about the crossbow, though... I love the bow so much...

being able to buy a rope or two and attach them to piercing arrows would be a good way of having both rope arrows and a more realistic way of having them, since having 20 rope arrows means having 20 ropes in your bag. That is a lot of space needed. Being able to recover the rope if you get close to the arrow would compensate for having just one or two.

As for the maps, I think T3 had them perfect. Pure sketches, since the places are hard to get in a make a decent map, and no stupid highlight showing you were you are. I think a peace of paper doesn't have that ability,

AND DON'T FORGET TO INCLUDE THE DRUNK GUARDS, EIDOS!!! Thief isn't thief without them.

hellwalker

05-20-2009, 08:04 PM

big outdoors should not be much problem if done correctly, I mean Assassin's Creed gives you whole city to play with, and Tes Games 20+ square kilometers of space.

not that I would like thi4f to be a true open ended game. One of the greatest parts of thief games is detailed great level design, which will hardly be possible in open ended game.

Skaruts

05-20-2009, 08:36 PM

Yea, that's was exactly what I was thinking of. But remember two things though:
Assassins Creed gives you huge cities and landscapes, yes, but there's almost no interiors. If there was any, it would have to render about twice the detail. 3 or 4 times more textures and models, without a good rendering control it would be reeeeealy harsh.

And another one is that you can play Assassins C with about 20-40 fps without noticing any bad performance, but that's due to the gameplay type. You just have to press buttons. In thief, you would have to look around swinging your mouse and there you'd notice the delay of low fps. Personally I think FPSs are good with more than 60 fps. I start feeling the mouse movement heavy below that.

But, still, if I had half that city, with interiors, rooftops and everything in thief, I'd be soooo happy. And even happier if there were more cities like that to go to. :D

Rahl

05-20-2009, 10:41 PM

WVI

05-20-2009, 10:53 PM

That...post doesn't tell us much of anything, Rahl. >_>

Rahl

05-20-2009, 11:09 PM

That...post doesn't tell us much of anything, Rahl. >_>

I meant, that most of the changes ion made were bad. Like the removing of the rope arrow, the arrow trails, the straightforward missions, inmission loading screens with the blue mist for the sake of xbox, loot changes, 3rd person view, etc.

And dont get me wrong i did like some aspects of the game, for example i liked the story, and the cradle.

Matuzzz

05-21-2009, 02:31 AM

I meant, that most of the changes ion made were bad. Like the removing of the rope arrow, the arrow trails, the straightforward missions, inmission loading screens with the blue mist for the sake of xbox, loot changes, 3rd person view, etc.

And dont get me wrong i did like some aspects of the game, for example i liked the story, and the cradle.

I think the worst decision were steam robots from T2. It absolutly broke any tension and atmosphere. It is far more bad decision than disabling swimming or loot changing. But I liked the game. And simply accept it with them.

That is what Skaruts mean. ANY change would be bad. Everything they changed you considered as bad. And things you liked about it didnt involve gameplay. And you liked Thief 2 because it was Thief 1 with new maps, enemies, items etc...

Psychomorph

05-21-2009, 05:20 AM

I think the worst decision were steam robots from T2. It absolutly broke any tension and atmosphere.
Haha, I can only agree, I hated these metal beasts with passion, a total killer for me. The metal faces were also very annoying (and easier to trick than human guards), generally I disliked everything about the mechanists and disliked most of the mechanist missions, I only kept playing because I knew there would be also good missions in Thief2, else I probably would have quit playing. :(

---------------

Ok. One thing I realiszed in games is, that features aone do not make a good game. The Rainbow Six franchise is the best example. Rainbow Six 3 was a game that was critizised by the old schoolers (it is literally the Thief 3 of the R6 franchise). During the developement of the sequel (R6: Lockdown) the devs asked the community what they wanted in that game (through a community mager, so it's like God speaks to you through Engel Gabriel... whatever...) and most people, of course, suggested features from the original games.
Result was a game that infact incorporated many original features, but... the game was bad, really bad (even worse than the disliked 3rd title of the series), it was a tactically linear game where you had to tactically mow down everything in your tactical way. What the game succeeded in is to lose the essence of the franchise, it's spirit and now the R6 community hails the once disliked 3rd title as the last true Rainbow Six game.

...my conclusion is, that if we will get a "Thi4f: Lockdown", you haters will kneel down and kiss Thief3's feet. :D ...

However, my point is, that what matters is the essence of a franchise, the so called spirit, Thief3 leaked in many ways, but it succeeded at the most essencial (I believe) and that must be the sole focus dealing with the fourth Thief installament and honestly, that is my main concearn. They may implement all the T1&2 features we are asking for, but they can eventually forget about the spirit.
It is an industry with the purpose of making business and if that means selling Thief's soul, than it will be sold... cheap.

But I hope the best.

*
*

ThePacifist

05-21-2009, 06:43 AM

Arrrrggggghhhhhh! TDS was such a lame attempt and there are people here who are actually defending it.
:

because while it had it's problems, it still had moments of pure inspiration (The Cradle for example, and even the Overlook Manse was as atmospheric as any level in Thief history). Yes, The Cradle would have been better as a mission in Thief 1 or 2 (maybe, the graphics engine was archaic even by 1998 standards) but I really liked TDS and am glad it was made, problems and all.

Drackulis

05-21-2009, 07:34 AM

only 2 things:

1- Thief 3 didn't have good graphics??? o ma god!!

2- Boring to wait? That's what the game is about. Taking time, making your strike at the perfect time, lurking, watching them as they are unaware that you are about to decide their fates: blackjack, stab in the back, or simply let loose.

But since you speak of that, one major improvement I noticed in DS was that guards wouldn't stay looking for you for all eternity, as happened in DP and MA. That made the game more real in a way, and less painfull to comit mistakes. I think I went up to the end of the game with some mistakes, but all in one go, except for in the cradle, where I had to load it again a few times.
;)

Now, to everyone that is talking like "DS was crap, DP and MA were perfection", I tell you this:
I had my doubts about both DP and MA when I played them. Many aspects rly got me disapointed at the time, I even skiped some of the last missions in DP cuz I thought they were stupid as hell. But in the overall I loved them cuz they put me in the part of a thief in FPS, and in a very fun way. Also the conspiracies that made the plot caught my attention in the good way.
Same happened to me in DS, except it had no stupid missions. I had a better time playing this game than I had in DP, maybe not as good as in MA, but still had rly rly good time with this one.
None of them was perfect, and all of them were good and fun. Imo, thief 3 was much better in terms of movement, graphics, and realism. And some stuff I can't remember anymore.

Does anyone ever gonna mention that water arrows are a bit questionable too, in terms of realism? Or is everyone just pointing out things they would do otherwise and leaving some unrealistic/questionable stuff forgotten just because?

I ask this cuz many ppl here sounds like those metallica fans when they let out their black album. They just said it sucked because it was diferent (tho not that much). Not that they had actually listened to it.

Man, I said that thief 3 did not have bad graphicks at all.:o
The second thing is(when I think about it) very reasonable actually.:scratch:

Skaruts

05-21-2009, 07:53 AM

Man, I said that thief 3 did not have bad graphicks at all.:o
The second thing is(when I think about it) very reasonable actually.:scratch:
lol
Sry man I missinterpreted it. ;)

I agree with Rahl about the loading zones. It was a big mistake, at least the way it was made. The myst should be a subtle way of telling the player that a map boundarie is there, but it failed in subtlety big time. But it's not that big of a mistake that ruins the whole game up. PS3 and Xbox are making the devs work harder and harder every year and that is the big problem. They have to write code for this console and code for the other one, make changes here and there so it fits in that console, and the same again so it fits the other one, and they loose considerable amounts of precious time and money in stupid compatibility issues that microsoft and sony should be taking care of. (or should've taken care of in the 1st place)

As for the ropes it was a restriction they had. But one thing is true as Gman sais in his 1st post: They could've delayed the release for another year and try to make some more things happen.

But the big problem goes to the gaming industry again: adding to the consoles problem you got the budgets problems. Mostly they are forced to come out with whatever they got cuz dev time and money runs out, and that ruins a lot of games. It even makes me wonder if that wasn't what happened with Oblivion which came to be a total waste of time and resources. (and money for who bought it)

That said, I usually don't blame the devs, and mostly I try to see if it's rly worth playing. And I found T3 worth playing. But I say this again, I had to do the same with 1 and 2. I skipped the monsters and trickster missions in T1 cuz I disagreed with them (thought they were stupid).
And as for T2, there were no improvements. I definitely hated those robots. Geez... I loved the bank mission a lot, but those robots... they just weren't medievil... I even wondered about stop playing it but I didn't.
And they were both worth playing.

In all this, I think the most important thing we should ask Eidos Montreal is to give the devs the time and resources needed so they can get to give a big step forward in the series. And leave the consoles for when they have spare time.

GmanPro

05-21-2009, 09:18 AM

Matuzzz

05-21-2009, 09:23 AM

Skaruts

05-21-2009, 09:26 AM

I loved those robots :p

They definitely added a lot to the gameplay and made you rethink your strategy if you ran into them.

Definitely true. ;) Even though I didn't like them much, I liked the dificulty they provided. Maybe that was why I loved the bank mission so much. Can't remember well enough...

GmanPro

05-21-2009, 09:30 AM

I always wondered why they didn't put a better vent over their 'furnace'

Those robots looked kinda weird to me at first. But after a time, I got used to them. And now, I really appreciate the art style. TMA had some great themes going for it

You COULD destroy them with mine.

But not gas mines.

ToMegaTherion

05-21-2009, 09:30 AM

You can defeat the robots with the blackjack as well, it is not too difficult, but noisy and you usually lose some health.

Tom Pladgett

05-21-2009, 05:47 PM

Here's my input as an old school taffer (played through all the three previous games multiple times, and even made a few custom missions for T:TDP).

Deadly Shadows was in many ways a hit-and-miss affair. The story was quite good, actually, with a few less-than-Chekhovian plot twists (like Garrett having a moronic epiphany to break into a clock tower due to a vague prophecy about 'time standing still' - and turning out to be right on the money. Sigh). Of particular note were the splendid little mini-stories implied in some of the individual missions. You know which missions I'm referring to.

On the other hand, the mythology and overall atmosphere somewhat resembled a theme-park version of what we had seen in the previous games. As just one example, the Hammers and the Pagans were reduced down to a chivalric order of technophiles having a largely non-violent grudge against magic-wielding nature hippies who talk funny. As portrayed in the first two games, the Hammerites were insane religious fanatics, who only allied with Garrett because that was the only way to defeat the Trickster. The Pagans were unhinged animistic worshippers of eldritch horrors, who only helped Garrett to stop Karras' omnicidal plan. Having them as factions who Garrett could actually be on friendly terms with did not ring true to me.

The living city concept was a noble idea, hadn't it been for the epic fail in the AI's behaviour. Towards the end of the game, the open cityscape was invariably a chaotic circus of the macabre, with Hammers, city guards, neutrals and Keeper assassins running amok, often attacking people ostensibly on their side for no immediately obvious reason. The world's economics were royally skewed, with gold having no practical purpose after the first few missions. And why has the world's greatest thief suddenly become the city's number one celebrity, recognized by sight wherever he goes?

The third-person perspective was a problem. As mentioned above, it did degrade first-person gameplay, and being able to see around corners thanks to the camera floating three meters away from you is a tad cheap. That said, if T4 is to have a third-person view, as long as it's implemented well and is optional, I won't mind.

Actually, a lot of the problems in Deadly Shadows were fairly excusable. While the rope arrow was a much cooler tool to use gameplay-wise than the lame velcro gloves, I did lose count of how many times I got immobilized between ceiling timbers or was mysteriously catapulted to oblivion when jumping off one in TDP and TMA. Quality control hates that kind of stuff, so I assume that was the main reason they were dropped. Still, I'm sincerely hoping that Eidos has a crack squad of pencilnecks slaving away in a lightless underground lab working out the technological kinks from the rope arrows for T4. Dudes, this will be a selling point. Reviewers will praise it (if it works). You can even put a special mention on the back of the box! An entire E3 stand dedicated to suspended cord dynamics demos!

A lot of the issues, like the loading zones, were naturally caused by the increase in graphical detail overwhelming the capabilities of the original Xbox. I believe a lot of it can be corrected by the simple fact of having a next-gen development platform (or should we finally be calling it the current-gen?). Lots of recent games are having endless gorgeous detail landscapes streaming off the disc without loading pauses.

So, in the end, even though I've been a loyal and ardent taffer from the start, Deadly Shadows was still enjoyable for me, even with its issues. It wasn't the mind-blowing journey through the dark underbelly of a pseudo-medieval/Victorian era fantasy city that the first two games were, but neither was it a failure by my standards. It was simply a tasty tuna salad sandwich following two slices of fried gold.

Skaruts

05-21-2009, 09:11 PM

being able to see around corners thanks to the camera floating three meters away from you is a tad cheap.
That's the main reason why I refuse to play in 3rd person, and one of the reasons I hate playing 3rd person games in general.

Nice post. I didn't remember that skirmish of hammerites, city watch and everyone else at the end. And garret rly goes from thief to neighborhood superstar.

"To see a keeper is not an easy thing. Especially one that does not wish to be seen."

Much truth in your post.

GmanPro

05-21-2009, 09:17 PM

That's one of the reasons why I think placing Thief 4 somewhere in between Thief 2 and 3 would make sense. As a way to explain why Garrett is recognized by everyone.

While I usually don't like third person games, I feel I should point out that Kotor 1 and 2 were both awesome. And the Infinity engine games were near perfection, though they weren't really third person as it is commonly known, but isometric top-down. Technically still third person.

Drackulis

05-22-2009, 01:38 AM

[QUOTE=Skaruts;999514]lol
Sry man I missinterpreted it. ;)
QUOTE]

Is Ok :thumb::)

Garrett2727

05-22-2009, 01:41 AM

I agree with major most of suggestions/questions by GmanPro.

After all, devs, please don't forget that Thief 4 should be more about practicing the thievering at different places than L4D/Splinter Cell/etc -related zombie-hunting.
Of course with alot of mythic and sometimes hardly recognizable background storyline (by "hardly recognizable" I mean cryptic artifacts found by Garrett for example..) - since we really will NOT have to understand 100% of everything that can happen in the City/Outside.

And Stephen Russell's voice def should be there!

Garrett2727

05-22-2009, 01:43 AM

Also I really hope Garrett will have one of main roles, even if the 3rd ended like it did..

Skaruts

05-22-2009, 02:56 AM

One thought I had right now that I definitely would like thief 4 to include is more involving missions like that one in T1 (can't remember the name of it) in which 2 guys try to kill Garret and then you must follow them to their master and rob the whole place up.
That mission was a total blast for me. I played it in the demo, before having the game, about 20 times lol.

Missions where you get that touch of unpredictable, deviation from the plot and from the usual deeds is much entertaining and can be most interesting. Especially when they turn the plot around.

Damn I gotta get my T1 back. Shouldn't have borrowed it...

vasanx

05-22-2009, 03:56 AM

of course there were zombies. but not as much as in TDP

Haha. You're right. Me and my rusty memory again.

But here's how I salvage that argument. Less zombies to fight in TDS ergo, don't miss the longsword as much. There. I think that works.

Kaermes

05-22-2009, 04:17 AM

Just posting my 2 cents here...

There seems to be all the good points made out here already concerning like all the three games, so I'm pointing out some of my opinions briefly.

Pros (about DS):
-Story, or more precisely, the plot; I was surprised more than once during the game and some kickass cutscenes made me stare the screen in awe
-Cradle, nothing to add here
-Living city, shopping and such
-Feeling of living back in Thief world. Factions lacked the edge this time though
-Graphics were fine and good for that time, I liked them.
-Lack of those moronic zombies \o/ An undead or two can be really scary in a tomb, but masses of them? Nooooo... (and burrichs too, come on, burping dinosaurs?)

Cons:
-The AI, oh why are the guards just soooo dumb? It's long time ago I played DS through, but I can remember some things that just shouldn't have been so. Like in museum, I got caught at some point and started running away, and after many doors and running I had like 6 or more guards on my back - I threw one gas bomb, all went asleep. It shouldn't just be so easy, getting every guard pass out with one lousy bomb. I could rob the place in peace and I didn't even kill anyone. I don't want immortal and unbeatable guards - I just want them to be more scary, and not just running on my back and shouting some stupid, never reaching me, never trying to split or trap me or anything. And I also hate it when they wander around in the same routes, never changing. Why don't they change routes, go to talk to their mates, go to eat or do something else? No real life guards just wander around mindlessly in same route - especially if they have seen someone who shouldn't be there, but who disappeared...
-Living city, though it was rediculously small with little options to rob same houses again and again. In cutscenes and previous games it is HUGE, so why do we stroll so minimal area in the game? How is it living if only a handful of people habit it? And avoiding the guards in some areas was just too annoying, like, in real medieval city, are there guards in every street? They couldn't have afforded so much people to nightwatches - make it more free to wander around! And more like, there should have been very few walkers around, because it is very dangerous to wander in a dark city at nights. It would be great if you could just rob the town during nights, when no-one is around. Living time would be fun too, it isn't night all the time and even during night there are differences in how the city lives. Well this is quite lot to ask for developers, but just make it more believelable.
-Gloves/Rope arrow gone missing, 3d person view, lack of sword etc.
-Gargoyles, well they were very scary in the cutscene and had kickass voices, but they were just guards little harder to beat. Why their behavior was so idiotic and totally similar? I never had fear of getting bumped into them. Robots from T2 were much more creepy.
-Some cutscenes, especially the 3d ones... No. Thief cutscenes were art in the two first games. And the change of style, I didn't like the face of Garret at all in the final cutscene, he looked way too young and stupid :D
-Somehow I didn't like the Keepers coming as an ally, or a place you can visit. All the secrecy was stripped away and seeing them as quite as normal people was very depressing. And those telepathic assassins? Oh god.

Even so, DS was a good game, even with it's failures.

vasanx

05-22-2009, 04:27 AM

Fraz

05-22-2009, 07:54 AM

I have some general suggestions that cover my experience from all the previous titles finished at least two times each (and TDP 7 or 8 times at least YES IT IS THAT GOOD)

Good Strong Story that lefts a lasting impression ... THAT LEFTS a LASTING IMPRESSION long enough that we talk about it like we are now about TDP
Story complemented by artistic unique and compelling cutscenes (not easy at all you need an artist like Garret himself ;))
Fairly long missions ... no short and easy stuff ... remember many people were unable to pass the third level "Down in the bonehoard" in TDP but the challenge and horror in it was what made it good.
I loved missions with human life and stealing from the lords but i did not enjoyed later part as much with full of magic and unrealistic creatures as compared to some initial missions in TDP so i would suggest not over do magic and freaky creatures KEEP a balance.
All weapons of TDP should be there in T4 ... i did not like unrealistic stuff like spying ORB in Thief 2 ... just include all the weapons of TDP
First person or Third person view as long as the First person is as good as it was in TDP.
hire the orginal voice actor that did it for TDP ... we need the voice of Garret.
AI should be good ... it was not good in TDS

Thats it for now ... i will come up with more later ...

Skaruts

05-22-2009, 08:37 AM

Matuzzz

05-22-2009, 11:01 AM

Skaruts

05-22-2009, 11:30 AM

WVI

05-22-2009, 01:25 PM

AI should be good ... it was not good in TDS

Look, to be perfectly honest, you're nuts if you think it was good in ANY Thief game. Nevermind that DS's is actually better. I should go back to a certain TMA mission and FRAPS a certain guy to prove what I'm talking about.

Psychomorph

05-22-2009, 02:09 PM

Ghosts were good.

Matuzzz

05-22-2009, 02:16 PM

Look, to be perfectly honest, you're nuts if you think it was good in ANY Thief game. Nevermind that DS's is actually better. I should go back to a certain TMA mission and FRAPS a certain guy to prove what I'm talking about.
That´s right...do you remember that in T1 and 2, they almost every time went after you when they were in search mode? Straight to my position no matter how far from the place I was.

Psychomorph

05-22-2009, 02:19 PM

I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...

I see it almost exactly like that. In fact, the missions that gave me the most thrill were the simple and normal thievery missions, like Baffort's Manor, Ramires Manor, especially the Mansion of the Widow in Thief 3 (forgot how called), Thief's Highway, also especially the Theater mission in T2.
The regular human sword and bow carriers were always my most favourite kind of enemies.
I absolutely LOVED the parts where the Thief games had something like a crime story, where you uncover curruptions by reading letters that were not meant to be read by any outsider, awesome, and I loved Garrett's comments on what he found out, sarcastic and ironic, priceless.
I also rather disliked the fantasy tools, I only used the regular (real) weapons, never used any of the "slow falling" and "invisibility" potions and hope not to see them in Thief4.

What I personally want is an organic world, buildings made of stone and wood, fire and moonlight to enlight the dark. I would prefer T4 to focus more on the medieval aspect, no freaks, no robots. As much as you hated the Pagans, as much I hated the Mechanists and every mission that had to do with them (kinda accept the Hammerites, they are more like a religious order, less like technofreaks).

As for Pagans, I generally kinda like ancient paganism and occultism, the magical and mystical, so I enjoyed the paranormal events in the Thief games and also liked the Pagans (Thief3's story about the witch was pretty nice). I only hope to see the Pagans less freaky and shiny, but more creepy, gloomy, mystical and occultic, as you can nicely see in some of Thief3's cutscenes.

Well, that's just my personal view on things.

That´s right...do you remember that in T1 and 2, they almost every time went after you when they were in search mode? Straight to my position no matter how far from the place I was.
That annoyed the freaking hell out of me, every time.

AI should be good ... it was not good in TDS
AI in Thief3 worked mostly better for me, than it did in the previous Thief games.

Matuzzz

05-22-2009, 02:25 PM

The only non-humans I liked in TDP were ghosts (not sure if TMA had them).
In DS I liked them all, though. But like I said before, ghosts can be scarier. Zombies are a bit overused and they don't rly get the heart pounding. They can die, ghosts can't (or shouldn't).
The only ghosts in TMA were no enemies. In Trail of Blood mission. And do you remember the map(I can´t remember the name) where you found secret library with that crying woman ghost? Oh man, she was not enemy, but I was scared as hell. One of very few places in TMA where i was frightened.

Fraz

05-22-2009, 03:14 PM

Look, to be perfectly honest, you're nuts if you think it was good in ANY Thief game. Nevermind that DS's is actually better. I should go back to a certain TMA mission and FRAPS a certain guy to prove what I'm talking about.

To me AI was not good in view the time it was released (i.e. 2004) why u r comparing it with Thief 1 or 2 1999 or 2000 ... u surely don't have any brain ... it was not good especially stealth; There were number of incidents when enemy characters were unable to spot Garret when it was visible ... On the other hand imo TDP (not TMA) was good in every sense at the time it was released ...

Psychomorph

05-22-2009, 03:22 PM

You heared that Matuzzz? You don't have any brain.

:lmao:

Matuzzz

05-22-2009, 03:26 PM

Aha! I knew that! :scratch: :D

WVI

05-22-2009, 03:45 PM

To me AI was not good in view the time it was released (i.e. 2004) why u r comparing it with Thief 1 or 2 1999 or 2000 ... u surely don't have any brain ... it was not good especially stealth; There were number of incidents when enemy characters were unable to spot Garret when it was visible ... On the other hand imo TDP (not TMA) was good in every sense at the time it was released ...

Oh snap, I just got owned by a second-grader. I surely don't have any brain.

Anyway, since this post is basically one relatively big "no u", I'll just say I was talking about the AI in general, not just with respect to when they came out. I don't see why it's even relevant, really. If I'm playing a game, I don't care when it came out. If I'm enjoying it, I'm enjoying it. I didn't just finish another level in TMA to go "Wow, that sure was great in 2000!".

Matuzzz

05-22-2009, 03:54 PM

Oh snap, I just got owned by a second-grader. I surely don't have any brain.

Guys, you should calm down and stop arguing because of such banality. I think Fraz doesn´t speak naturally english, nor do I.

WVI

05-22-2009, 03:57 PM

I didn't mean to sound bitter - I was being a jackass, but not with any serious overtones. It's facetious.

dnoeyen

05-23-2009, 02:16 AM

Skaruts

05-23-2009, 02:23 AM

yea, that and the drunk guards. They we hilarious in TDS. I'm still trying to remember what one of them said... some thing like "I'm a meeeaan [gibrish with a mix of coughing] ..." I rly can't remember the rest... :confused: he was like trying to scare me. :p

I remember one interesting thing in TMA that made me feel like I was in a rly living world. I think it was in the 2nd mission in the warehouses. There was this guy and a lady I found occasionally and I stood hearing their conversation. While I thought it would be over in a minute, it lasted like roughly 5 minutes. They just kept talking and talking about their lives... That made me feel (again) that satisfaction I want games to give me. :rolleyes:

dnoeyen

05-23-2009, 02:24 AM

I really agree with the first post, but I think the guards voice acting shouldn't be forgotten.
It really makes it so much better when the guards are talking about whatever subject that actually makes sence and relates to the story.
For example, you are seen and you hop back in the shadow, the guard sometimes say "DON'T THINK YOU CAN JUST HOP BACK IN THE SHADOWS BOY!", thats just one of the things that made the game so bloody brilliant.

It creates a feeling of being very close to the guards when you can hear them mumble something to themselves, or you can hear them talking about their lives and their wives.
It adds to the sneakyness and to the tention of don't getting caught.
(as does the music)
So I think the audio part of the game should be very solid.

dnoeyen

05-23-2009, 02:26 AM

yea, that and the drunk guards. They we hilarious in TDS. I'm still trying to remember what one of them said... some thing like "I'm a meeeaan [gibrish with a mix of coughing] ..." I rly can't remember the rest... :confused:

I remember one interesting thing in TMA that made me feel like I was in a rly living world. I think it was in the 2nd mission in the warehouses. There was this guy and a lady I found occasionally and I stood hearing their conversation. While I thought it would be over in a minute, it lasted like roughly 5 minutes. They just kept talking and talking. That made me feel (again) the game was something else. :rolleyes:

Yeah, thats what I mean

Skaruts

05-23-2009, 02:36 AM

It creates a feeling of being very close to the guards when you can hear them mumble something to themselves, or you can hear them talking about their lives and their wives.
It adds to the sneakyness and to the tention of don't getting caught.
(as does the music)
So I think the audio part of the game should be very solid.

Exactly. And it also adds to the sense of reality and imersion. Like, they're not just a skirmish of poligons covered by a bitmap, instead you get the feeling that they're just some regular guys on their everyday tiredsome duty to earn money that isn't enough for a good life, and on top of that their wives cook badly, their cousin jacob comes by for a visit and they couldn't get a day off to be with him, cuz the boss was in bad mood today... one of their coleagues that had a promotion a few days ago was fired yesterday because of that bad mood.... EDIT: and he sais that, btw, some taffer went into his house last night and robbed his medalion that had been a gift from his mother (which happened to be garret on passing by)...

It all just sums up on a very positively involving and humorous way. ;)

huzi73

05-23-2009, 04:15 AM

I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...

While I agree with your arguement on realism,look at it this way,if you had 2 play through 12-15 missions,with only humans in them,you'd probably be bored by the 5th mission or so,thinking to yourself,oh yawn,more of the same.up until the 8th mission,TDP had me playing it for the sake of it being different.I mean ok,there were a couple types of undead,humans,a burrick or two and hey!What a surprise!a few Craymen!but from the cut scene in which Constantine reveals his true form,I was totally hooked.Now the game became less medieval/steampunk and much more dark fantasy.Thief 2 was more victorian for the 1st half,and then over the top steampunk for the rest.TDS was a watered down version of TDP imo,with the chaos reserved for the last mission.I too love a few well planned Mansions/banks/museums etc.But constantly going up against humans without a break from the realistic setting can get quite tedious.(the first games that come to my mind are hitman and splinter cell.which were both not primarily action games,and focused more on stealth.And both bored me to death)sure,good games have been made using realism,but the immediate ones that come to mind are either wwll shooters or cod4.and those are basically run and gun action.I personally would love to see Thi4f being a mix of TDP & TMA,featuring a balance of undead/haunted/pagan/chaos/creature/human/castle/mansion/bank/mechanist/techo/steampunk.not just one or 2 ''non human'' missions,but rather a fine mix of each.
I know many will agree/disagree,but this is purely my preference.

Skaruts

05-23-2009, 08:36 AM

I didn't say the game should only include humans. I didn't mind the zombies and I loved the ghosts. I agree with that of trying to make a game less tedious and repetitive, which they actually worked around well. But the Apebeasts,Bugbeasts, Frogbeasts and even the Trickster's just seemed out of that world. I didn't like them for both not having an imediate clue of how to kill them (died many times before I understood how, when I did) and for thinking that it was a step too far out from the limits.

Kinda like the pagans in DS, like Psychomorph said, they were too freaky and shiny. In the case of TDP's monsters and the levels they were in, I felt like playing Alice in Wonderland, or even McGee's Alice. Just felt totally out of place.

I prefered the freaky and shiny pagans in DS to that.

BlooferLady

05-23-2009, 09:07 AM

I'm going to have to argue for the strange creatures. I hate having to work my way around the undead. Just... not a fan. TMA was a breath of fresh air for me for that specific reason. I personally don't have a problem with any of the opponents in the game, as long as there is a variety. TDS was very undead-heavy to me, so when all I had to contend with were bugbeasts, I was a very happy tafferette.

If you don't like the fantasy creatures, what did you think of the Kurshok and the ratmen in the sunken citadel?

Skaruts

05-23-2009, 10:01 AM

They had a certain style. I kinda liked them. The only thing I disliked (but that was a general problem) was their AI. Their voices were nice aswell.
In DS I liked everything in this matter. Just not the pagans that much.

The rats certainly fit into any medievil story. Whatever their size. :p

GmanPro

05-23-2009, 11:34 AM

I would prefer less crazy monsters and more humans/robots

Ice1019

05-23-2009, 09:16 PM

I would prefer less crazy monsters and more humans/robots

Totally. I'm not quite sure why, but sneaking past guards and Karras' Children seemed cooler than all the monsters from the first game. I think part of it was how the guards could occasionally hint at a plot point, or a key to beating the mission, or just something funny. It made the world seem more alive.

vasanx

05-23-2009, 09:23 PM

Everybody here complain about a LOOOOT of cons about TDS. Okey, you couldnt swim,there were less items to obtain,different movement...but such great ideas in making levels and such nice architecture is more important to me. And of course shadows, which was thing that this game missed. I dont think TDS changes too much from his predecessors. It maintain its spirit.

I'm sorry but I would not never put the words 'maintain' and 'TDS' in the same sentence. TDS had its moments with its level and what not but that is not enough to counter all the stuff it did manage to screw up.

You're right. Everybody did complain too much in a thread titled, 'What was wrong with TDS you may ask?'

As promised, I replayed TDS. I wanted to be more fair I guess, both to IS and the two TDS fans here so, here is the list of things I noted during my playthrough.

And just to shake things up, I'll be startin with the Pros. But even the Pros could use some work so, go figure.

PROS

1. Lockpicking.

Loved the hand animation and all. Sadly, it wasn't as immersive as it could've been because we could see the insides of the lock. I want to find the sweet spot just by listening for it. Plus, it got to be a bit too easy because your right hand kept goin up whenever it hits the sweet spot and you can Right-click to speed up the lockpicking. Not a lot of tension there.

2. Body Awareness

This was done nicely. It was always weird in TDP and TMA to look down and not see your lower extremities.

But the thing about Body Awareness, the player becomes aware. Like really aware. Where is my Climbing Gloves when I'm climbing? I remember seeing and buying something that looked like a baseball glove at Undercurrent.

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/4136/glove1.jpg (http://img34.imageshack.us/my.php?image=glove1.jpg)

3. Wall hugging

I liked this actually. But its weird when you wall hug and a guard can't see you when he's like 3 inches away from you. In TDP it doesn't matter how dark it is, if the guard comes close enough he will spot you because the eyes adjusts and you will be noticeable.

But in TDS Garrett's a freakin' chameleon!

4. Guards didn't ignore door to their room being opened.

It was always odd in TDP and TMA when the door creaks open and the guard will be like, "Hello, anyone there?" and that's it.(There. I just criticized TDP and TMA.)

5. Oil flask

Loved seeing them guards slip. But for some reason when I use it on a staircase, the guards would only slip a few steps. Shouldn't they be rolling down the stairs?

6. Candlestick.

This was a nice touch but again it's plagues by inconsistency. You can extinguish candlesticks on tables but not those mounted on walls? Why?

7. Dagger

I like the dagger actually. But too bad they had to remove the longsword to include it. And if you're gonna replace something, why don't you replace it completely?

What happened to the 'hold the mouse and Garrett pulls back for extra oomph swing' ?
I missed Garrett's grunt (in a very non-homosexual way I might add)

CONS

This is gonna be quite a list. I advise coffee breaks in between.

1. Guards Banned from Shops

How is it that the guards can chase you everywhere in the city but not into the shops? They just wait outside for you. Is it because they don't have a warrant?

2. Torch

I don't know bout you but I find this extremely irritating. Some torches require more than a few water arrows to extinguish it. Is there like a sweet spot in the flame too? Just die already.

3. AI

This is the first mission. I'm at the Castle front yard and I was spotted. So, I ran up the ladder on my left and the next thing I know, there's a guard conference happening near the ladder's foot.

Two things to note. One, guards can't climb ladders. Really? How hard can it be?

Two, they have a death wish. There I was in Legolas mode and them guards just stand there. Some don't even look up. They go into the 'Come out, Come out wherever you are' mode.

Either give them a shield already or jack up their IQ.

4. Parrying

Thanks to the removal of the longsword, guard confrontation has been reduced to 'Let's stab each other as quickly as possible and see who bleeds out first'

That's why we hate the dagger. Not because it is a dagger but because we miss the brilliant swordplay from TDP and TMA.

There's nothing like hearing that sickening metal screeching sound you get when you successfully block a swing. None of that in TDS.

5. Hiding the Body

I've yet to read bout this but I could've missed it. In TDS, it's hard to chuck a body. You gotta be at the right distance, angle and elevation or some sh*t before you can get that rotting/stinking body off of you.

If that's not annoying enough, TDS' Garrett goes, "Aah, aah" whenever you can't dump a body in a particular place. Since this happens a lot, Garrett ends up doing this wierd medieval rap. Just thinking bout that during gameplay kicks you out of the experience.

6. Loot in the Dark

We've talked bout this. Everything looks the freakin' same. In TDP and TMA when you look at something, you instantly know whether it's a loot or not. As for the TDS was too dark argument, here's what I've to show,

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9338/loot.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/my.php?image=loot.jpg)

Wow! I'm so confused. Which is the loot? Is it the bluish looking thingy or is it the golden looking thingy? Surely a vase made of gold won't look golden right?

7. Highlight

I'm not gonna waste explaining this. Just look:

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6923/hilite.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hilite.jpg)

Like my old man used to say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Ok, he didn't but u get the point.

I've got loads more but I'll stop here for now. Let's hear the rebuttals.

GmanPro

05-23-2009, 10:38 PM

WVI

05-23-2009, 11:24 PM

3. Wall hugging

I liked this actually. But its weird when you wall hug and a guard can't see you when he's like 3 inches away from you. In TDP it doesn't matter how dark it is, if the guard comes close enough he will spot you because the eyes adjusts and you will be noticeable.

But in TDS Garrett's a freakin' chameleon!

This was actually about hitboxes more than anything. They were more refined in DS.

As for the TDS was too dark argument...

Don't bother. DS was factually much less dark than TMA.

Anyway, I just finished DS. That was a surprisingly cool ending. It was pretty epic, too. As the game faded to black, Garrett got struck with a mortal blow. I still won. :D

vasanx

05-24-2009, 12:02 AM

The only thing I want to point out is that the guards would slip and fall down the stairs if you place the oil flasks just right. They'd go into ragdoll mode and enter a knocked-out phase as if you had blackjacked them. But it was kinda inconsistent. Same as some of the torches, as you also pointed out.

I agree with everything else you said though. Especially about the weak-sauce dagger combat. No dodging, no parrying, no angled swings. Really takes away from the "swashbuckling" experience that was possible in TDP/TMA.

That part about guards not being able to enter shops was a good point (pure immersion breaker). I always become painfully aware that I am playing a game when things of that nature start to happen. Too much about TDS was set in stone (for lack of a better term). Notice also how whenever you wanted to pick a lock, you'd have to enter a "lockpicking mode." Garrett starts up an animation and the gui changes etc, and its difficult to pry yourself away from this "mode." Same thing with the climbing gloves, and ladder climbing, and whenever you wanted to blackjack somebody. That game just didn't feel fluid, as it should have.

So they do Jack and Jill after all. Thanks for that GmanPro. But yeah, it's the inconsistency that really irked me.

A swordplay enthusiast at last! :friends:

Your point on the 'lockpicking animation breaking the immersion' is something I didn't think through properly.

I was kinda ok with it but now that I think of it, you're totally right!

The game MUST NOT TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM THE PLAYER and these animations do just that.

Even the ladder climbing thing. You gotta wait a few secs for Garrett to move into position.
I know they were driving the body awareness thing here but climbing ladder and lockpicking felt so much more natural in TDP and TMA.

This is what EM must take note of if they're serious about immersing the player in the game world.

GUI. I totally couldn't stand it in TDS. I always enjoyed the idea of a HUD-less design. Call of Cthulhu was the most immersive game I've ever played. And I know TDP and TMA isn't perfect in this regard but TDS simply cluttered the screen with sh*t we don't need.

Most annoying of all of em is the GUI when you're climbing. Why the hell do I need to see this again?

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6044/guituo.jpg (http://img33.imageshack.us/my.php?image=guituo.jpg)

I don't know if a HUD-less design would work in T4 per se but if it did, this is my pitch on improving TDP and TMA's original design.

Invisibility gem - Since body awareness is everything, why not make it more useful than just being able to look at your crotch and know it's there.

Allow Garrett to see his belt. That's where the gem is rite? This could only add to the tension because imagine moving into a new position and having to check whether you're hiding properly. You actually have to look away from the approaching guard.

But I dunno, maybe it will break the gameplay or somethin. But you gotta admit, that is as real as it gets.

I can only come up with a solution for the gem without goin into an animation for the rest. :D

Guess it's not that easy after all.

Matuzzz

05-24-2009, 12:24 AM

I'm sorry but I would not never put the words 'maintain' and 'TDS' in the same sentence. TDS had its moments with its level and what not but that is not enough to counter all the stuff it did manage to screw up.

You're right. Everybody did complain too much in a thread titled, 'What was wrong with TDS you may ask?'

As promised, I replayed TDS. I wanted to be more fair I guess, both to IS and the two TDS fans here so, here is the list of things I noted during my playthrough.

And just to shake things up, I'll be startin with the Pros. But even the Pros could use some work so, go figure.

PROS

1. Lockpicking.

Loved the hand animation and all. Sadly, it wasn't as immersive as it could've been because we could see the insides of the lock. I want to find the sweet spot just by listening for it. Plus, it got to be a bit too easy because your right hand kept goin up whenever it hits the sweet spot and you can Right-click to speed up the lockpicking. Not a lot of tension there.

2. Body Awareness

This was done nicely. It was always weird in TDP and TMA to look down and not see your lower extremities.

But the thing about Body Awareness, the player becomes aware. Like really aware. Where is my Climbing Gloves when I'm climbing? I remember seeing and buying something that looked like a baseball glove at Undercurrent.

3. Wall hugging

I liked this actually. But its weird when you wall hug and a guard can't see you when he's like 3 inches away from you. In TDP it doesn't matter how dark it is, if the guard comes close enough he will spot you because the eyes adjusts and you will be noticeable.

But in TDS Garrett's a freakin' chameleon!

4. Guards didn't ignore door to their room being opened.

It was always odd in TDP and TMA when the door creaks open and the guard will be like, "Hello, anyone there?" and that's it.(There. I just criticized TDP and TMA.)

5. Oil flask

Loved seeing them guards slip. But for some reason when I use it on a staircase, the guards would only slip a few steps. Shouldn't they be rolling down the stairs?

6. Candlestick.

This was a nice touch but again it's plagues by inconsistency. You can extinguish candlesticks on tables but not those mounted on walls? Why?

7. Dagger

I like the dagger actually. But too bad they had to remove the longsword to include it. And if you're gonna replace something, why don't you replace it completely?

What happened to the 'hold the mouse and Garrett pulls back for extra oomph swing' ?
I missed Garrett's grunt (in a very non-homosexual way I might add)

CONS

This is gonna be quite a list. I advise coffee breaks in between.

1. Guards Banned from Shops

How is it that the guards can chase you everywhere in the city but not into the shops? They just wait outside for you. Is it because they don't have a warrant?

2. Torch

I don't know bout you but I find this extremely irritating. Some torches require more than a few water arrows to extinguish it. Is there like a sweet spot in the flame too? Just die already.

3. AI

This is the first mission. I'm at the Castle front yard and I was spotted. So, I ran up the ladder on my left and the next thing I know, there's a guard conference happening near the ladder's foot.

Two things to note. One, guards can't climb ladders. Really? How hard can it be?

Two, they have a death wish. There I was in Legolas mode and them guards just stand there. Some don't even look up. They go into the 'Come out, Come out wherever you are' mode.

Either give them a shield already or jack up their IQ.

4. Parrying

Thanks to the removal of the longsword, guard confrontation has been reduced to 'Let's stab each other as quickly as possible and see who bleeds out first'

That's why we hate the dagger. Not because it is a dagger but because we miss the brilliant swordplay from TDP and TMA.

There's nothing like hearing that sickening metal screeching sound you get when you successfully block a swing. None of that in TDS.

5. Hiding the Body

I've yet to read bout this but I could've missed it. In TDS, it's hard to chuck a body. You gotta be at the right distance, angle and elevation or some sh*t before you can get that rotting/stinking body off of you.

If that's not annoying enough, TDS' Garrett goes, "Aah, aah" whenever you can't dump a body in a particular place. Since this happens a lot, Garrett ends up doing this wierd medieval rap. Just thinking bout that during gameplay kicks you out of the experience.

6. Loot in the Dark

We've talked bout this. Everything looks the freakin' same. In TDP and TMA when you look at something, you instantly know whether it's a loot or not. As for the TDS was too dark argument, here's what I've to show,

Wow! I'm so confused. Which is the loot? Is it the bluish looking thingy or is it the golden looking thingy? Surely a vase made of gold won't look golden right?

7. Highlight

I'm not gonna waste explaining this. Just look:

Like my old man used to say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Ok, he didn't but u get the point.

I've got loads more but I'll stop here for now. Let's hear the rebuttals.

Weeell, now I really think I´m going to stop to try discuss here anything. You mentioned such banal things, but I won´t go to write down pros and cons of TMA. I just noticed some mistakes in your post.
-I don´t know about wall, but guard in TDS noticed you when you stood in the most dark places when he ran into you, in TMA when I was in darkness where bar was totaly black, guards sometimes just didn´t stop walking, he was banging his head whith mine, but still didn´t notice me.
-I don´t remember guards in TMA were able to climb a ladder.
-I didn´t spend more than 1 arrow on each torch. And if I did I just said to myself, that I must be getting old, as I said in TMA.
-You were right, that sword is missing in fighting with guards, but I usually played each Thief game on Expert, so I didn´t have to fight guards and didn´t notice that. And if you like sound of swords, than there is plenty of them in Oblivion.
-Yes you couldn´t throw body into the wall like in TMA, where you threw him right into the corner and from the wall was sticking out just his leg, body usually disappeard.

You just don´t want to see ANY change in that game. For example about that body. If it was disappering in TDA and not in TMA, you would write an essay here about it.

Why didn´t you mentioned some other pros. For example great graphic and especially architecture. Implementation of physics, possibility to see my own body and hands(garrett was able to fly in TMA, he didn´t use the ladder stading in front oh him, he just flew next to him)...

You were so prejudiced against TDS from the day it was released that you were just going through the map and searching something you don´t like. You didn´t play and think about storyline or something what player should do when wants to enjoy the game.

ToMegaTherion

05-24-2009, 12:29 AM

vasanx

05-24-2009, 01:07 AM

Weeell, now I really think I´m going to stop to try discuss here anything. You mentioned such banal things,...

Banal is necessary in a game that is 3 yrs away. It's a reminder for the devs who don't actually go and read through every single post here. If they missed the first time around, my post could be the one they read. And I think my explanations are pretty unique and even, entertaining.

I'm pretty sure no one will get bored reading my post unless you choose to.

Mistakes, huh? And what mistakes exactly? Oh, that's right, you didn't feel like writing it but you just wanted to point it out anyway. :thumb:

"but guard in TDS noticed you when you stood in the most dark places when he ran into you..."

You don't say.

"I don´t remember guards in TMA were able to climb a ladder"

Wow. I was explaining how TDS being the "improvement" still couldn't fix this problem. Read the thread's title again, will you? It's not 'Why TDS is lousy compared to TDP and TMA?'

"And if you like sound of swords, than there is plenty of them in Oblivion."

Oh, stop already! I can't stop laughing. This is too funny. NOT!

"Yes you couldn´t throw body into the wall like in TMA, where you threw him right into the corner and from the wall was sticking out just his leg, body usually disappeard"

Again comparing the wrong stuff in TDP and TMA. You need to get on the program here.

We are discussing what is wrong in TDS that can be improved in T4. TDS tried to improve stuff from TDP and TMA and failed. Please don't waste your time and ours by writing bout stuff that we all know was broken in TDP and TMA.

"You just don´t want to see ANY change in that game. For example about that body. If it was disappering in TDA and not in TMA, you would write an essay here about it."

Really? So, you really can't see the Pros list I've written above? Wow. We know bout the disappearing body. Stop comparing obvious stuff already.GOD! :mad2:

"Why didn´t you mentioned some other pros."

Why I didn't mention? That's a given. I was showing how I can appreciate TDS too but you have me dead for a TDS hater, don't you? Jeez.

"Fly in TMA?" Oh, gosh. I've already acknowledged that Body Awareness in TDS is nice, what else do you want me to say?

"You were so prejudiced against TDS from the day it was released that you were just going through the map and searching something you don´t like. You didn´t play and think about storyline or something what player should do when wants to enjoy the game."

Searching for something, huh? And I hacked the codes too so that TDS will play like crap and I can complain about it here. :thumb:

Storyline? Who's complainin bout it here? Who?!

And by the way, if you don't feel like discussing, feel free to do so. No one is stopping you.

p.s. Try to delete some stuff when you're quoting a large post. We get it that you're quoting that person but you don't have to eat more space than it is necessary.

Matuzzz

05-24-2009, 01:24 AM

There is no need for such aggressiveness. I would just like if T4 would be in TDS way.(of course not completely)

vasanx

05-24-2009, 01:27 AM

There is no need for such aggressiveness. I would just like if T4 would be in TDS way.(of course not completely)

I might have used too much red in my post but I really don't think it was that bad.

I know you do.

But there are ways to present one's POV. That's all I'm sayin.

Skaruts

05-24-2009, 04:47 AM

I'm sorry but I would not never put the words 'maintain' and 'TDS' in the same sentence.

I would: Maintain some of the body awareness details as in TDS.
It's simply brilliant. For at least 3 reasons:

- When you turn the mouse his head turns, unlike every other game where the whole body goes spining. He's a thief and needs to stand still while checking his surroundings. Besides, there's nothing wrong with his neck.
- You can see that he holds his weapons like a normal person, unlike other games where the main character holds his arm streched forward at all times like a retard. Even in the best up-to-date FPSs.
- The movement seems realistic as you see the camera bumping while he walks.

there. Used both words. :p

as for point 6, I agree with having loot to blend with other objects. After all, loot objects are objects like any other, but you forgot how the game tells the player which one is a piece of loot and which isn't. It glows. So it's never as hard as you say to distinguish them in TDS.
Even though the glow isn't too realistic, it's a necessary evil.

And I think the same goes to the door glow. Even though it could be more subtle, it's a good thing that it's there. Otherwise you'd be clicking around to put out a candle and then you'd get that in the cons instead.

Psychomorph

05-24-2009, 05:40 AM

As for the glow to distinguish loot from not-loot, in the first titles we have a glow, as you say the necessary evil, in the third game we have the constant sparkles, why not to combine both? The loot remains blend in with other non valuables (in T1&2 it isn't really the case actually, you can distinguish stuff, but it is less obvious so you have to double check), but looking at them they get a little bit of a sparkle (like realistic light reflexions), telling you that it is valuable.

Not sure how to do this with other objects (doors, scrolls, etc), I'll think about that.

As for the door glow, I have to say that I never really liked it, because when I sneak through the dark and suddenly a droor glows, I instinctively feel exposed, because the glow looks like the spot is lit out, very unnatural to the feel.
In T3 the glow is intensive too, but the blue glow does not look authentic, so it becomes much easier to distinguish which glow is real light (and exposes me) and which is just a usable object.

I think there has to be a better solution for usable/pickable objects than what has been done before in the previous Thief titles.

Skaruts

05-24-2009, 11:13 AM

I can't rly remember how the objects were in T1 and 2, can only remember doors.

I never had any of those problems with door glow that you talk about. I never took it as if it's being lit up, but rather as it being pointed at. Much like it was in T1 and 2. None of these two issues ever bothered me in any way (in gameplay effeciency terms), but I do agree that it's too intense and a better solution should be put to use.

I sure hope they've thought some way to solve that.

But every game I've seen has some way of telling you that you are close enough, or pointing the right direction to press the button and take the desired effect. This is my favorite way, though (but not necessarily TDS's way), cuz I hate when I see a hand icon popping out on the screen as a hint for interaction.

BlooferLady

05-24-2009, 12:40 PM

Having trouble putting torches out, huh? Just a general Thiefsie tip: aim for where the bracket that the torch is sitting in meets the wall. Works 99% of the time. Compliments of my brother.

So much of this stuff I would never notice, but they are good points. (Hence why I'm not a game developer ;)) I never noticed the blue door-glow. But yeah, it's a bit weird. There's no reason to change the color of the object that gets highlighted. Just keep it like it was in the first 2 games.

vasanx

05-24-2009, 06:29 PM

OK, time for some quick comments about your cons...

1. Granted, and indeed the idea of Thief Shops you can just wander into is sufficiently ridiculous for me to treat it simply as an abstraction (and indeed a fairly pointless abstraction).

2. As in Dark Project and Metal Age, you have to hit the right spot.

3. Granted, but a criticism that could be levelled at all three games, all of them responded ineptly to areas they couldn't reach, and they couldn't reach lots of really easy-to-reach areas. Apart from the tendency to drop to lowest alert state even after having spotted the player, Deadly Shadows AI generally acts more plausibly than the previous two games. None of the games has good or believable AI, though.

4. If you can beat 50 guards simultaneously, the swordplay is not brilliant, it's broken. And parrying was a suboptimal choice unless you ended up stuck in a corner fighting lots of guards, and even then it is probably suboptimal. The fact that the dagger isn't a win-immediately cheat like the sword was is an improvement.

5. This is the same as in the other games, I think, but the positioning is different, so if you are used to previous games then you get it wrong a lot more.

6. Granted, although there isn't really any way to tell whether that possibly-silver thing in your screenshot isn't loot.

7. The highlighting is horrible, fortunately JohnP makes it much better, but it is worth mentioning again and again that ugly blue highlighting and loot glint is nothing other than hideous. It makes you wonder when something so unbelievably vile gets in a game.

1. Fairly pointless? I really don't think so. When a game makes you question simple logic, it fails. Whether having a shop that sells flashbombs in the open is really besides the point because it's acceptable in that game world.

But the guards not following you in and continue waiting outside is unacceptable. The only way I can rationalize such a moment is that Garrett being chased after for a while yells back, "Ok, guys. Chasing me around Stonemarket has been fun but I'm low on health. Lets take five so I can stop by the shop and grab some health potions. And I promise, you guys can continue chasing me after I come out of the shop. Ok guys?"

And the guards go, "Sure Taffer. We can use a drink while we wait for you outside"
(The hillarious dialogue (I hope) is not meant to insult you by the way)

2. Looks like everyone has taken Legolas' Advanced Archery course here. I am pretty sure that TDP and TMA had more obedient torches. Something was not right in TDS.

You need to fire your water arrow from the correct spot or something because the water arrow hits the flame and I don't know about you, but when I see water splashing on a flame, I'd like to think I'm hitting the right spot.

Move a few feet in front or to the side, and maybe then it will work.

TDS is inconsistent here as it is in other areas. That's what I'm driving at.

3. Yes, yes. But lets not talk bout stuff that's already broken in TDP and TMA. TDS bein the technological improvement over its predecessor still couldn't get this right.

I don't know if it's because of tech. limitation, consolitis or they missed it during playtest, if there even was such a concept in IS but when I pick on stuff like this, it's more of a reminder.

4. The 50 guard example again. Hmm. You seem to suggest that Garrett is invincible with his sword in TDP and TMA. Swordplay in the older games isn't unbalanced in the previous two titles at all.

In fact, swordplay was never a good alternative in the first place since the guards will almost always bring down your health shields. And there's only so much health potions you can take.

It gets especially tricky when there's an archer around when you're busy parrying and, if you can't get to him fast enough you better run.

So, I don't get where this swordplay is an immediate win thing is coming from.

5. I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier to dump a body in TDP and TMA. Plus the added benefit of not having to listen to Garrett rapping.

6. But that's where the fun is, right? Guessing whether it's a loot or not and end up picking up junk. I missed some silver plates before I realized they're not junk. And even then, you wouldn't be picking up junk as much since the bulk of loot in TDP, TMA looks like loot.

But you couldn't do that in TDS if there was no loot glint because they only had one candlestick model.

The main idea here is to remove the loot glint system from T4. IS chose not to follow LGS' model so that they can justify loot glint as an "improvement".

7. :friends:

GmanPro

05-24-2009, 09:57 PM

The loot, in general, was not as visually appealing to me in TDS. Loot in TDP/TMA and Deus Ex, was always a treat to find. I'd get really exited whenever I found valuable items in those games. Finding loot in TDS felt more like a chore. Also, I miss that sound effect from the previous games. That was sooo satisfying to hear.

ToMegaTherion

05-25-2009, 02:04 AM

I agree with you GmanPro, I rather liked the general drab graphics style in Deadly Shadows but the loot could have been prettier.

In reply to vasanx:

1) By fairly pointless I meant having the shops there in the first place is fairly pointless. Leaving aside the guards not following you in, the idea of having thief shops is pretty silly to start with, then annoying whenever you have to traipse over to Stonemarket every time you want a moss arrow, and doesn't, for me, add anything to gameplay except annoyance and doesn't add anything to atmosphere except disbelief. I find it a bad idea entirely, and difficult to take seriously.

2) It's been a long time since I played the old Thief games, as I recall to put out a torch you had to not shoot the flame but shoot the metal part of the torch for best results, this seems to be similarly true in Deadly Shadows. Maybe the larger size of the torches in Deadly Shadows makes it harder?

3) OK, I guess we should be more careful to differentiate between "things TDS did wrong that TMA didn't" and "things where TDS failed to improve on TMA".

4) I'm pretty confident in beating most guards with a sword without losing health. Indeed if you take every melee guard in a level and put them in a room with me, as long as it's not too small a room, I think I'll win fairly comfortably. I never actually tried 50 guards at once because it gets tiring, but I did do 40 apebeasts once.

5) Again, been too long to remember properly. I think you can do it closer to a wall in the earlier games, but not right up to it, but I could be wrong.

6) Things are indeed better in the first two games, because although the first time you might not know soemthing isn't loot, you know the second time. In Deadly Shadows you often have to wait for the glint to make sure.

7) :)

Skaruts

05-26-2009, 09:50 AM

I remember there was a big problem with picking objects that weren't loot (I believe in TDS too). When you realised you picked something that wasn't loot you had to throw the object away and that would make lots of noise, cuz garret was never as delicate in handling objects as he was in stealth.

That is the main reason I disagree with not being able to distinguish loot.

If there is a way to evaluate the objects before grabing them, which happened in thief 2 at least, since loot objects were often golden chalices and golden plates, golden in general, then I agree with not making them glow while not pointed at (and even if pointed at).

But there should be a way to gently put the object back into it's place, completely silently, for those times when you accidentaly pick the object next to the loot one, or there's a chance of being spoted for dropping the object at the wrong place and sounding like an alarm. I remember looking for carpets to drop them on, when that happened, but sometimes it wasn't enough, and it was frustrating.

ToMegaTherion

05-26-2009, 09:53 AM

Use R in Dark Project and Metal Age, right click in Deadly Shadows. It is not perfect but it is OK.

Skaruts

05-26-2009, 10:20 AM

I always used the key/button to "drop softly". I was taking that into account. It wouldn't save from being heard many times.

GmanPro

05-26-2009, 10:24 AM

Or maybe ttlg meant to keep that feature as another mechanic that encourages the player to carefully think and plan before taking action.

ToMegaTherion

05-26-2009, 10:37 AM

If they did that then they're pretty silly, since in some cases it is actually impossible to avoid innocently picking up trash.

Caranfin

05-26-2009, 11:21 AM

It was not impossible in the first two games due to the loot actually looking like loot, or in DS due to the awful loot glint. In TDP and TMA the player develops an eye for loot and with practice can avoid picking up the non-valuable objects. If you do pick up trash, it's your own fault. Personally I think it's a good thing to make the players think what they'll pick up from a dining table with a bunch of candlesticks and plates and goblets, for example, instead of just right-clicking everything they see and setting them back again without sound if it's not valuable.

Garrett being unable to put them back down softly does seem like a bit of an artificial way of punishing the player at times, though.

ToMegaTherion

05-26-2009, 12:09 PM

That would be nice argument, but since you automatically pick up anything from a chest you open, and that can be junk, it is indeed impossible to innocently avoid picking up trash. Sometimes it happens when there is actually no carpet for miles around, which cause a bit of a problem (e.g. Bafford's Manor, just leaving the basement).

Caranfin

05-26-2009, 12:39 PM

Oh right, I totally forgot about that. Might be a clue that it's time for me to replay the games again. :) The obvious solution is of course to make the chests actually contain the items and not just automating the pick-up process when you open them.

Skaruts

05-26-2009, 03:02 PM

Well, the auto-pick up has been already discarded in TDS. I don't think that'll ever be a problem again.

I would like it if they would make it as before, so the player can develop his sense of distinguishing loot when there's any. Keeps things more realistic, and better looking too. ;)

But I'd like it if they would find a solution to drop things silently. It's still needed even without auto-picking from chests. For example, imagine the bottles-holder in the cellars (there's many of them in thief 2, if I'm not mistaken), there's very few chances you'll distinguish a valuable bottle from all the others.

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom

05-26-2009, 08:13 PM

I am playing TDS again. I am using Johnp textures and minimalist mod.

I have 2 humongous issues with the game right now.

As has been discussed here, Garrett does not drop things silently. This seems a lot worse in TDS. Any time I drop something that turned out to be junk I hear a curious guard comment or worse, they go looking. I love that they can hear these things, but I hate that I have no means of just placing an item down. I know about the difference between the throw button and the drop button. I can't believe how infuriating it is. I remember hating it, but not this much. I believe the minimalist mod improves the ai senses. That must be why this is such a huge issue for me now. ><

Garrett keeps stepping off ledges! In the next game, I hope Garrett can lean with his torso and not move his legs. I keep falling because of this crap. I'm so used to leaning a lot in the previous games. In TDS I try not to.

These might not be issues in the regular game difficulty and in third person, but it just goes to show how extremely annoying those things can be. These two have jumped way up on my list of things I hate in TDS.

While I'm on it. I read you guys talking about how the loot looks. The loot does tend to look more...obvious in the first two games. I installed some graphic enhancement to the first games the other day and it really makes the loot stand out! In T3 the way the loot looks doesn't really work without the painful glint. This seems mostly a problem with the improved shadows. Everything is dark, it's so hard to tell what's worthwhile in TDS. Even when I can see loot it tends to look rather plain. At least I know a gem is loot just by looking at it's shape. A candle holder, bowl, or cup is a tough call unless I'm ready to make some noise.

Really, we should be able to place an object down. I don't want to alert the guards for no good reason. It shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not I'm just randomly picking things up. It's gamey at it's gamest. I don't believe it was intentional, but then again, why the heck would they make it that way? It could not have been difficult to come up with a way for Garrett to make less or no noise when he doesn't want something. I dunno, I can't see why it's been that way all along unless it's supposed to be gamey. And that's just lame.

5. I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier to dump a body in TDP and TMA. Plus the added benefit of not having to listen to Garrett rapping.

LMFAO, rapping, I just got that.

vasanx

05-27-2009, 02:24 AM

LMFAO, rapping, I just got that.

Finally! Someone took note of that joke after all. Thanks. :D

vasanx

05-27-2009, 03:02 AM

I would: Maintain some of the body awareness details as in TDS.
It's simply........

....there. Used both words. :p

The word 'maintain' was used in the context of TDS "continuing" the TDP and TMA spirit. :mad2:

Body awareness in TDS is a given.

as for point 6, I agree with having loot to blend with other objects. After all, loot objects are objects like any other, but you forgot how the game tells the player which one is a piece of loot and which isn't. It glows. So it's never as hard as you say to distinguish them in TDS.

I said, it would have been hard to distinguish if there was no loot glint since the loot candlestick and the junk candlestick looks the same which is of course the reason why the loot glint is there in the first place.

IS basically created the situation to bring in "additional features" to the game. They thought they were being clever but we saw right through it.

And I think the same goes to the door glow. Even though it could be more subtle, it's a good thing that it's there. Otherwise you'd be clicking around to put out a candle and then you'd get that in the cons instead.

Everyone agrees door glow is necessary. God knows I missed a few doors in my TDP days if they're far away and there are no torches.

Just don't put blue, orange, tangellow or pink glow no more. Leave its original color be.

ToMegaTherion

05-27-2009, 03:21 AM

The irritating white flash that occasionally highlighted important items / notes etc was pretty tiresome too, I don't think anyone else mentioned that. Quite funny that Garrett could not only detect loot from afar but also could notice whether notes were key to objectives or just background information without even reading them!

huzi73

05-27-2009, 03:48 AM

vasanx

05-27-2009, 03:51 AM

Having trouble putting torches out, huh? Just a general Thiefsie tip: aim for where the bracket that the torch is sitting in meets the wall. Works 99% of the time. Compliments of my brother.

Thank u BlooferLady's brother. So, hit the bracket, huh? That's very....logical. And I know TDP and TMA isn't that perfect either so don't bother people.

They really gotta fix this in T4. If the water arrow hits the flame and I don't care if it hits the blue part or the orange part of the flame, it has to go off. Period.

Unless it hits the wall next to the torch of course. Because that would mean you're a lousy shot and I ain't a lousy shot.

I can hit the wings off of a fly with my broadheads if you catch my drift.

BlooferLady

05-27-2009, 08:08 AM

5. I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier to dump a body in TDP and TMA. Plus the added benefit of not having to listen to Garrett rapping.

He does that in the first two as well. Well, he doesn't give you the "uh-uh" noise, it's just a grunt. Which is either more or less awkward and stupid to me, depending on how I feel that day.:scratch: I don't know how else you would indicate that you're too close to a wall, though.

Skaruts

05-27-2009, 08:47 AM

maybe having 10 or 20 very short sentences that garret could say alternately, like "there's not enough space here.", "can't" or "better try a diferent angle"... so on.

Of course that would have to be made in a way that he would say it when you press the button once and then he would shut up if you keep pressing it like a maniac, only saying something again after 20 clicks or after 10 seconds without clicking. Otherwise it would feel just like the musician garret from TDS :mad2: :lol:

Silent-Wolf

05-27-2009, 10:06 AM

One neat touch I liked from TDS but it wasn't taken advantage of enough was being able to manipulate the environment ot create an "accident" for instance like in the Hammers Factory a guard would walk through a furnace which you could switch on to kill him. Another example was in the Pagan Santuary where you could push a giant cog that would sometimes kill a person that was underneath it.

Maybe T4 could use some inspiration from the Hitman series in which you can carry poison or even chloroform to take out guards or targets. Well maybe poison is a bit too far but it's an alternative option.

However, I wholly agree that the first 2 games were far superior but it didn't stop me from enjoying TDS.

As for putting out torches I always aimed above the flames so that the water splashed down onto them, this aiming for the metal bracket is nonsense IMO. I hardly had any issues with failed attempts doing it my way and if I did I'd just assume it was error on my part and readjust my position or aim slightly differently.

I also agree that the item "glint" needs removing entirely, pah, I can find my own loot thanks without some noobish help like that. Took the pleasure away from discovering any for yourself that one. Maybe use it on the tutorial mish but not afterwards.

Cheers guys, I have enjoyed almost all comments on here and can't wait for the first screen shots to come out.

Sierra Oscar

05-27-2009, 10:09 AM

Skaruts

05-27-2009, 10:14 AM

As for putting out torches I always aimed above the flames so that the water splashed down onto them, this aiming for the metal bracket is nonsense IMO. I hardly had any issues with failed attempts doing it my way and if I did I'd just assume it was error on my part and readjust my position or aim slightly differently.

Same here. I always pointed above the flame and hardly ever missed. :p

Taffer17

05-27-2009, 01:26 PM

First time poster, so sorry if I replied to a specific post...

Anyway, Thief 4 needs some more Easter eggs like the ones in T1 and 2. When I accidentally found the basketball court I remember being so thrilled. And in Thief 2 outside Shoalsgate Station, where you throw the scouting orb over the wall and see two zombies doing the thriller dance, I had a really good laugh about that one...although I wish there was some way to get into the interrogation room in that one...anyway as far as I know, TDS didn't really have any easter eggs, or if they did, not any worth hearing about. This must be fixed! :p

VIKTORIA

05-27-2009, 03:21 PM

Taffer17

05-27-2009, 04:42 PM

* Some rope climbing in horizontal direction would be awesome..(like I can shoot a crossbow to the roof of the other building and by anchoring the other end of the rope to my roof, I could climb from building to building over the street when the guards below are searching for me on the street).
;)

sweet idea. stuff like that. that's a good change to the game and a positive addition. now removing rope arrows and replacing them with climbing gloves just removed a lot of the versatility of the game. with the rope arrows you could shoot htem at a ceiling and you could go anywhere from there. with the climbing gloves for the most part u were stuck on a surface of wall 3 feet wide and it led to nowhere. you jumped up on that wall in order to escape a guard only to find out there you had nowhere to go and that the guards weren't leaving. i admit i was excited when i heard that i could scale walls, then the excitement dropped when i found out it was only stone walls...then i was royally disappointed once i received hte climbing gloves. :( it was a sad sad moment in my years of thief playing.

although there were some good maps in TDS (the cradle), for the most part they weren't that good. yes the architecture looked nice but it was mostly hte graphics. TDP and TMA had absolutely stunning levels like both Lost City levels and Life of the Party, and Constantine's mansion, and i for one loved the undercover Hammerite level. That was a really cool idea. and even though now its very tame, nothing beats the first time i played any of the zombie levels in TDP. My heart was beating like crazy. I freaked out when playing the first haunted cathedral level just running through the city and then the first couple times i played the game, i had to have my brother play Return to the Haunted Cathedral (i was a wee 9 or 10 around that time)...or maybe i did the level skip code...i dont remember if it was in the original game or only thief gold... now of course TDS had hte cradle and that was definitely one of the scariest levels i've ever played and far scarier than any movie i've watched since i was participating in it. I played it in surround sound and when I read that note about the lady who carried her baby around and then left the note and heard crying, i nearly soiled myself. that was genius. Sooo, thief 4, DEFINITELY needs at least one or two levels like the cradle or haunted cathedral and to build off of that, without the amazing audio, thief is nothing so don't forget that.

and as far as the steam robots went, i found those terrifying the first several times i played TMA. it made me terrified of leaving the shadows.

and day levels? really? thief is about shadows! has anyone gone outside and tried to hide in a shadow? it's sort of pointless. not to mention, where's the ambience? also, TDP had one level during daylight i recall. Cragsleft Prison... it was mostly indoors for a reason. and when u did go outside at the very top and encountered the Hammer on patrol, there was no way you could hide from him. no shadows!
and this long-winded rant sums up my second post ever :lmao:

Taffer17

05-27-2009, 04:44 PM

thanks for the link to the easter egg thread...way too many threads to read through. this is gonna take me weeks haha

TeoRocker

05-27-2009, 06:47 PM

But every game I've seen has some way of telling you that you are close enough, or pointing the right direction to press the button and take the desired effect. This is my favorite way, though (but not necessarily TDS's way), cuz I hate when I see a hand icon popping out on the screen as a hint for interaction.

In TDP and TMA, it was Garrett saying something.

Skaruts

05-27-2009, 06:58 PM

Nope. He wouldn't say anything when you pointed at loot or doors. Only if it was something more relevant than just that (like plot items/paths).

vasanx

05-27-2009, 07:35 PM

He does that in the first two as well. Well, he doesn't give you the "uh-uh" noise, it's just a grunt. Which is either more or less awkward and stupid to me, depending on how I feel that day.:scratch: I don't know how else you would indicate that you're too close to a wall, though.

But the thing bout TDS, the collision detection or whatever the tech term is, was broken.

You had to find the right spot and distance to dismount your load and it forces you to right-click so many times and that's where the 'Garrett rapping' phenomena arises.

TDP and TMA had its moments too but it was nothin compared to TDS.

Here's what I'm thinking. Instead of forcing the player to stop and waste time thinking where the body should go ala Monk, why don't they fix it already?

Don't even include the grunt/uh-uh noise in T4 because in T4 you can throw the body anywhere just like in the real world.

How's that for a solution? :naughty:

Skaruts

05-27-2009, 08:15 PM

Another thing that didn't rly bothered me.

Much probly the colisions in thief 4 will be improved and you may be able to drop the body more comfortably. Ragdolls have been improved as the time goes by (just like everything else) and probly that won't be a problem anymore. Though I can't rly tell for sure.

I believe what made them have to do it that way was to prevent ragdolls from overlaping the walls as it ocurred in TDP and TMA, with NPC models, as much as a ppl blinks their eyes. (ok I'm exagerating :p)

Knowing how things work from the backstage of a game leads me to excuse many things. Of course, I don't excuse things I know that could've been done better or I believe that could be fixed easily.
But while I don't rly know how ragdolls are programed, I fear it must have been a pain to get them working properly, and to interact/colide properlly with the world around as they seem to do nowadays. Even though, I see ragdoll issues all around.

Even in Assassins Creed, that is a fairly recent game and well worked upon (in some matters), they have a few malfunctions.

vasanx

05-27-2009, 08:25 PM

CROSSBOW??
* A good upgrade in the arsenal can be the addition of the crossbow. If it can shoot rope arrows I'd be extremely grateful :) Some rope climbing in horizontal direction would be awesome..(like I can shoot a crossbow to the roof of the other building and by anchoring the other end of the rope to my roof, I could climb from building to building over the street when the guards below are searching for me on the street).

Thank you Taffer17 for that quote. Totally missed that post. Amazing, amazing idea.

This will totally open up the map as Garrett can now go anywhere he wants to with ease.

Usually this would have been impossible if they had a huge street and the best they could do is have the roofs connected somewhere further down the street.

With orderofthestick's idea, Garrett can finally get the freedom of movement he was denied in TDS.

And imagine scaling the rope horizontally in first person? Looking at the sky and then move the mouse to see the streets below. If they can make the rope swaying happen, I'll be only too happy to purchase a Motion Sickness bag.

That's the kind of First Person realism we want in T4 EM.

And by the way, why the heck would Garrett be moving on the streets with his Wanted poster plastered everywhere?

Shouldn't the people recognize him and not the guards alone? What? No one reads the Wanted posters no more?

Rooftops should be his main choice and to not make it too easy for Garrett, besides having guards, what they can do is, block his rooftop passage on occasions so he'll have to use the streets.

Maybe the ledge broke off or the building was demolished or somethin and, even with the rope arrow, he still couldn't get to the other section of the rooftops unless he uses the street first.

Now, that would make travelling the City Hub a lot more interesting and this will also solve the problem of having to listen to repeated dialogues.

I like listening to the wind, the creaking of the rooftop or the sudden shriek of a crow when I'm rooftopping. And looking at the moon and the rolling clouds above and the view of the City's outskirts from the top would be oh! so cool.

I beseech you EM. Make this happen already....

Hypevosa

05-27-2009, 08:33 PM

Thank you Taffer17 for that quote. Totally missed that post. Amazing, amazing idea.

This will totally open up the map as Garrett can now go anywhere he wants to with ease.

Usually this would have been impossible if they had a huge street and the best they could do is have the roofs connected somewhere further down the street.

With orderofthestick's idea, Garrett can finally get the freedom of movement he was denied in TDS.

And imagine scaling the rope horizontally in first person? Looking at the sky and then move the mouse to see the streets below. If they can make the rope swaying happen, I'll be only too happy to purchase a Motion Sickness bag.

That's the kind of First Person realism we want in T4 EM.

And by the way, why the heck would Garrett be moving on the streets with his Wanted poster plastered everywhere?

Shouldn't the people recognize him and not the guards alone? What? No one reads the Wanted posters no more?

Rooftops should be his main choice and to not make it too easy for Garrett, besides having guards, what they can do is, block his rooftop passage on occasions so he'll have to use the streets.

Maybe the ledge broke off or the building was demolished or somethin and, even with the rope arrow, he still couldn't get to the other section of the rooftops unless he uses the street first.

Now, that would make travelling the City Hub a lot more interesting and this will also solve the problem of having to listen to repeated dialogues.

I like listening to the wind, the creaking of the rooftop or the sudden shriek of a crow when I'm rooftopping. And looking at the moon and the rolling clouds above and the view of the City's outskirts from the top would be oh! so cool.

I beseech you EM. Make this happen already....

Unless Garrett got extremely careless or lazy, his face shouldn't be recognizable to anyone he hasn't met personally, or on posters for that matter. I have a post about getting posters and notoriety for being stupid during missions if you want to search it. But as it stands Garrett is the master thief, and all people have to go on are lore, and nothing (that they know to be) factual.

I personally don't want a crossbow, I like the bow as it is... why are we giving Garrett what's basically a gun? :( I don't know, I'm just really attached to the bow...

vasanx

05-27-2009, 08:37 PM

I believe what made them have to do it that way was to prevent ragdolls from overlaping the walls as it ocurred in TDP and TMA, with NPC models, as much as a ppl blinks their eyes. (ok I'm exagerating :p)

Knowing how things work from the backstage of a game leads me to excuse many things.

Even in Assassins Creed, that is a fairly recent game and well worked upon (in some matters), they have a few malfunctions.

Yeah, I get that part bout how people need to know more bout their sh*t before they start complainin.

But like you said, even with the tech at hand, laziness and/or oversight can still screw things up.

I just pray that EM is much much better than this. Look at Dead Space for QA and playtesting inspiration.

That thing was so ready when it came out, it was readyculous!

Get it? Ready + ridiculous? :D (I know you guys get it, that was me being funny)

vasanx

05-27-2009, 08:55 PM

100th post! Booyah!

Unless Garrett got extremely careless or lazy, his face shouldn't be recognizable to anyone he hasn't met personally, or on posters for that matter.

Face is one thing. But what bout the hood? The poster has Garrett in a hood and was there anyone else in the city wearing a hood?

Garrett was the only dude in the entire city in a hood and if that doesn't raise the flag for the people, I don't know what will.

I personally don't want a crossbow, I like the bow as it is... why are we giving Garrett what's basically a gun? :( I don't know, I'm just really attached to the bow...

Haha. Don't worry. If they do include the crossbow, it is not meant to be a replacement because as we have all discussed before, pulling another dagger stunt isn't gonna help with the fans of the original.

We can still use the bow I guess for horizontal scaling but I don't know how you can achieve the anchoring of the rope on your side without including an animation.

Since, we have already established that animations will remove the player from the experience, it has to be done in real time.

This could sound stupid so, don't be too mean bout it. How bout having a rope with arrows on both sides? He selects his two-headed? rope arrow, shoots at the wooden pillar next to him and then selects the rope arrow that's stuck to the pillar and, use it to shoot onto the pillar across the street.

How's that? :naughty:

Skaruts

05-27-2009, 10:59 PM

The two-arrows-rope isn't a bad idea, at all. I just wouldn't like to be able to get 20 rope arrows as before... I hate that. Why? Try taking 20 ropes, half-inch thick, long enough to reach the second story window, and put them in a sac, see if they all fit nicelly in there. :p Two recoverable ropes, would be enough for most cases. So you could attach them to a normal piercing arrow and have fun from there. Exactly the same but more realistic.

As for the animation, it wouldn't necessarily have to include an animation. Most things in Thief never included animations. For ex., opening a door, picking up objects, dropping them also, using a key on a door, etc. And most likely they will stay the same. Else, they will surprise me astonishingly.
But I can't see how a "door-knob-turning" animation, for ex., would be consistent without taking over the player's controls to place garret's model in position so his hand would grab the knob right, lest you'd see the knob turning alone cuz his hand was 1 or 2 inches aside.
Same goes to picking up objects.

So, for practical reasons, it shouldn't include an animation, unless they have some rly brilliant ideas, or unless I'm missing something. (I hope so, indeed...) Otherwise, leaving "taking over" aside, you have only two options left: either hearing garret rapping for not being correctly placed to turn the knob, or having inconsistent animations that will fill future forums with flaming posts and their hearts with grief.

There could be a knot done without animation (by simply clicking on a light-post or some thing which could bear a knot).
It wouldn't bother me at all. What would bother me would be if that had an animation and the rest of the stuff didn't.

vasanx

05-28-2009, 01:47 AM

The two-arrows-rope isn't a bad idea, at all. I just wouldn't like to be able to get 20 rope arrows as before... I hate that. Why? Try taking 20 ropes, half-inch thick, long enough to reach the second story window, and put them in a sac, see if they all fit nicelly in there. :p Two recoverable ropes, would be enough for most cases. So you could attach them to a normal piercing arrow and have fun from there. Exactly the same but more realistic.

Really? I thought people were gonna skewer that the moment they read it. Haha. Ok, then. Go Two-headed rope arrow!

The '20 rope arrow' thing is a sensitive subject. I mean, you either do Halo or Half-Life when it comes to inventory and Thief simply belongs in the latter category.

Personally, I don't want to think too much bout it because if you really want realism, Garrett won't be able to carry half the stuff he's used to carrying around. Sure, he can have a sling bag of some sort but unless his cape has pockets all over em, there's just no way.

A Halo version of Thief could be an interesting approach. Maybe they'd incorporate it into the Difficulty levels instead of just adding more Objectives? I dunno.

Most things in Thief never included animations. For ex., opening a door, picking up objects, dropping them also, using a key on a door, etc... or unless I'm missing something...hearing garret rapping for not being.....

Err....You apparently didn't read the posts on TDS' annoyin lockpicking and ladder climbing animation that I was talking bout with the others.

So, 'Garrett Rapping' is taking off, huh? I want a dollar everytime someone says it! :D

esme

05-28-2009, 05:40 AM

20 rope arrows ! :eek:

most city missions I can manage with 1, maybe 2 if there's an awkward multiple jump section

I think the most I've ever used was 5 and that was a T2 fan mission with wooden beams over lava being the only way to get to the objective ... and I retrieved all the arrows on the way back

thats the nice thing about rope arrows, you use them over and over without even thinking about it

I suggested the double headed rope arrow thingy in the "THE ARMOURY: Tools of Your Trade" - Weapons/Equipment Discussion Thread (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=88479) at this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=990474&postcount=87&highlight=twinned%20arrow)

I also suggested this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaages ago at TTLG http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1673260#post1673260

I'm liking the way the idea is catching on though

but in the interests of getting any kind of rope arrow in thief 4 I'll waive copyright :D

....one of you taffers would only nick my profits anyway :lmao:

Skaruts

05-28-2009, 08:37 AM

Err....You apparently didn't read the posts on TDS' annoyin lockpicking and ladder climbing animation that I was talking bout with the others.

So, 'Garrett Rapping' is taking off, huh? I want a dollar everytime someone says it! :D

I did.
When I talked about the game having to take over player controls to place the model correctly, I was taking those situations in consideration, though I didn't say it. It was there that I learned that everyone seems to have hated loosing control. Which may happen in every animations as you can see. (Animations that don't relate to garret's body, I mean)

The '20 rope arrow' thing is a sensitive subject. I mean, you either do Halo or Half-Life when it comes to inventory and Thief simply belongs in the latter category.
I know. :p But I'm not saying I want full realism, that would make the game extremely hard and no much fun. If there was full realism, loot objects would make lots of noise inside the bag, for ex.
It's just the the most obvious stuff that makes me want that. Besides, like esme said, you only need a few for each level, and you can always take them back. Except maybe if it were the two-arrows-rope.

PiCroft

05-28-2009, 04:12 PM

I'd love it if they brought back the steampunk feel of thief 2. I like TDS but it had a very medieval feel, like every piece of advanced technology brought about in T2 was magically vaporised.

I found the mechanical and steam-powered security devices very immersive and creepy. It also adds exxtra stuff for the player to do. A lot of the T2 missions had devices and machines that the player could manipulate, lights could be turned off and alarms could be shut down.

vasanx

05-28-2009, 09:42 PM

I suggested the double headed rope arrow thingy in the "THE ARMOURY: Tools of Your Trade" - Weapons/Equipment Discussion Thread (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=88479) at this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=990474&postcount=87&highlight=twinned%20arrow)

I also suggested this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaages ago at TTLG http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1673260#post1673260

I'm liking the way the idea is catching on though

but in the interests of getting any kind of rope arrow in thief 4 I'll waive copyright :D

....one of you taffers would only nick my profits anyway :lmao:

This is not goin to work. And don't think for a second that I'd do an out of court settlement esme. You better be ready coz my guys are from Wolfram & Hart. :naughty:

Seriously though, I hope EM has read our rope arrow dilemma by now.

It would be nice if EM can start a thread here that will list down all the things they have noted from our rantings. What you guys think?

Hypevosa

05-28-2009, 09:52 PM

you could 'Prime' a rope arrow.... equip the arrows, press a button, and when you click to fire garret taps the metal against the wood of the bow, setting off the magic mechanism that makes the rope drop, then holds the end of the rope in his left hand with the bow, and fires. This leaves the rope in the curve of the bow, and allows him to use the bow as a zipline when he ties it to something around him. Or if we don't want thatt he can just pull the bow over across his shoulders, and then jump down and swing into the wall, and climb up the rope... But that's what makes most sense to me if we want to keep the rope arrows AND use them for horizontal crossings.

vasanx

05-28-2009, 10:05 PM

I did.
When I talked about the game...

Duly noted.

I know. :p But I'm not saying I want full realism, that would make the game extremely hard and no much fun. If there was full realism, loot objects would make lots of noise inside the bag, for ex.
It's just the the most obvious stuff that makes me want that. Besides, like esme said, you only need a few for each level, and you can always take them back. Except maybe if it were the two-arrows-rope.

I know you know but I wanted to compare Halo and HL2 to show two, very, different inventory systems.

HL2 could have easily carried 20 rope arrows if Gordon needed it and HL2 fans would have still ignored it. It still works in that world. Your :p Sir, is totally unwarranted. Mine however, isn't...:p

That's the problem with two headed rope arrows. You can only use em once. Instead of making them into some exotic or insanely expensive arrow, why don't we just stick to our regular rope arrows?

When you need/want to do horizontal scaling, Garrett selects two rope arrows from the inventory (I dunno how that will be implemented) and ties both end. There you go.

And, if you really love your rope arrows, you can always scale the rope until the middle where the knot presumably is and either cut, undo the knot with one hand or chew through it.

This will result in Garrett doin a Tarzan swing before crashing through a window and scare the bejesus out of a half-naked Lady Rumford in the shower. :naughty:

Hypevosa

05-28-2009, 10:20 PM

tying 2 rope arrows would not work... no knock means no bow, and the fletching would get all messed up meaning unreliable trajectory...My suggestion above even assumes that the rope's weight won't effect the trajectory terribly (probably just means you could only really shoot the arrow as far as the rope extends... which makes sense anyways.)

VIKTORIA

05-29-2009, 06:30 AM

I think it was mentioned,refered to as loot glint

A beautiful phrase... just a horrible concept. :D

LightWarriorK

05-29-2009, 07:34 AM

Yes, I really hated the whole loot system of TDS. The "glint," the fact that you were informed in-mission how much was left, the fact that there were "special" items as opposed to just being of more value.....

I'm hoping that they really rework the whole system.

Master Taffer

05-29-2009, 10:48 AM

The percentage loot system always really irked me. There's no realistic way Garrett would have this "thief sense" that would tell him exactly how much profitable swag was left in a mission. And the goal of stealing 10%, 30%, 60%, and 90% of the loot int he mission was stupid by proxy. Thief 1 & 2 had it right in that regard. "Steal X amount of loot" is the way to go.

Equally irksome is the "steal 3 special loot items" goal. Is it that hard to write something in the goals section involving specific loot? Here, I'll do it right now:

Rutherford Manor

Find a way into the Rutherford family vault to gain access to the Opal.
You're infiltrating the manor to swipe the Bloodline Opal, don't leave without it.
Lord Julian at the Inn mentioned Lord Ember had another Rutherford Medallion. A matched set will be twice as profitable.
Lord Arlek painted a portrait of Mortimer the Mad for the Rutherfords many years ago and would be valued by an Arlek collector. (Hard Only)
The Captain of the guard recently won a Gilded Helm in a competition that should be worth a pretty penny, take it.(Expert Only)
The Rutherfords are one of the oldest and richest of the noble families. They likely have many trinkests worth stealing. Steal atleast 2,500 in loot.
You're a thief, not a murderer. Don't kill anyone.
When you're done, leave by the front gate.

There, done. It just takes a bit of effort.

The loot glint is one of the complaint the Thief community had that I wasn't so bothered by. It made searching the level for loot easier, thus negating some of the challenge. This is a drawback, yes, but I'm not entirely opposed to a method of identifying loot from junk.

Perhaps the glint would have been better if it showed up when Garrett was a close distance away from the object and looked at it for a certain amount of time. For example, Garrett comes upon a dining table littered with plates and glasses, some junk and some loot. If he gets close to teh table and starts scanning it with his eyes, the glint will appear after looking at the swag for maybe 2 or 3 seconds. This way it is closer to Garrett appraising everything with his eyes, and not having a "Thief-Sense" that tingles and allows him to spot loot from a mile away.

Added: And perhaps the distance involved with the glint can shift depending on what difficulty you're playing on. On normal difficulty, you may be able to see the "glint" from a longer distance, like 15 feet. On hard, the proximity might be close, somewhere like 7-5 feet. That way it's still up to you to spot potential swag in a room then go investigate it. On expert, loot glint would be turned completely off. If you're playing on expert, then you are playing for the true challenge and shouldn't need any game assistance.

Also, the glint should be subtle, not like it was in Deadly Shadows. Perhaps a shine along its surface or soemthing as such.

DarknessFalls

05-29-2009, 12:17 PM

Hypevosa

05-29-2009, 12:34 PM

I think loot glint was well intended though it removed some of the challenge. If you've played the mission where you listen in on Truart and Karass' conversation at the mechanist cathedral, then you might remember that there's a tin plate... which looks exactly like a tin plate, under a table. It's actually the donations plate, and considered to be treasure. Personally, if it's supposed to be treasure, I think it should be obvious by it's color/decoration, being a coin, etc. The same could be said with some of the plates, as they can be easily seen as just decorative, what thief bothers taking extremely fragile china... how's it not going to get broken in the huge sack Garrett has to carry around to hold all the loot in? Why is a tin plate that was used to take donations treasure? I mean, why can't I just take all the gold/silver/copper that's IN the plate?

I think if there is loot glint, it should only be applied to things that aren't OBVIOUSLY loot to begin with, and are actually visible/ within reach. I don't want the secret treasure in the dark alcove above the sanctuary to be gleaming at me when I'm on the bottom floor if you catch my drift.

Master Taffer

05-29-2009, 12:36 PM

Good job with the Rutherford Manor description with loot descriptions. I also strongly prefer that method.

As for loot glint, I won't be sad when it's gone in T4. When I saw a blinking beacon of light up on some 2nd balcony from the 1st floor in T3, I could only roll my eyes. T2 had it right; the valuable stuff could be determined by it's appearance alone. Stick with that and T4 will be golden (no pun intended). ;)

PS: Reserving "no loot glint" for Expert would not be my preference. If I want to play Normal difficulty, I should not have to suffer through a loot glint experience. Either don't have it at all, or make it a toggleable gameplay option that is turned off by default, imo.

Actually, not everything valuable in TMA could be identified by sight alone. Problem was T2 actually pulled a fast one on returning players by making some junk from the previous game into loot in T2. It was only after my 3rd playthrough of Running Interference, after I had knocked out everyone in frustration and was digging through the level like someone rummaging through a trash can, that I had figured this out. Some old junk plates from TDP were now loot, and the junky looking "flour bag" in the kitchen was now worth 45 gold. At that point I cursed LGS for such a dirty trick and moved on. It still irks me to this day.

And as for the "make it optional" arguement that has popped up around here on a wide range of features, I can only say "No." Either impliment something or don't. Having a bunch of menu tabs in the option for "activate this, activate that" is a piss poor idea. I've seen it range from graphical cues to enemies in the game. "Make it optional" is not a valid suggestion and should be stricken from arguements. If you want to shape a game's gameplay to tailor it to yourself, then go type up a game design doc and try and sell it to a studio.

Platinumoxicity

05-29-2009, 01:38 PM

And as for the "make it optional" arguement that has popped up around here on a wide range of features, I can only say "No." Either impliment something or don't. Having a bunch of menu tabs in the option for "activate this, activate that" is a piss poor idea. I've seen it range from graphical cues to enemies in the game. "Make it optional" is not a valid suggestion and should be stricken from arguements. If you want to shape a game's gameplay to tailor it to yourself, then go type up a game design doc and try and sell it to a studio.

There's nothing wrong with making things like loot glint optional. Those who want to ruin the whole "treasure finding" part of the missions can use the loot glint. Those who want to actually search for stuff can deactivate it. It's that simple. Also things that are important to the story such as books, papers and mission items should not have the glow they had in TDS. Maybe that could be also an option that can be turned on if you want to play speedrun style. You don't have to use the options that make the game easier if you don't want to.

I would never use either of them though. :)

Master Taffer

05-29-2009, 01:44 PM

There's nothing wrong with making things like loot glint optional. Those who want to ruin the whole "treasure finding" part of the missions can use the loot glint. Those who want to actually search for stuff can deactivate it. It's that simple. Also things that are important to the story such as books, papers and mission items should not have the glow they had in TDS. Maybe that could be also an option that can be turned on if you want to play speedrun style. You don't have to use the options that make the game easier if you don't want to.

I would never use either of them though. :)

I've got a bigger issue with the "make it optional" approach in general. As I've said, I've seen it range from things that range from simple visual cues like "loot glint" to actually making it optional which enemies are in the game and which gameplay mechanics are implimented (ie, lockpicking), which is utterly absurd. While things like loot glint would fall in a very reasonable slot if were made optional, the option itself has the potential to be abused by many of the fanboys that populate these forums.

Luckily any game designer in his right mind wouldn't make the later examples optional. I'm more oppose to the prospect of "make it optional." I agree that loot glint could very feasably and reasonably be made optional, I just hate the idea of people using the prospect.

Platinumoxicity

05-29-2009, 02:10 PM

I've got a bigger issue with the "make it optional" approach in general. As I've said, I've seen it range from things that range from simple visual cues like "loot glint" to actually making it optional which enemies are in the game and which gameplay mechanics are implimented (ie, lockpicking), which is utterly absurd. While things like loot glint would fall in a very reasonable slot if were made optional, the option itself has the potential to be abused by many of the fanboys that populate these forums.

Luckily any game designer in his right mind wouldn't make the later examples optional. I'm more oppose to the prospect of "make it optional." I agree that loot glint could very feasably and reasonably be made optional, I just hate the idea of people using the prospect.

Sooo... What's your opinion on loot glint and mission clues then? You don't want them optional so which do you want them, on or off? :confused:

Skaruts

05-29-2009, 02:11 PM

I believe his point wasn't how he wanted it. I agree with Master Taffer. Having a bunch of options that will or may considerably change the game itself isn't a good idea at all. It's not the same as having the (sugested here) 3rd/1st person camera option under Gameplay options, or a Fog on/off under Graphics options or even a keyboard-mouse/gamepad option under controls. It's rather like having a totally unnecessary set of "tools", probably in the wrong hands, and it's a waste of dev time and resources.

Either they make it glinting very very very wisely, or not glinting at all. I totally prefer the latest, provided that they consider actually making objects distinguishable in many consistent ways.

There are several "rules" in making games which I don't know as well as EM must know, but one of them is that a game must be objective rather than subjective. There's a point in a game and if the players fail to see the point, then the game must be failure. This kind of options would create a certain subjectivity to it, and that wouldn't be good.

(I hope I used the right words, english is not my language.)

Master Taffer

05-29-2009, 02:18 PM

Sooo... What's your opinion on loot glint and mission clues then? You don't want them optional so which do you want them, on or off? :confused:

I don't want loot glint as it was in Thief 3, but some sort of loot recognition is a wise decision as long as it's well done. This is of course provided that they don't make the loot obvious in game like in TDP, which would make appraisal easy for the player.

Sierra Oscar

05-29-2009, 02:22 PM

Either they make it glinting very very very wisely, or not glinting at all. I totally prefer the latest, provided that they consider actually making objects distinguishable in many consistent ways.

As long as the objects were actually fairly distinguishable in-game apart from "special" loot or the like, I would probably be happy.

ToMegaTherion

05-29-2009, 02:46 PM

Master Taffer

05-29-2009, 02:50 PM

I continually fail to see why people would want, in the fourth game in a series, game designers to refuse to give us control of our gaming experience. I'm pretty sure by now that I know better than them (and everyone else here) how I want to play Thief. I can see it in a game I haven't played before, because then the designers might know better than me, but not in episode 4.

Considering how much disagreement there is on this Thief 4 forum, not even every Thief fan wants to play the game the same as you. It's up to the developer to make the best game possible that will please as many consumers who enjoy the genre. Following one person or group because "they know best" is the path to failure.

ToMegaTherion

05-29-2009, 03:02 PM

It seems to follow therefore that more options is a good idea...

Master Taffer

05-29-2009, 03:04 PM

It seems to follow therefore that more options is a good idea...

Or would result in a sloppy game without distinctive polish or focus.

Skaruts

05-29-2009, 04:06 PM

Or would result in a sloppy game without distinctive polish or focus.

This is a good short way of stating what I meant before.

It wouldn't give you control over your gaming experience, it would give you spoilers instead.

crazy_bex

05-29-2009, 04:43 PM

Ok, I'm not an expert on technical aspects of the game, but here are a few things I was dissapointed with in DS and would like to see amended in Thief 4

-The City thing was a really good idea and really changed the dynamics of the game for the better. Please dont drop this idea because it really added to the fun of the game. What I will say is, that it was a really good idea but not given its full potential. The maps just weren't big enough and there werent near enough houses to loot or places to explore (too many doors with nothing behind them) and in Audale all there was was the goldsmith's shop. I would like to see something like in Thief 2 with a large continuous city with no load scenes, more rooftop areas and houses to loot. It was more like a small town in DS than a city. Make it bigger.

-The shadows were a brilliant idea, but I felt that most places were too dark and I had to rely on the mechanical eye almost all the time to do anything because you just couldnt see a thing. I'd like to see a variety of dark and light and make the dark places so that you can actually see where you're going.

-The missions were just too small in DS. And the load scenes really ruined it because it just separated the missions out and felt like you were in two or three different places instead of one. Also activity in one section didnt have any effect in the others, which really restricted gameplay (ie in Thief 1 and 2 the guards could chase you from one end of the mission to the next, and alerted each other in the process which could not have been possible in DS because the load scene provided an easy getaway). And like I said, the missions just weren't big enough which was a real let-down in terms of exploration and satisfaction.

-The cutscenes in Thief 1 and 2 were brilliant and all put together, were like movies in their own right, which were a real pro to the plot of the game. Please bring these back, with the original style of animation - that was really cool!

-The dagger was disappointing because it restricted what you could do. It made combat much more difficult, and with the sword you could break things such as doors. Please at least consider bringing the sword back.

-The absense of rope arrows was a real dissapointment because the rope arrow was more ideal to a Thief living in the middle ages than some rubber gloves, which would be more suited to a Thief in the 21st century. Also the Climbing Gloves were too restricted and the rope arrows were alot easier to use.

-Please whatever you do, dont get rid of Garrett as the main character. Simply because the whole game series is based and built around Garrett. It would be like taking Mario out of Super Mario. You'd be taking away the whole point of the game and it would become a mere spin off, just like Yoshi's Island and Princess Peach.
I also think that there is still so much more yet that can be done with Garrett's character. We've only really discovered a small portion and I reckon there's so much more to expand on. ie Who were his family? Discover a big secret about his past? Was he ever in love? Maybe he could find out more about himself? Something could come along and really challenge him inside? Doctor Who has been going for 46 years and the character is STILL going strong even now, so why couldn't we keep Garrett going? It would be a really bad move to get rid off Garrett in my opinion. He is 'Thief' and as far as I can see, nobody else could take that place. I certainly wouldn't bother buying Thief 4 if I knew Garrett wasnt in it. People here are saying "Garrett's run his course" but if we have some really excellent writers making the story then that doesnt have to be the case.

-The Factions idea was good but poorly executed. There wasn't nearly enough to do and the way to get favour was just too simple. There should have been proper side missions or something, which could have been optional missions in their own right, instead of finding a plant in the docks. Yawn. Too easy.
Also, the Hammerite's faction base was excellent, very good size, however the Pagan base failed in comparison. It was way too small and not as impressive by far. I think the bases need to be roughly the same size and maybe make more than one for both?

-The graphic detail of the loot was brilliant but sadly, I only got to see it in the museum because of the higher level of brightness compared to everywhere else. Instead of the blue thing, I think it would be more impressive if the whole object highlighted in colour with the lusture being visible, like in the museum. Then it would look more real.

-Also, the dropping of some of the items was a real loss, such as the slowfall potion. However I didn't take too much to the invisiblity potion because it made it too easy and the scouting orb was abit pointless, the ommissions of which I'm not too bothered about in TDS.

-It was also a shame that Garrett couldn't eat food anymore which was a good idea, especially in Thief 2 when it restored health.

-The engine for Thief DS had brilliant graphics but it caused too many problems, such as the game being choppy and problems with animation and restrictions on mission sizes. A better engine would be a good idea, as long as it doesnt require really high specifications because alot of people, including myself dont have them and its not worth spending £100s to upgrade your computer for it.

-I dont see having the third person camera as a problem AS LONG as it doesnt interfere with the first person camera as people have pointed out.

-The Xbox idea wasnt a good one because in doing so, it restricted what could be done with the game for PC because it had to fit the lower requirements of the Xbox. Maybe after the game is made it can THEN be considered for consoles but not until its been made for the PC first.

JeffTheTaffer

05-29-2009, 06:27 PM

Well if they stick the story line its gonna be hard to bring back Garret. Most likely it will be the little girl at the end that becomes his Keeper disciple. Alot of fans will geek with no Garret.

However it would be nice to them wipe out DS and pretend it never happened. I hated the whole story line with the way the Keeper's were portrayed. They seem to have lost the peaceful Zen like quality of the original game. The Keeper assassin's was stupid.
The Keepers trained not just in stealth but in combat as well. Why not just a single Keeper that has the same abilities as Garret hunt him down. Might have made room for a multiplayer addition to the game.

If only I was the CEO of Eidos. My first memo would state,

Referendum to Thief 4 developers:

Thief 4 will be designed and released for PC only. Any mention of Xbox,PS,Wii,or DS by any member of the Thief 4 team will result in immediate termination of employment.

Sigh,

If I were only king for just a day.

Skaruts

05-29-2009, 09:35 PM

Referendum to Thief 4 developers:

Thief 4 will be designed and released for PC only. Any mention of Xbox,PS,Wii,or DS by any member of the Thief 4 team will result in immediate termination of employment. I would willingly suport you on that :p (with a shotgun ahahah)

-The shadows were a brilliant idea, but I felt that most places were too dark and I had to rely on the mechanical eye almost all the time to do anything because you just couldnt see a thing. I'd like to see a variety of dark and light and make the dark places so that you can actually see where you're going.
I've seen this being pointed out before. I believe that this depends on each person's monitor. I don't know which monitor you have, but I do know that if you have a cheap HP LCD then you can't see a thing even with brightness maxed and the lights out.
I never had that problem. I still have an old Samtron, I have brightness usually at 25 and I have to adjust it slightly down for Thief games, so that I can just barelly see the walls in a completely dark area. If it's too dark I still have about 80 brighter levels.

So, I rly don't think that is an issue from the game. In fact, personally, I hope they keep it just as dark.

GmanPro

05-29-2009, 10:02 PM

I'd like to play Thief with the gamma/brightness turned way down but if I do then I can't make out any details. On the other hand, if I turn it up to the point where I can actually see what I'm doing then it becomes unrealistically light. Not really a big deal because I just pretend that because Garrett spends so much time in the dark, his eyes have grown accustomed to it and so he can see better in low light than most.

Platinumoxicity

05-30-2009, 12:36 AM

I recently found out this. It's very simple and I feel like an idiot since I didn't notice it before: :mad2:

1.Thief 1 and Thief 2 had loot that was mostly very distinctly shaped and textured to point out that the item was valuable. Gold and silver had distict metallic color, gems were shiny or translucent in many colors and goods were designed to stand out from normal objects because they were rare.
=> That's why:
2.T1 and T2 had frob highlighting that made the entire object fullbright, so that the player could "feel" if the object is what they want to frob even in total darkness.

3. ????

4.TDS wanted to change to the ridiculous azure frob highlight that used some weird shader that painted the entire object blue, ignoring it's original texture and bump-mapping. The reason to change the frob highlighting is Insert valid reason here
=>That's why:
5.TDS had loot glint because it was impossible to determine whether an object was valuable or not since the azure frob highlight hid the texture and color of valuable items and there were also valuable objects that had the same shape as their worthless counterparts.
=> That's why:
6.PROFIT ???

What the taff were they thinking?

ToMegaTherion

05-30-2009, 12:37 AM

I don't see anything sloppy or unpolished about making a game with a set of rules and then having an options screen which goes along the lines of "We haven't really designed the game with these options in mind, but we recognise that you might want to play around with them; this is mainly for veterans of the series who know what they want by now".

I'm pretty sure when people come across a gameplay mechanic that really frustrates them these days they don't think "I must persevere because video games should be objective and if I don't like it then I just have to live with it", they think "let's mod this so I enjoy it more." Putting in options is pretty similar.

Skaruts

05-30-2009, 12:56 AM

Do you see games coming out with those features? Hardly.

Forget about it, man. Rest asured that the most they will do is either one way or the other. They won't get both ways at your disposal. Like I said: they would most likely loose some time giving us a useful feature like having 1st/3rd person available in the options, than loosing time with something that they surelly will consider of little use.
That feature means more dev code, less dev time, less dev money.

Actually, even the 1st/3rd person seems hard to believe that they will ever loose time putting it in the options rather than in an ingame hotkey as usual. They'll probly have tons of other features to worry about that are much more important and relevant than even this one.

They struggle against two monsters here: a monster called hardcore fans and a monster called Budget. Even though the former may come to influence the game in many ways, the latest will force them to take decisions. And they will certainly not attend to every single wish that's around here. And if they did, then Master Taffer's last post would surely turn out to be a profecy.

You can always mod the game like you said. Or look for mods for your tastes. But if you can't mod or find a mod for you, then you have to live with it. I always found things I hated in every single game. I lived with it.

ToMegaTherion

05-30-2009, 01:20 AM

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom

05-30-2009, 02:19 AM

Master Taffer, I loved the way you wrote the objectives.

I remember when I happened to make my way to that 'Mortimer the Mad' painting. I was thinking, who the heck would know to pick this thing up? I caught the tidbit in the mission about the gilded helm, but the mention of the painting never got to me for some reason. I mean, I read it, but I just wasn't paying enough attention to realize that it was a painting in that very level that I could take. I found it entirely by accident. It's not unrealistic that Garrett would know some history about a famous painting being there or anything. So yeah, the whole 'take special loot' thing has got to go. Give me some sort of hint! 'Special' says nothing.

I'd like to play Thief with the gamma/brightness turned way down but if I do then I can't make out any details. On the other hand, if I turn it up to the point where I can actually see what I'm doing then it becomes unrealistically light.

I loved having buttons on my keyboard to raise or lower gamma/brightness on the fly in T1 and 2. I don't remember TDS having those buttons :(

Seriously, somebody has to make a Thief rap mp3. Use plenty of uh uh's and guard coughs and try to rhyme actual dialog from the game. Throw it all together with a phat beat. Extra points if the Seaside Manor music is used in there. I can totally imagine that playing with a cool beat and Garrett going "uh uh uhuh oooh" It would be so cool.:p:thumb: Anybody know how to extract the dialog out of the games?

Skaruts

05-30-2009, 03:22 AM

Time & effort are reasonable reasons for options not to be given, but a certain Taffer was apparently suggesting that that it wouldn't even be desirable to have such options on principle rather than due to practicalities. I submit that this is a silly position.

I agreed with him cuz I think it's not a practical solution and I agreed that it's not a good principle too. I think being able to distinguish loot like in thief 2 is a much more practical and valid solution. Pretty much straigh forward.

I hope I didn't sound rude in my last post, but I rly think that having a loot-helper in options seems like providing the player with an immersion spoiler, analogous to having some option to toggle a "map position highlight" or a "show loot percentage" option. It would also ruin lazy and greedy ppl's gameplay experience, imo.

ToMegaTherion

05-30-2009, 03:47 AM

OK, I just think it's about time that video gamers grew up enough to take responsibility for their own gameplay experience in some ways. Especially in the fourth episode in a series; that seems a good place to start. But maybe you're right and not enough people can be "trusted" to choose better options than the designers force upon them. This perhaps corresponds somewhat with what I've touched upon elsewhere when talking about alarm systems: it was Ion Storm's philosophy to avoid "cascading blunder" scenarios, presumably because most people would just reload instead of dealing with the consequences. I've criticised that philosophy, but maybe it really is true, and most people would just reload.

I also guess that we have different ideas of immersion... things that are obviously unrealistic gameplay mechanics like loot glint and map highlights don't bother me at all, I think because in general it is much harder to keep your bearings and find things in a video game than it would be in real life, and so I just filter out stuff to make it easier, whereas if things are really trying to be too realistic, I get very frustrated because I realise that it wouldn't be as hard if I was really there.

Add to that the fact that I really don't like having to track down the last few bits of loot required to get the objective requirement, and you'll see why I find loot glint quite nice. There are other reasons I rather like the loot glint, and would be sad to see it go. On the other hand, I'm sure that enough people wouldn't want it, so that if it was in the game it'd be rather mean to make in non-optional.

Regarding the concept of such things as being "cheating", in some sense, I see what you mean, but it does seem rather perverse that if I want to play a Thief game in which I don't have to frustrate and bore myself by scouring high and low for loot, I'm out of luck. I think when you have a game like Thief which has a lot of different elements, such as ghosting, blackjacking, occasional wholesale murder, loot collecting, exploring, and so on, it's being a little hopeful to expect everyone to enjoy every element, and so it'd be nice if each element could be reduced somehow without affecting the others. I reckon that in this particular case, though, loot glint could be abandoned in favour of making the Loot Collection difficulty independent of other difficulties, so that I could just reduce the amount I have to steal.

massimilianogoi

05-30-2009, 03:58 AM

You forget the ability to detach from the stairs immediately, as in Thief 2/1, while in Thief DS it makes all the climb animation before: that's not good.

It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:

The levels were too small
>Missions in Thief 1 and 2 were enormous. There were no load screens splitting the levels up causing havok to the AI whenever you left one area and came back to it to find nothing had changed since you left.
>Missions like The Lfie of the Party, where you could explore a huge portion of the city and the entire interior of an epic castle all in one level and without load screens splitting it up were great. We want more of that.
______________________
Third Person Camera
>This is not what Thief is about. You as the player are supposed to assume the role of Garrett. Put on his boots and become him. You are supposed to feel like YOU the player are inside the mansion trying not to get caught
as opposed to sitting in your comfortable chair sipping Dr Pepper and chomping down on Twinkies enjoying a casual gaming session. If you don't like playing games that way, stop shouting that we are selfish for wanting Thief to be the way we like it and go play games that you like. Go play any number of other games that are stumbling over themselves trying to accommodate your needs.
>I now also think that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky and generally uncoordinated feel of the first person mode in TDS. Whatever the case may be, the movement in this game is not a fluid or precise as in the first two games. Some call it "body awareness", but I don't think that's it. Technically, Thief 1 and 2 had a sort of body awareness as well, but it was done so much better.
______________________
No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
>Rope arrows were one of the coolest features of The Dark Project when it first came out. It was exiting being able to go to places which in previous first person shooter games would have been blocked off and inaccesible. Not only that
but it felt right. Its something a master Thief would have in his arsenal. The TDS engine couldn't handle them for whatever reason and so they were replaced with climbing gloves which were practically useless because they were
only usable on a tiny fraction of the surfaces in the game. And usually there was nothing to be gained from climbing any of the walls anyway. Not a bad idea, but poorly implemented.
______________________
No more Sword?
>Some people think the dagger was more suitable for a Thief. I can see where this view comes from, but I for one would like to have my trusty sword back. At least a short sword in any case. Its a good tool for breaking wooden boards
and repelling the undead.
>Not much to be said for this one, just meet us in the middle here EM and give us a short sword. Or a dagger AND a short sword.
______________________
City hubs
>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.
>The Thieving equipment was probably too cheap. I always could afford to load up my arsenal to the max for each mission (later in the game) and still have some gold left over.
______________________
Nerfed blackjack
>This is the most annoying aspect of the entire game for me. It feels broken. Why should I have to get right behind somebody and wait for the blackjack to be raised signaling that my strike will incapacitate my victim? Why can't
I smack said victim in the face?
>Why is it that when I flashbomb somebody, and they cover their eyes and stumble blindly about etc, I am not allowed to knock them out? They are blinded, they don't know where I am, so why can't I blackjack them? Why does their vision
magically come back to them instantly when I smack them with the blackjack? Then they spit some snarly comment about how weak I am with my soft blows. ITS COMPLETELY RETARDED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTICED BY THE QA TEAM!
>Also, why are guards impervious to the blackjack when they have their weapon out? They enter search mode and begin slowly scanning the premises for me (OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM) and yet a knock to the head from my
blackjack does nothing to them. Even from behind. I cannot get over how bad the blackjack feels in this game.
______________________
No more cutscene briefings
>Why take these out? They were awesome. Bring them back EM.
______________________
Immersion breaking loot percentage system
>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average value? Or
that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?
>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was also unnecessary.
______________________
No Burricks!?!?!?
>Where'd they go?
______________________
Garrett forgot how to swim?
>Come on Garrett. Get it together...
______________________
Less items for the arsenal
>I already mentioned rope arrows/vine arrows, but there were other items as well. TDS introduced the oil flask, which came across as clumsy to me. Hardly the delicate precision instrument that a master Thief would use.
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc
______________________
Factions
>Another good idea but poorly implemented.
>Shooting dust mites? Buying pagan respect by pouring my resources into their shrines? W. T. F.
>Why didn't you just hold on to the game for another year and make actual missions for us to do for these factions Ion Storm? Your faction system was sloppy and lazy and unprofessional. It felt like it wanted to actually be something
but was instead just thrown in there half finished just because...
______________________
Poor choice of engine
>Thief was never about being the next prettiest game. It didn't try to dethrone the king-of-the-hill of graphics because it knew that in another six months a new title would come along and nab the spotlight. Take away the pretty
graphics of TDS and what are you left with? Ion Storm should have picked an engine that can handle large environments. Besides that, the engine was too hardware intensive for what it provided.
______________________
The story/plot
>Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.
>The world was believable in Metal Age. There was more to do in the game world. More to interact with. Like that tip you could get about searching through people's trash because you might find some interesting info.

________________________________

All of this being said. I still found TDS to be an enjoyable game in its own right. For all its faults, at least it didn't feature regenerating health, an alternate protagonist and multiplayer.

One of the things I really enjoyed about it was that it added just a hint of RPG flavor to the mix. Exploring the city at your leisure, visiting fences to sell loot and black market shoppes to purchase your gear. Doing side missions like that blacksmith job, where you gotta nab the golden dagger. It was a good idea, but poorly implemented. All of this could have been fixed and polished and made perfect if only Ion Storm had held on to the game for another year.

I would say that I'm sorry for the long post, but I'm not. This needed to be said. If anyone else had some problem with TDS that I didn't. Feel free to add it here.

Master Taffer

05-30-2009, 09:28 AM

Low light visibility has always been a thorn in Thief's side since the very first game. Deadly Shadows had a way around it without adjusting the gamma ont he game, but the sounds the mechanical eye made while zoomed in were quite annoying. Perhaps some way of letting Garrett's eyes naturally adjust to the dark could be a solution? Standing still for a second in the dark might turn the gama up just enough for Garrett to make out the basic outline of his surroundings, instead of having to reach for the + and - keys. I've seen it done in games older than Deadly Shadows, so it seems doable.

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 11:49 AM

I loved those robots :p

They added more to the gameplay. With them, you now have to worry about enemies that you cannot beat in a sword duel or knock out with the blackjack or with gas arrows/mines. But you can take them out with water arrows, which become more valuable as a result.

They definitely added a lot to the gameplay and made you rethink your strategy if you ran into them. I missed them in TDS. The cameras especially

i remember being terrified of them at first since they were so difficult to take out of the picture compared to human guards or "monsters". i loved that because its not like they were impossible. a good fire arrow could destroy the cameras and the robots but the walking ones were an added difficulty compared to the humans because you could only really stop them from one small area on their back. it definitely made it much more of a challenge then someone walking by and clubbing them on the back...i think they should have some fractured remainder of the once glorious mechanist sect who still uses the machines. just that maybe they live outside of the city and have some secret hideout...perhaps they finished renovating the KD site? that would make me happy returning there for a third time

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 11:53 AM

Definitely true. ;) Even though I didn't like them much, I liked the dificulty they provided. Maybe that was why I loved the bank mission so much. Can't remember well enough...

even if the bank didnt have the robots, i'd still say it was just a really cool mission. in fact that was the one mission where i wished they didnt have the walking robots and just the cameras and lock. i loved how big that map was. i always climbed in through the roof but i never can remember the map no matter how many times i play so i always need to completely relearn it which adds to why its such a cool map

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 12:31 PM

Having them as factions who Garrett could actually be on friendly terms with did not ring true to me.

The living city concept was a noble idea, hadn't it been for the epic fail in the AI's behaviour. Towards the end of the game, the open cityscape was invariably a chaotic circus of the macabre, with Hammers, city guards, neutrals and Keeper assassins running amok, often attacking people ostensibly on their side for no immediately obvious reason. The world's economics were royally skewed, with gold having no practical purpose after the first few missions. And why has the world's greatest thief suddenly become the city's number one celebrity, recognized by sight wherever he goes?

The third-person perspective was a problem. As mentioned above, it did degrade first-person gameplay, and being able to see around corners thanks to the camera floating three meters away from you is a tad cheap. That said, if T4 is to have a third-person view, as long as it's implemented well and is optional, I won't mind.

It wasn't the mind-blowing journey through the dark underbelly of a pseudo-medieval/Victorian era fantasy city that the first two games were, but neither was it a failure by my standards. It was simply a tasty tuna salad sandwich following two slices of fried gold.

you sir, are a genius! that last part perfectly describes it. it was by no means mind-blowing. i was not amazed at TDS at all! but nevertheless i did have a lot of fun playing it. that final line is perfect. definitely two slices of gold...although it didnt come between it lol.

as far as the third person, the only time i used it was to see around corners. it was stupid. the leaning didnt work well at all and as someone stated earlier, it made u fall of ledges many times and u could even be seen. if u can be seen why not just walk out instead of lean?! i never played it on the computer, so i hope they make one for 360 cause i dont have money for graphics cards, but anyway, in order to lean u needed to hit left or right on the dpad. if u hit up, it would zoom in on ur mechanical eye. well everytime i tried to lean sideways, the stupid eye would zoom in if i didnt hit it just right (the problem with xbox dpads). and the only time i ever used the mechanical eye was because it was too dark and i was trying to see something. i understand it needed to be dark, it definitely increased the mood, but some parts were just way too dark to see anything. i've had to cut my game down to just playing at night because the slightest bit of light hitting the tv would ruin all visibility. even if i turned up the light in the game, that would just decrease the quality of the details. the mechanical eye should go back to being used with the scouting orb. i always loved trying to catch a glimpse of what garrett looked like in T2.

i completely agree with the city part. why was everyone so chaotic. i'd try and get to the next level and end up having to run and hide for five minutes to get away form people attacjing me when all i wanted to do was walk through the streets. why was garrett such a celebrity? and if he was so well-known as a thief, how the hell was he able to get an apartment and have no one harass him?! at least in T2 the ambush mission settled that.

also, idk if it was just hte xbox version or not (i have the computer version but have yet to try it on our new computer), but has anyone else had the problem with fire and the portals where u can see them through walls? i rented the game and it worked fine but when i bought my own copy there was this glitch. if there is a fire in the other room, u can see it through the walls. same goes for portals. so if there is something important i need to see, the fire/portal smoke just blocks it. its a huge turnoff from playing the game. :( it really takes away from the mood of it.

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 12:58 PM

I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...

dude! the mythic stuff like MADE the storyline. besides the great gameplay, thief had one of the best storylines if not THE best storyline of any game i've ever played. the magic stuff played a big part of that. just because u didnt think it was realistic, that shouldnt ruin the game for you. thief was never supposed to be realistic. for example people keep referring to victorian times and ****. i'm sorry but hte victorian times were in the 19th century. medieval times went until around 1400. and seriously, there werent any cities like the one in thief durting the medieval times. u think they had such big banks like the one in the bank mission?

anyway thief is what is commonly referred to as a steam-punk game...although it has a more medieval theme while steam-punk is generally victorian times. thief 2 kinda had a bit of modern tech in a victorian style but it still had medieval styled places too. it was a nice mix. the whole game is unrealistic in every aspect so you really shouldnt let that hinder any fun ur having.

sorry if it sounds like i'm flipping out. i'm not. ur a fellow thief fan so i have nothing but respect. anyone who is a big enough fan of thief to be talking about it in a forum eleven years after it came out is good in my books ;) i just think u shouldnt belittle such a major part of the game like that.

also, sorry i posted like 4 times in a row. i have no idea how to quote more than one person in the same post. like i hit multi-quote the other day to try it out and it did the same thing as regular quoting. anyway now i dont even see a multi-quote option. if someone could explain it to me it'd be a lotta help lol

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 01:15 PM

The only ghosts in TMA were no enemies. In Trail of Blood mission. And do you remember the map(I can´t remember the name) where you found secret library with that crying woman ghost? Oh man, she was not enemy, but I was scared as hell. One of very few places in TMA where i was frightened.

i'm guessing ur referring to the library in that mansion where in the first mission u just scope it out and cant kill anyone and then u go back for the following mission? in one of those i dont remember which one, i went through a secret hallway to get to the library and i hear all these ghosts and i dont see anyone. i turn around no one there. so i turn back to where i was and BAM theres a ghost in front of me out of nowhere! scared the **** outta me! anyway, i do remember that i WAS attacked by at least one ghost in that library. it fired some ghostly orb at me. i believe there were three ghosts total in that library. anyway, ghosts could be dangerous

crazy_bex

05-30-2009, 02:44 PM

One big thing that really let down TDS was the swimming absense. That really cut out alot of the fun the in the game and seriously restricted the player. Swimming was a huge part of the missions in Thief 1 and 2 and really enhanced Garrett's versatility.

If theres anything that should really be brought back, its the swimming and the rope arrows if anything.

DarknessFalls

05-30-2009, 02:56 PM

Actually, not everything valuable in TMA could be identified by sight alone. Problem was T2 actually pulled a fast one on returning players by making some junk from the previous game into loot in T2. It was only after my 3rd playthrough of Running Interference, after I had knocked out everyone in frustration and was digging through the level like someone rummaging through a trash can, that I had figured this out. Some old junk plates from TDP were now loot, and the junky looking "flour bag" in the kitchen was now worth 45 gold. At that point I cursed LGS for such a dirty trick and moved on. It still irks me to this day.

And as for the "make it optional" arguement that has popped up around here on a wide range of features, I can only say "No." Either impliment something or don't. Having a bunch of menu tabs in the option for "activate this, activate that" is a piss poor idea. I've seen it range from graphical cues to enemies in the game. "Make it optional" is not a valid suggestion and should be stricken from arguements. If you want to shape a game's gameplay to tailor it to yourself, then go type up a game design doc and try and sell it to a studio.
"Make it optional" is the only reasonable way to make more game players happy with the base mechanics of the game. You're taking my argument out of context, or going to an extreme, as a lot of your arguments seem to do.

For most games, I want a music audio slider separate from the main audio slider so I can turn off the music and just enjoy the game sound EFX. Is that an option that shouldn't exist, in your "devs know best / I should play it only how the devs make it" world? Surely, they spent the time and money to make the audio track, so I should be forced to listen to it, apparently? Are you saying you never use the available menu options in games? You just play everything at 'default' value?

For Thief hot topics like "loot glint" and the "lockpick mini-game", those would be simple-to-implement optons in the whole scheme of things; they would not be some extreme deviation from the core game the devs want us to play. It's when you get into the rediculous notions like, "I don't like swimming so I should have a menu option to turn swimming off" when it becomes a problem. Using common sense should help dictate what menu options should/could be there.

To not give 'any' options to the player would be rediculous, especially with all the modding and tweaks that occur these days because devs don't give more options at launch. In addition to the above, TDS probably should've had options to change the color and brightness of the blue frob highlight and the option to turn off the arrow trails among a few other things. Then you would be happy, and so would I. Or, if I'm to take your stance, they should've just launched everything the T2 way and not given you the option to have any of these things.

So for T2, you say it still irks you to this day that you can't determine what is loot. If T2 had a loot glint option, then you would be happy (you'd turn it on), and I'd be happy (I'd leave it off). How is that such a bad thing?

Platinumoxicity

05-30-2009, 03:06 PM

"Make it optional" is the only reasonable way to make more game players happy with the base mechanics of the game. You're taking my argument out of context, or going to an extreme, as a lot of your arguments seem to do.

For most games, I want a music audio slider separate from the main audio slider so I can turn off the music and just enjoy the game sound EFX. Is that an option that shouldn't exist, in your "devs know best / I should play it only how the devs make it" world? Surely, they spent the time and money to make the audio track, so I should be forced to listen to it, apparently? Are you saying you never use the available menu options in games? You just play everything at 'default' value?

For Thief hot topics like "loot glint" and the "lockpick mini-game", those would be simple-to-implement optons in the whole scheme of things; they would not be some extreme deviation from the core game the devs want us to play. It's when you get into the rediculous notions like, "I don't like swimming so I should have a menu option to turn swimming off" when it becomes a problem. Using common sense should help dictate what menu options should/could be there.

To not give 'any' options to the player would be rediculous, especially with all the modding and tweaks that occur these days because devs don't give more options at launch. In addition to the above, TDS probably should've had options to change the color and brightness of the blue frob highlight and the option to turn off the arrow trails among a few other things. Then you would be happy, and so would I. Or, if I'm to take your stance, they should've just launched everything the T2 way and not given you the option to have any of these things.

So for T2, you say it still irks you to this day that you can't determine what is loot. If T2 had a loot glint option, then you would be happy (you'd turn it on), and I'd be happy (I'd leave it off). How is that such a bad thing?

The only thing that I'd like to fix about your argument is that if they choose to go with the classic and awesome "fullbright" frob highlight instead of "paint solid blue" frob highlight, the loot glint becomes obsolete once again because you can examine the objects with your own eyes before even picking them up. :) You don't need loot glint at all because you can clearly see what's loot when you get close enough to frob them.

Skaruts

05-30-2009, 03:08 PM

DarknessFalls

05-30-2009, 03:18 PM

DarknessFalls, you're comparing usefull sound options to it... those sound options not only are useful, but they also are implemented in almost every game for years.

Have you even read the rest of that discussion?
I'm sorry, you somewhat caught me. I do admit I didn't read all the lengthy posts on the last two pages. I was simply replying to MasterTaffer's direct reply to me a couple pages back, as I don't agree with his logic.

To me, having an option to turn music off is similar to having an option to turning loot glint off. It makes my gameplay experience more enjoyable without really affecting his. Yet, MasterTaffer (at least as of two pages ago) was saying there shouldn't be any options. Don't give players the choice, etc., etc. Which I don't agree with.

[EDIT: Okay, I read the follow-ups (I had already read most), even these last few posts that haven't had anything to do with the 'options' argument, and it wouldn't have affected my post at all. MasterTaffer's position still seems clear that he ideally doesn't want options for the player.]

MasterTaffer also illogically wrote:

MasterTaffer wrote: If you want to shape a game's gameplay to tailor it to yourself, then go type up a game design doc and try and sell it to a studio.
So in response, I've already done my part to try and shape a game's gameplay by being on The Dark Mod team (Broken Glass Studios). Aside from that, I'm sure you'll recognize that it's not very realistic that me drafting up a design doc that is basically "Thief without loot glint, a lockpick mini-game or climbing gloves (or a few other things that were in TDS)" will do me much good; for I could just post those ideas here in this forum and hope the devs take them into consideration. Do us a favor and let them decide what they'll take from the community, unless EM has hired you to be their protector to stop all proposals from T2 fans. Which they haven't, or they'd just shut the forum down.

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 10:19 PM

anyone else remember using arrows the first time in TDS and realizing the arc was less realistic and smooth than before? why did they downgrade the arrows? u used to be able to watch the arrows in flight, in TDS there is just this magic line that quickly shoots the target. so lame

Taffer17

05-30-2009, 10:35 PM

[QUOTE=vasanx;1005898].
They really gotta fix this in T4. If the water arrow hits the flame and I don't care if it hits the blue part or the orange part of the flame, it has to go off. Period.

Unless it hits the wall next to the torch of course. Because that would mean you're a lousy shot and I ain't a lousy shot.

Of course u want to aim at the wall or the bracket! u ever spray water at a flame? it doesn't put out a flame. u need to get water on the surface that is burning. when it hits the wall it splatters onto the surface that is burning, same when u hit the bracket. it makes perfect sense and thats why i always aim at hte wall unless i'm like parallel with the wall in which case i am at the bracket instead

Vae

05-30-2009, 10:51 PM

DarknessFalls

05-30-2009, 11:48 PM

I'm not an archer, but I've heard that the trajectory in T2 wasn't very realistic. If it's not, I hope for Th4f they go back to the T2 way for gameplay reasons. It seemed funner to have the arc of the T2 arrows.

Platinumoxicity

05-31-2009, 12:12 AM

I ghosted TDP last week and I tried to play TDS yesterday. It was horrible! I tried to walk on the wooden floor over the start of the pagan sanctuary and I fell trough the 15cm wide hole between the planks. Also, I tried to sneak up the broken stairs in the shaman's room and I had 2 choices, either I try to jump over the buggy part of the stairs on the right, or I walk over the less buggy side on the left which is filled with beer bottles. I stumbled over the bottles and the shaman went to aggressive search mode immediately. That's taffin' shiet! I can mantle a man-height wall, and a cheist-height wall, sometimes even belly-height wall, but it's completely impossible to get over a knee-height obstacle without jumping and making a terrible racket. I also noticed how much problems Garrett has when walking up stairs. Any obstacle higher than 15cm and lower than 40cm is a major obstacle. And what's with the loud walk and 100% silent crouch and creep modes. Why isn't there a middle-ground like in T1 and T2?

The whole movement system in TDS feels like you're balancing yourself on a big ball at all times.

Vae

05-31-2009, 12:45 AM

Taffer17

05-31-2009, 08:31 AM

20 rope arrows ! :eek:

most city missions I can manage with 1, maybe 2 if there's an awkward multiple jump section

I think the most I've ever used was 5 and that was a T2 fan mission with wooden beams over lava being the only way to get to the objective ... and I retrieved all the arrows on the way back

thats the nice thing about rope arrows, you use them over and over without even thinking about it:

i loved picking up an arrow WHILE jumping off. i'd jump and right-click a split-second later. it made no sense but it was good for those arrows that would be too far to reach after jumping onto a ledge...as far as two sides ropes go, that would be one that wouldn't make sense to be able to retrieve. how would u get the arrow out of the side u started on? u'd have to carry a few or only have one situation to use it per level

CheesyCat

05-31-2009, 12:53 PM

Thief DS definately would have been much better if you could have moved around with the grace that you have in 1&2. Maybe leave out the speed jumping (although it is fun to train guards with).

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom

05-31-2009, 03:03 PM

ooh I forgot about that. I hated the speed jumping and how I seemed to move faster diagonally rather than forward.

NewHorizon

05-31-2009, 03:34 PM

The 100% silent crouch (even when running on any surface) in T3 is an absolute mockery of what THIEF is and should be about. I guess the "kiddies" needed something very simple to work with in order to get from point A to point B with out much trouble. :mad: UNBELIEVABLY WRONG. :mad:

Yup. I asked one of the T3 developers about this in an email and they told me how this came to be.

Essentially, someone higher up wanted creeping/crouching to be completely silent, but the developer maintained that it shouldn't be like that and should just barely audible to both the player and AI. I guess there was some back and forth on this debate. Someone would silence it, and the dev I spoke to would tweak it back to what it should have been. Ultimately, the 'higher up' had one of the programmers hard code the silent creep/crouch into the game....so even we modders couldn't fix it when the game was released.

Platinumoxicity

05-31-2009, 03:37 PM

Yup. I asked one of the T3 developers about this in an email and they told me how this came to be.

Essentially, someone higher up wanted creeping/crouching to be completely silent, but the developer maintained that it shouldn't be like that and should just barely audible to both the player and AI. I guess there was some back and forth on this debate. Someone would silence it, and the dev I spoke to would tweak it back to what it should have been. Ultimately, the 'higher up' had one of the programmers hard code the silent creep/crouch into the game....so even we modders couldn't fix it when the game was released.

They were almost as evil as Ubisoft with Far Cry 2. A game with the overall best map editor ever created and they refused to release an SDK and stopped patching the games flaws.

Zahr Dalsk

05-31-2009, 04:03 PM

My thoughts on the matter.

First, let me say that I consider Thief 2: The Metal Age to be one of the pinnacles of the gaming industry. Right up there with the first three Dawn of War games, Mass Effect, Mask of the Betrayer, KotOR, etc.

Anyways... the problems with Thief DS, as I see them.

Bad engine. The engine in TDP and TMA was a lot better. Sure, DS had better graphics, and in some cases brilliant atmospherics (St. Edgar's, Pagan Sanctuary, Overlook), but overall, particularly in terms of character movement and load times, it was inferior to TDP/TMA.

Thief games do not need brilliant graphics. Sure, really old graphics won't be very good for selling, so there will need to be improvement, but as I see it, it would be best to go with an engine not too advanced from that used in TMA. There's no need for HDR (lol gaming HDR, exactly the opposite of what HDR in photography means), fancy environmental details, etc. As long as it looks decent, I think most people will be content.

Killing the mystery. Too much information! Particularly with the keepers. TDP and TMA both had a lot of mystery to them, lots of things we didn't know nad had to speculate on. Then DS came along and started ruining it, filling in things that ought to have remained secret (such as details of the Keepers) without really making the setting more detailed, as TDP and TMA did.

They took away unnecessary detail! This might sound silly, but hear me out. In TDP and particularly TMA, there were lots of little background details that were pointless. Gervaisus' servant's shopping list, for example. The spare offices in First City Bank and Trust that didn't have anything in them. These were pointless but they made the game feel alive. They made it so much more immersive than a fancy graphics engine ever could. Bring those back!

Missing equipment; vine/rope arrows, scouting orbs, flares, etc. Gas mines and flash mines were neat too, but I guess with the Mechanists gone, those were gone as well.

Anyways... what DS did right:

Atmospheric feel in the following areas:

Pagan Sanctuary. The Cradle. St. Edgar's Church. The Clocktower. Overlook Mansion.

And the intro scenes for the Hammerites and Pagans.

But that's just about all it did right. I hope Thief 4 brings back the feel of TDP and TMA. (I also hope we find the occasional Mechanist, perhaps in a noble's manor. Hammerites are nice and all, but I loved how the Mechanists managed to blend into the Thief setting so smoothly.)

Tom Pladgett

05-31-2009, 05:00 PM

Interesting comments aboce on the 100%-silent crouch in TDS, I didn't know about that. Of course, it was hard to notice since, IIRC, a bug at the initial release had all difficulty levels actually revert to Easy, and the guards weren't really too perceptive even after the patch.

In the PC-only TDP and TMA (without analogue controls), there were actually a fairly large number of speeds you could use... Run (W), Walk (A), Fast Creep (W+Shift) Slow Creep (A+Shift), and all these doubled by standing/crouching. I believe the crouching slow creep was actually pretty much 100% silent even when crossing a metal grille. Then again, it was slow as a snail towing a 105mm howitzer. Seriously, you had to watch the screen for a while to notice you were actually moving.

morty343

05-31-2009, 07:56 PM

"Dissolving" zombies were LAME! (I ain't gonna give this one up.) Make 'em explode! (And do damage if you're too close!)

Climbing gloves needed more explanation as to what surfaces they worked on, and what didn't. Inventory limits with certain items needed better explanation. Lack of rope arrows was unfun. Loot/item highlighting was overdone, who needs that much hand-holding?

Levels TOO SMALL. Lack of variety in NPCs led to crazy clone colonies in the city (But I'm sure this will change.)

Zahr Dalsk

05-31-2009, 08:59 PM

Also: if we get another Cradle-style level, I'd propose making the Puppets, or their equivalent, get up automatically soon after being taken down. Actually, best of all would be if they were fully invincible. Much more frightening to be there picking a lock when one of those things could come around the corner any minute, rather than just flash bombing it and then strolling through the place with ease.

Skaruts

05-31-2009, 09:59 PM

I remember crouch NOT being silent, at least in TDS. Unless perhaps if you use the "walk slowly" key with it.

But anyway, that is something that has always annoyed me. Noone ever crouches to be silent. Walking slowly should be enough. But in all thiefs the walk slowly has always been noisy enough to not be a solution. And it shouldn't.

Besides, garrets shoes always went against the "hard-to-spot-a-keeper" thing. I'd like to see garret stop using hard shoes for once.

"Dissolving" zombies were LAME! (I ain't gonna give this one up.) Make 'em explode! (And do damage if you're too close!)

... are you rly sure about that? :scratch:

Platinumoxicity

06-01-2009, 12:28 AM

I remember crouch NOT being silent, at least in TDS. Unless perhaps if you use the "walk slowly" key with it.

But anyway, that is something that has always annoyed me. Noone ever crouches to be silent. Walking slowly should be enough. But in all thiefs the walk slowly has always been noisy enough to not be a solution. And it shouldn't.

Besides, garrets shoes always went against the "hard-to-spot-a-keeper" thing. I'd like to see garret stop using hard shoes for once.

... are you rly sure about that? :scratch:

No, the crouch and creep modes in TDS are 100%, absolutely silent. Never used moss arrows in TDS. What a shame.

And the zombies, YES! There's nothing more satisfying that shooting zombies with fire arrows and watching their different body parts fly to their respected directions! :D

esme

06-01-2009, 03:59 AM

i loved picking up an arrow WHILE jumping off. i'd jump and right-click a split-second later. it made no sense but it was good for those arrows that would be too far to reach after jumping onto a ledge...oh taff yeah, the thought of leaving a rope arrow behind causes major palpitations, I just played an FM and had to leave two in place as if I retrieved one I couldn't get to the other and vice versa and both left me too high to jump without taking damage there was a good half hour spent trying to find ways of retrieving them .... and I still may go back and try again

CheesyCat

06-01-2009, 05:12 AM

That super slow creep is what got me past the first haunt encounter in the bonehoard, well that and walk-creeping.

PJMaybe

06-05-2009, 10:59 PM

1. I haven't read through every post, there are far too many now, but one thing that bugged me about TDS was Garret himself. They had completely changed his character!

In T1 and T2 he was only interested in himself and and each mission was about getting himself some loot or saving his life (even though it also meant saving the whole city in some cases). If the keepers had a problem he would walk away from it unless they coould persuade him with a reason why he shouldn't.

In TDS he had lost this trait and seemed to actually *want* to help the keepers. Also, he went to the clock tower to destroy it. Why? He was not there for loot and the keepers didn't want him to go. He had become more of an action hero character and it just didn't sit right with me.

I don't want them to remake TDS but I would like T4 to carry on as though TDS hadn't happened.

2. Also, even though it has already been mentioned: I hated that awful frob, the system used in T1 and 2 was perfect. I loved looking at NPC bodies, architecture and loot close up. In TDS everything turned green. It was just plain BAD!

3. Leaning was a great feature which had become completely redundant in TDS. You could not stay in cover of darkness and it was easier to use the 3rd person angle to see where Garret couldn't possibly see. It totally broke the immersive feel of it all. If 3rd person is in T4 I'd like it to be an option which you cannot alternate to without restarting a mission.

4. Loot glint was ridiculous. It could be kept at short range (as someone has already suggested) and perhaps not so bright.

5. Climbing gloves made escaping too easy. At least with rope arrows if you were being chased it was very hard to aim your arrow into some wood and climb it before being caught.

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom

06-06-2009, 12:26 AM

3. Leaning was a great feature which had become completely redundant in TDS. You could not stay in cover of darkness and it was easier to use the 3rd person angle to see where Garret couldn't possibly see. It totally broke the immersive feel of it all. If 3rd person is in T4 I'd like it to be an option which you cannot alternate to without restarting a mission.

Don't forget, leaning in TDS made you freakin FALL right off of ledges. Also, there was no forward lean. I can't believe how badly they did leaning in that game. What the heck were they thinking? It was no different than just walking out and looking. There may as well have been NO lean button in TDS.

jay pettitt

06-06-2009, 01:10 AM

VIKTORIA

06-06-2009, 01:17 AM

And the zombies, YES! There's nothing more satisfying that shooting zombies with fire arrows and watching their different body parts fly to their respected directions! :D

Haha, yeah, and the realistic 'squelch/splat' sound that came with it was equally satisfying. :D

Browser

06-12-2009, 05:30 PM

Bravo GmanPro, I completely agree with opening post. Though I wouldn't mind if we could choose switch between first and third person views but third person does take the player out of the character and the game when it comes to immersion.

fayfuya

06-13-2009, 02:15 AM

You can't nock out some1 with a blackjack to the face because he may block it, you can' nock out warned guards because they are aware of the situation and it would get harder to make them go unconcious.
But i think that guards with helemts should be unvurnable for blackjacks, because the blackjack is too strong, unbalanced, it's too good for a game, it ruins the fun.
And if you nocked out someobdy with blackjack he should wake up after 5 minutes, it's much better this way

Platinumoxicity

06-13-2009, 02:37 AM

And if you knock out someone with the blackjack, he should wake up after 5 minutes. It's much better this way.

No it's not. Everyone would just have to stab the unconcious victims to death to prevent them from waking up. The only way they could wake up should be when another guard finds his sleeping buddy, then he can revive him. This encourages you to hide the bodies in very hard-to-find places.

PJMaybe

06-14-2009, 02:40 AM

And if you nocked out someobdy with blackjack he should wake up after 5 minutes, it's much better this way

This was discussed at great length on the Looking Glass forums some 6 years ago. If you were to allow the guards to wake up you would have to impliment a system as to where you could disbale them (i.e. tie them up) and that would mean an extra - and unecessary- step for the player. Why not just assume that the knocked out guard has been tied up and gagged.

Certainly though, the consequences of a guard finding a body or unconcsious person should be greater. I think if a body is found - or if a guard escapes when he is being attacked - they should run to a room which is a sort of barracks and it triggers an action where a load of guards are 'released' into the mission map.

Platinumoxicity

06-14-2009, 02:47 AM

They're in scale.
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/9418/cityl.png

gpagonewest

06-14-2009, 03:27 AM

This is where I differ from most from what I can gather. The one and only thing I wasn't keen on in Thief: The Dark Project, was all the monsters/zombies.

For me Thief: The Metal Age is the pinnacle of thievery, no zombies (except two in a tower on the Life of the Party level) and no fighting (if run on expert). Garrett is the ultimate thief, in and out without anyone knowing. He doesn't kill because that shows a lack of skill/professionalism, although he will if cornered.

We all have our opinions/hopes for Thief 4 and everyone's opinions are very valid. I just hope they go back to the Thief 2 mentality and stick to what Thief should be about, stealth/atmosphere and a bit of scariness here and there (only my opinion of course).

Oh, and scale, big maps, biiiiig maps. Life of the Party size maps please.

Hareton

06-14-2009, 08:26 AM

Thanks OP for writing it, hopefully devs will agree.
However there is no much hope for levels like The Life of the Party, because Dark Engine was unique wonder that hardly can be matched; and with today's multidude of graphical details possibilites are narrowed.
Still they could make quite large maps, I hope.

protoss.Ecorin

06-14-2009, 09:09 AM

What Thief 4 needs is good AI. I mean even in darkenss I should be able to spot a thief running about when he is standing right next to me (which was odd in TDS). The game should make you feel as much of a Thief as possible, not getting caught. Though it depends on the player, if there are no restrictions, some just like to kill everyone.

Master Taffer

06-14-2009, 09:19 AM

They're in scale.
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/9418/cityl.png

Good job, Plat. It's always been my complaint that Deadly Shadows made the City feel like a goddamn fishing village.

kkk1

06-14-2009, 10:26 AM

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6586/cityl.jpg
In TDS you can spend many hours in city, sneak in to houses, rob people, buy stuff in shops, read someones notes, hear conversations about news in City etc... In TMA? (I love that level but..) That was just 1 level filled with a colored boxes , nothing more.

jtr7

06-14-2009, 10:34 AM

In TDS you can spend many hours in city, sneak in to houses, rob people, buy stuff in shops, read someones notes, hear conversations about news in City etc... In TMA? (I love that level but..) That was just 1 level filled with a colored boxes , nothing more.

Wow, that's a pretty uninformed and extreme opinion. In less than hour I could explore all there is to explore in more than one TDS city section. :scratch: Either you haven't explored the Ambush/Courier map much, or your memory fails you.

kkk1

06-14-2009, 10:58 AM

Yeah there was Garett house and house another thief. Ah, yes, tavern. What else?

Platinumoxicity

06-14-2009, 11:00 AM

In TDS you can spend many hours in city, sneak in to houses, rob people, buy stuff in shops, read someones notes, hear conversations about news in City etc... In TMA? (I love that level but..) That was just 1 level filled with a colored boxes , nothing more.

I'm not saying that you're a tard but the obvious point was that they're in scale. The entire "City" in TDS, consisting of 7 different districts, is smaller than one district in T2! I'm not saying that the City has more districts and stuff to do in T2, but how is it possible that the "whole City" in TDS can fit inside one district in T2? Twice?

jtr7

06-14-2009, 11:04 AM

Yeah there was Garett house and house another thief. Ah, yes, tavern. What else?

You're serious?

You can't be. That's impossible.

kkk1

06-14-2009, 11:25 AM

You're serious?

You can't be. That's impossible.
serious.
can.
possible.

jtr7

06-14-2009, 11:58 AM

Do you have the game installed? I'm not going to list a hundred places you can go. There's no need to hurry to get to Garrett's apartment so you can spend a couple of hours exploring, or realize you can't speak with any authority on the matter.

Contradictio In Terminis

06-14-2009, 03:19 PM

you don't have to wait for the blackjack to be raised...I never did...or my timing was so dead on that I never noticed it...either way, the s.hit you guys complain about is purely aesthetics from what I see...

you don't like how the game was made? make your own damn game and stop complaining.

You are a consumer. Consume.

The End

jtr7

06-14-2009, 03:29 PM

Freedom of movement is not aesthetics. The complaints piss you off because you don't have the facts about our points of view to see the basis of our concerns.

A lot of people bought the game and were not happy at the changes, especially when they seemed unnecessary.

People are making their own games and quite a number of people haven't touched the official ones in years. If you ask them why, you'll get the complaints.

What's this "You are a consumer. Consume." crap? Are you a proud sheep, or something, thinking you are obligated to feed the entertainment industry for little return?

Nevermind the hypocrisy of your post. If you don't like our discussions, you can start your own forum and stop complaining here.

Contradictio In Terminis

06-14-2009, 03:36 PM

"Are you a proud sheep"

I'm a producer, one who is consumed. nuff said.

"Freedom of movement..."

I've played the game almost five times...and the only time I've experienced a problem with such things is when I am walking up stairs while crouched.

"The complaints piss you off because you don't have the facts about our points of view to see the basis of our concerns."

I've played the game, thusly, I have the facts...they "piss me off" because you people are talking out of the side of your mouths...

Consume and stfu. It's pretty simple.

You don't have the ability to do it yourselves so you piss and s.hit on other people when they don't live up to your expectations...

screw trying to please you mouth breathers.

Contradictio In Terminis

06-14-2009, 03:39 PM

oh yeah, learn the word "hypocrisy" before flinging it around like that...it makes you look like a fool.

the End

ToMegaTherion

06-15-2009, 12:56 AM

That's brilliant. Consume and stfu.

It took me half a mission to get used to the Deadly Shadows movement, but after that it was fine. Maybe because I don't play many FPS games.

Also: "thusly" and "whelp" on the same forum on the same day? This place is epic.

Subjective Effect

06-15-2009, 02:15 AM

You don't have the ability to do it yourselves so you piss and s.hit on other people when they don't live up to your expectations...

Not this boring argument again.

It is perfectly acceptable to expect levels of quality in a product even if you have no clue about how to make that product, just like when you need brain surgery the surgeon doesn't expect YOU to be as good as him before he's expected to do a good job.

People don't like a lot of the changes in TDS because they result in a lesser game than T1 and 2. They are entitled to that opinion and will vote with their dollars. If Thief 4 is like Thief 3 I will not buy it, simple as that. I suspect that you, Condradicto, will buy it no matter how it turns out.

esme

06-15-2009, 06:35 AM

I spent hours on the ambush/courier map, there are tons of places to get into and lots of things worth stealing too

you can't get into every building I'll grant you but you can't get into every building in a TDS city hub either

jtr7

06-15-2009, 10:32 AM

oh yeah, learn the word "hypocrisy" before flinging it around like that...it makes you look like a fool.

the End

Besides telling me everything I needed to know in your posts, I do know the meaning of the word "hypocrisy", and all I did was show you what you sound like. What I meant went over your head, apparently. Now that I see how it is with you, I shall act accordingly.

fayfuya

06-15-2009, 11:09 AM

All the people in the streets or missions walked in the same walking speed and tempo, maybe some people should be a bit in a hurry for somewhere.
Or in some missions, people are patrolling with no goal, they just walk from here to here, stare the wall, stare the shadows, stare the nothing, people should be more alive.

Myth

06-15-2009, 12:24 PM

Xeo

06-15-2009, 05:37 PM

Allow me to preface this post for a couple of reasons:

1. This is in no way an antithesis to GManPro's post. As one who started with TDS and worked through the games in reverse chronological order I seek to provide a perspective on the Thief series as a hard-core Thief player that confirms both the brilliance and weaknesses specifically of TDS.

2. I am one of the few who believe that TDS is on par with or possibly greater than the other two games in the series. Invariably this can be attributed to the fact that I started with TDS and was enthralled by it due to having a lack of assumptions.

3. The points made by GmanPro that I have personally chosen a stance on I will comment about.
_____________________
The levels were too small
The levels certainly are too small. I understand that this may have been due to a technological limitation of the engine chosen for TDS, however this issue does need to be addressed.

My personal opinion, which may be greatly in the minority is to deviate from the level system and integrate the missions directly into a far grander central city. I believe that the city hub design has great potential. It just needed to be executed more meticulously.
______________________
Third Person Camera
Because third person view is merely an option at the player's discretion it is in my opinion that this is in no way a game-altering feature. I knew of its existence, but never used it for more than ten seconds. It had no bearing on the depth of immersion that the game provided.

Response to GmanPro's comment: The third-person perspective has no impact on the Garrett's awkwardness. That is strictly a result of the body awareness Ion Storm attempted to implement. Unless you're attempting to say that the body awareness is a result of their implementation of the third-person perspective there is no technological reason why a third-person perspective would have any bearing on this.
______________________
No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
I agree that rope arrows would have been great in TDS. That isn't to say, however, that climbing gloves couldn't also have their place simultaneously. I can envision circumstances in which a rope arrow wouldn't be as effective as the ability to scale a wall and vice versa.
______________________
No more Sword?
It is somewhat obtuse to assume that Garrett would never use a sword. I wouldn't imagine that someone as skilled in using a dagger or blackjack would resort to using a sword that often, but there is no reason he couldn't keep it in his arsenal.
______________________
City hubs
See above. A city hub ties the world together and is so suitable for this kind of game. The city-hub design is one of the few areas TDS set itself apart from the other games in the series.
______________________
Nerfed blackjack & Loot Percentage System & Swimming
GmanPro's sentiments have a certain poignance - I'm in agreement with them.
______________________
Factions
Factions are a step in the right direction. They were adequate, but not great.
______________________
Poor choice of engine
I believe that using an engine which allowed for realistic shadows was an absolutely fantastic design choice. That being said if the engine limited the size of the maps then that should have been addressed prior to the map design process.
______________________
The story/plot
It is in my opinion that the story and plot for TDS are fantastic. I don't feel as though going into greater detail would provide any greater insight.

PJMaybe

06-15-2009, 11:18 PM

______________________
Third Person Camera
Because third person view is merely an option at the player's discretion it is in my opinion that this is in no way a game-altering feature. I knew of its existence, but never used it for more than ten seconds. It had no bearing on the depth of immersion that the game provided.

I disagree with this. For me, 3rd person spoiled the whole leaning function. It made it redundant - and I had felt leaning was a superb feature of T1 and T2. As it happened, the lean funcion in TDS was useless anyway as it was not leaning at all but a small step. I don't mind 3rd person being incorporated into the game but there should be no option to switch between 1st and 3rd in mid-mission.

No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
I agree that rope arrows would have been great in TDS. That isn't to say, however, that climbing gloves couldn't also have their place simultaneously. I can envision circumstances in which a rope arrow wouldn't be as effective as the ability to scale a wall and vice versa.

I disagree with this. Gloves were too easy to use to escape. Rope arrows required time to aim and pull back the bow, allow the arrow to land and the rope unravel and then you had to make sure you jumped onto it properly. It was not easy to escape with rope arrows when a guard was right behind you.

Factions
Factions are a step in the right direction. They were adequate, but not great.

I thought the factions thing removed some of Garrett's personality. Previously he did not side with anyone unless it was for his own gain.

The story/plot
It is in my opinion that the story and plot for TDS are fantastic. I don't feel as though going into greater detail would provide any greater insight.

I partially disagree. The plot was good but the story was told in a terrible way. Garrett had become an action hero (almost) completely contrary to who he had been previously and there were 'jumps' in the story they made it disjointed.

jtr7

06-16-2009, 01:25 AM

Agreed, PJ Maybe.

Looks like more people don't know why there were no rope arrows and think they were inexplicably and even disrespectfully dismissed by Ion Storm. MYTH MYTH MYTH!!!

3rd-Person ruined the 1st-Person experience because when the camera is in Garrett's head the animation of his body jerks the camera around and makes the camera a slave to bad animation. In 3rd person view you can't see how "dirty" the animation is. It was not a simple option. The camera would slip out the back of Garrett's head at odd times, and the button would have to be pressed to go back into 1st person.

Myth

06-16-2009, 07:02 AM

jtr7: you called? :D

Skaruts

06-16-2009, 10:01 PM

The camera would slip out the back of Garrett's head at odd times, and the button would have to be pressed to go back into 1st person.
Went through the game 3 times. This never happened to me.

And, not sure if this is what you're talking about, but, I've always seen the "jerky" movements the camera had while walking and running as something way more realistic than the same static camera from most other FPSs.
While you walk, or whatever, your eyes are never at the same level.

jtr7

06-16-2009, 10:12 PM

Add one more MYTH-perpetuation to the long list grown in the last five years.

In real life I don't walk like a marionette and I don't have to take time to look at and align my feet with where I want to go. YES, there are many people who have not had these issues with the game, but there are many who truly have. It's not an illusion or a state of mind. I have no problems with the older titles, but I struggle just to move robot TDS Garrett where I want him to when it's not open, easy, straight terrain. He's a remote-controlled toy I manipulate, instead of inhabit. YES, there are many people who have not experienced this. Both are very real.

I'm not talking about head-bob, or natural jiggle, compressing cartilage and discs, muscle deceleration, or any of that. It's a camera attached to an animator's hand-animated virtual robot, and the rigid attachment highlights all the flaws in the animation of character movement. It's not a damned illusion, or a denial of any kind.

Skaruts

06-16-2009, 10:35 PM

Fair enough. Maybe (I can't remember this) it could also happen what happened in the 3rd person, as I saw in some videos in youtube. When you fired an arrow you were cast down to 1st person. Maybe the inverse change could happen in some situation, but I can't remember it.

Although, there's one issue I noticed about garret's movement, and maybe you also refered to it.

It has to do with the turn-head-only when you look around. Occasionally, when you neeed to move in a certain direction, his body wouldn't be turned in that direction, only his head. The issue would happen when you pressed forward from that point and he would make some sort of a circle to turn his body there, thus making him go a little to the side until he was totally turned in the right direction. This could make you fall from a ledge or blow your cover. I believe that, sometimes, it could even put him on the wrong route for a moment or two.

This, I confess and agree it was annoying. While I rly rly loved the fact that I could look at my shoulders like in reality, I hated that he had to circle that way. He should turn straight away when pressing forward.

esme

06-17-2009, 03:54 AM

yep I didn't like that either but I found that if you turned the head past a certain point the feet would turn on the spot

so if you overshot the angle you wanted to turn to with the head you could get the feet lined up and then turn the head back and press forward to get rid of the little 'dance' Garrett did to follow your lead

one of the more awkward workarounds I had for TDS

Skaruts

06-17-2009, 10:15 AM

yes. I believe tapping the strafe key could sometimes help too.

jtr7

06-17-2009, 10:33 AM

Exactly! That stuff was simply not an issue in the older titles, and freedom of movement was wonderful. I can't enjoy TDS as much as I'd like, because I'm too often fighting the counter-intuitive animation and controls.

PJMaybe

06-17-2009, 08:21 PM

I've always seen the "jerky" movements the camera had while walking and running as something way more realistic than the same static camera from most other FPSs.
While you walk, or whatever, your eyes are never at the same level

but also your field of view is not so restricted in real life so you do not 'see' the jerkiness. Try walking or running whilst looking through a cardboard tube.

jtr7

06-17-2009, 08:23 PM

:thumb:

Exactly! And take away the springy cushioning and light rubberiness of a movement and make it a series of relatively much fewer x,y,z plot points connected with straight lines.

citywolfdreams

06-17-2009, 08:27 PM

3rd person animation really ruined the game for me. Sure, it made the game a lot easier, but the game was plenty easy as it was, and it really ruined the suspense for me. So I started playing the game in first person only, and then I discover that I can't peek. That's right, Garrett - master thief - can't peek! Instead he takes a giant step out to look around the corner, clearly highlighting himself against the light. Whatever "genius" came up with that idea should be forced to share whatever he was smoking with the rest of us, cause clearly it was some primo-quality stuff.

DarknessFalls

06-17-2009, 09:40 PM

The purple haze load zones are awful, as we all know. But it got me wondering: couldn't Eidos fix this issue? Couldn't they go into the source code and piece things together in an editing tool so each mission becomes one big map? Just seems like it would be a near easy "copy/paste" job. The load zones really screw with my sense of "where am I and where do I need to go" for some reason. Then again, even Eidos did this, there are so many bad things about TDS, I probably still won't play it again. I wouldn't want them wasting their time. So maybe they should just release the source code to the community. Then after fans spend years fixing everything I might feel like I got my money's worth with this game. (I'm assuming they haven't released it already; and this would probably never be done... but I can dream...)

jtr7

06-17-2009, 09:56 PM

It's not easy at all. This has already been tried, and some missions were stitched back together. A major problem was discovered: Two parts of one mission like Rutherford Castle didn't line up! Also, the skyboxes and compass directions are rotated between parts of missions. Flux at TTLG gave it a go and realized it was going to require rebuilding terrain or making a bridge between the areas. :(

You can see there's a long bridge connecting the Cradle halves together:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bteGgByCedA

At least two of the Keeper Compound parts don't connect.

When the work is done, it is a triumph!
Thief DS Southquarter, Docks & Stonemarket Plaza:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCDA7QMotFk

Give the man a hand!

DarknessFalls

06-17-2009, 10:04 PM

Quite awesome! Good work Flux!!

jtr7

06-17-2009, 10:06 PM

Here's the discussion I referred to where problems began to crop up:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1699059#post1699059

TheEye

07-04-2009, 03:41 AM

on most of the topics i agree. HOWEVER:
1) the TDS flash bombs are good. hey are meant for quick getaways. if people did not snap out of them once attacked then it would just be too easy - killing 50 men with a flash bang and a knife/sword. plus once they are blinded they know someone's there and they are expecting a blow - that's why you can't blackjack them. if you want the previous features GmanPro then accept their drawbacks as well - no guarantee they'd work once you are spotted and a chance for garret to be blinded as well.
quit whining on such minor problems, for the Builder's sake!

jtr7

07-04-2009, 04:59 AM

quit whining on such minor problems, for the Builder's sake!

Oh really? It's not minor. You just don't think it's a problem. The flashbombs as an offensive weapon are problematic in all the games. Gameplay and ease aside, the older way was more realistic. Greater vulnerability, but the AIs shouldn't have gone down in one hit (without building in a sweetspot at the nape of the neck), unless Garrett is really trying to deal a deathblow, and that's no good. Miraculous vision-clearing and mental clarity and zero reaction to injury? No good either. And since you keep talking about slaughtering AIs, that's skewing many of your points.

Fatherwoodsie

07-04-2009, 09:54 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Here's the discussion I referred to where problems began to crop up:"'

wow. im completely blown away that someone found a way to connect all these levels. im not really good with computers nor do i know alot about them, but obviously these people do.

jtr7

07-04-2009, 12:53 PM

Yeah. It's just too bad that they burn out or have to step away from the projects like this before they finish.

Kold

07-04-2009, 02:51 PM

I preferred first person to third person view in DS, but I thought it was a good idea for the OPTION to be there to play in either view/perspective

Nate

07-04-2009, 05:05 PM

Hi Kold, there have been many discussions on the problems with having BOTH 1rst and 3rd person views programmed into the game.

Boiling it down for you, the problem is that by putting a 3rd person view into the game, the devs have to make 'empty' maps with high ceilings so the camera view doesn't get obstructed AND they have to use a lot of time and effort to perfect the 3rd person view....time and effort that could have gone towards other parts of the game.

Scopeh

07-04-2009, 06:59 PM

I agree with about 99% of what you have said.

The only thing I disagree with you about is the loot percentage system.

Whilst this obviously spoils immersion for you, for me it gave an incentive to go back and get 100% of the loot. It was fun and gave me replay value.

My suggestion is that you are not told if you have 100% of the loot during the mission, maybe during a debrief at the end of the mission. Notification from garret when you have it all (i.e "I have stolen about as much as I am able to carry/ I dont think there is anything else of value here"), as an in game voiceover would be ok for me too.

I say keep this feature, other than that I am with you the rest of the way.

theBlackman

07-04-2009, 07:34 PM

In the stats on the old one you were told you have XXX out of XXX. This always was a spur to replay and find that last bit, last secret or two, and pick the pocks you missed.

The percentage really bores me. At the level you choose, you know when you have reached the required amount to continue and that has been enough.

As a THIEF, you don't know how much is in the place you intend to rob. And in this game I am the thief, so I would have no idea of the percentage, and frankly I don't need to.

jtr7

07-04-2009, 07:52 PM

Exactly! And if the missions are designed well, the amount of loot becomes secondary to everything else. You will want to explore everywhere anyway and enjoy the thrills and want to revisit for the atmosphere and to achieve Mastery. Meet the objectives and savor exploring the environment. If you need a score incentive to replay the game, you are not enjoying the game much, nor appreciating that world.

DarknessFalls

07-04-2009, 11:48 PM

Exactly, part 2. And I love how some of the loot is tiny, in the dark and easily overlooked in T2. A couple small gold coins on a dark wood table in a dark room, or in a dark corner in an attic, is a recipe for not finding them... forcing you to be more diligent and possibly use the flares to assist. I love that! I say the same thing about the tiny secret switches that are sometimes a lovely pain to find! Kudos to Looking Glass Studios for not spoon-feeding us everything. Long live LGS.

I long for the day when a new game can be as sophisticated and intricate as T2, catering to serious gamers who don't want everything spelled out for them. I hope T4 will bring the day.

FriendlyStranger

07-05-2009, 02:02 AM

ToMegaTherion

07-05-2009, 02:11 AM

I think they mean telling you the percentage while you're playing, every time you pick up loot, rather than after the mission ends.

FriendlyStranger

07-05-2009, 02:14 AM

I think they mean telling you the percentage while you're playing, every time you pick up loot, rather than after the mission ends.

Ah ok. But having a screen somewhere telling you how much you already got should be ok?
I mean you don't have to view it.

Platinumoxicity

07-05-2009, 02:48 AM

Ah ok. But having a screen somewhere telling you how much you already got should be ok?
I mean you don't have to view it.

Yes, in the older games you had an inventory "item" that showed how much loot you had. It didn't show how much there was in the mission though, and that's the beauty of it.

ToMegaTherion

07-05-2009, 03:54 AM

I guess in 1 and 2 if you really wanted to know how much loot was in the level you could just fail an objective or get killed and then check the stats screen afterwards?

jtr7

07-05-2009, 02:32 PM

I don't get where the difference lies between telling you:

"You got 900 from 1000 loot"

and telling you:

"You found 90% of total loot"

Its actualy the same. You don't know more, you don't no less one or the other way.

Neither I, nor those I am in agreement with, want...ANY...loot stat. What you see is what you got, and if you want more, explore more. Death to the Loot Stat, death to High Score mentality, and just score as high as you can by being a Master Thief, who doesn't know how much loot is available in a mission ahead of time. No, we cannot just not look at it.:rolleyes:

Go into the mission, explore thoroughly, check off the mission objectives, get loot above and beyond the objective requirement that is randomized (explore thoroughly and get all the loot you can, and don't worry about missing anything), complete the mission, go to the store with expenses deducted (not a problem because you have PLENTY, and done right, NO NEED for LIMITS on how much you can carry!), buy more gear to supplement what you already have, start the next mission. Remove the blinders and realize the game does not have the limitations in your mind, see that it can be opened wider and be more realistic in this manner with zero negative impact on missions and outcome but what you as the player bring to it. I'm blending the old way of doing things, with the TDS way of doing things, including spacing the missions apart (most of the time) by distance and time elapsed (and taking ACCOUNT for that elapsed time), and making sense of what Garrett does with his money! It's an attempt to answer all the questions in one overarching concept. It's realism that doesn't break gameplay, while introducing innovation--and it's ironic that this is unwelcome by those who accused us of not wanting that.

The game takes care of all the math for you, it's designed to take care of your monetary and equipment needs, and you will never be screwed out of equipment, and it just might teach people about budgeting without them knowing it, heh heh heh.

I'm thinking within Thief and outside you box. If you wanna argue, we need to understand where we are coming from, and use facts, not impressions and wishes, to educate each other. I know you want a high score, and I know you don't appreciate the Thief Universe, and therefore, you are looking for justification to replay the game without getting bored. I don't have to look at the stats? You don't have to play the game. You aren't seeing that I'm addressing several common concerns in one by randomizing the EXTRA loot (not the same loot in random places! Random amounts of loot in the same places, but randomized to the point you will need to explore thoroughly).

If you find the games boring, then realize and admit to yourself you're not enjoying your purchase nor what Thief is, and cannot blame anyone or anything else.

People have questioned the logic or jeered at the same points regarding loot for years, and I'm working on eliminating those concerns. Since it's impossible to eliminate all concerns, I don't mind creating new ones for the right reasons, if even just to have something new to discuss, and maybe it will create an appreciation for the LGS devs' decisions, but the real goal is to take Thief into new territory for a new decade in gaming, and to give yet another example of how those of us accused of wanting a remake are in fact looking for innovation.

I also remind people that, in gaming, immersion happens in the mind and realism happens externally. So this weird sneering about "breaking immersion" applied to some things is incorrect.

Platinumoxicity

07-05-2009, 03:39 PM

If after reading that people still don't understand the beauty of no loot stat and randomized loot locations, there's something wrong with them, not with the suggestion. Because no matter how precisely I read that, I can't see anything wrong with it.

The new Thief-game has to evolve. And this thing is one of the best new features I've seen so far. No more speedrunning by going through the exact same loot spots and finding everything. No more certainty about the question whether you've got everything or not. It doesn't matter. ;)

theBlackman

07-05-2009, 04:00 PM

[...] Kudos to Looking Glass Studios for not spoon-feeding us everything. Long live LGS.

I long for the day when a new game can be as sophisticated and intricate as T2, catering to serious gamers who don't want everything spelled out for them. I hope T4 will bring the day.

Agreed. I don't want a game, especially the up-and-coming Thief 4 to be reduced to a walkthrough like the introduction sequence in TDP.

In T1 and T2, you were given advice in the briefings, and in the training missions where you are told (paraphrasing), "this is what you need to learn, now do it and pass the test by evading discovery by your trainers."

You didn't get glowing footsteps, locked movement until you satisfactorily completed the "training". It was DO THIS AND SURVIVE, FAIL and LOSE THE GAME.

Here's a target. Practice with your bow until you get it right etc. No molly-coddling, handholding walkthrough crap.

Greatrune11

07-06-2009, 10:38 PM

I'm new here on this T4 forum, so I don't know if my post belongs here or somewhere else.
In comment to GManPro: you're totally right about everything you said about the blackjack! I couldn't have said it better, but I'm talking about T1&2, as I haven't played T3 for more than 10 minutes. I also would ike to comment on the sword-actions of T1&2. If you raise your sword above your head and "fire" it at someone's head, wouldn't that someone have to be dead? I'm talking about the citizens, not about the gaurds. And if you shoot an arrow into somebody's head who isn't wearing any helmet at all, shouldn't that person have to be dead, instead of able to run and scream for further help?! I find these 2 facts the most unrealistic perspect of the game, yes, I know the Thief games aren't based on being 100% realistic, but common, can't at least the hits we deal others be realistic?

-Greatrune11, professional Thief player

jtr7

07-06-2009, 10:45 PM

For the game, yeah. In real life, often, but not always:
http://www.boston.com/news/daily/03/odds_miracle.htm

I don't know what giving the AI damage zones does to processing, but it's been done for nearly a decade (or more?), so Thief could have it as a way to improve it.

Hirnpilot

07-07-2009, 08:28 AM

Just finished this bull**** game again.

DS made Garrett a rockstar. Everyone knows him from the beginning. The factions, all shops and the whole damn city ... he even had an official home wtf?!?!?!?!?
Hes a thief, a shadow ... his existence should be a rumor.
I imagine Thief 4 now: Sneaking in the shadows cause everyone knows u robbed them anyway !!!nice!!! seriously how can he be a thief if hes the best known person in the city?
It just wont work!!!!
Bring a new protagonist or ignore that thief3 ever existed!
ps: and dont make it a wannabe rpg again.

kabatta

07-07-2009, 08:29 AM

Oh, boy...another annoyed one. Check the other threads.

huzi73

07-07-2009, 08:45 AM

The op is CORRECT!I HOPE EM IS PAYING ATTENTION!

TheJoe

07-07-2009, 08:47 AM

TDS didn't do anything wrong.

Fatherwoodsie

07-07-2009, 08:52 AM

yeah and hitting someone with the blackjack has no effect on them at all when they are aware of you hitting them.

Hamadriyad

07-07-2009, 09:12 AM

How do you know that whole city know Garrett? There is no such a thing. (remember fake Garrett. People don't know Garrett's face.)
And there is a official home in TMA too.

Direlord

07-07-2009, 09:21 AM

Garrett has to live somewhere. He constantly has need to pay his land lord. The wanted posters would have been better if they just had a extremely rough sketch or even a ? for his picture. In thief DP/MA both the pagans and the hammers know of Garrett and he meets both. Now that doesn't mean the faction you stole our priceless artifact but we forgive you makes sense though.

Any guards or city watch really shouldn't know who you are just that your a thief or suspicious character roaming the streets.

Trickster

07-07-2009, 10:02 AM

-Greatrune11, professional Thief player
Sounds like a sweet career. What does it pay? :D

jtr7

07-07-2009, 11:54 AM

First, the majority of defenders of the older titles do not say those games did no wrong. To say TDS did nothing wrong is either extremism or trolling. Every game does something wrong, and many of those things were on purpose. A major portion of the populace knows who Garrett is, they just don't all know what Garrett look like. He's legendary and talked about, but like Dillinger, his larger than life reputation makes him hard to recognize. Many of the startled comments in TDS are realizations that he's THE thief, or the one on the poster. How did the poster get made without a good accurate look?

Too bad people know where to find him if they just ask around. The factions know where he lives and get into his apartment, Curtis asks around and finds out where he lives, etc.

The City Watch recognize him, and call him by name.

No, not everyone knows who he is, but way too many people do for Garrett to have one apartment.

Hypevosa

07-07-2009, 02:51 PM

well I'll go bump my thread on notoriety now that someone's talking about it again...

jtr7

07-07-2009, 03:09 PM

Merge imminent?

Hypevosa

07-07-2009, 03:21 PM

maybe, not sure, his title is rather distinct though reading the paragraph it seems to be along the same lines as my renown vs rumor thread.

jtr7

07-07-2009, 03:36 PM

Related topic with the same points being brought up invites a merge.

Greatrune11

07-07-2009, 11:59 PM

Sounds like a sweet career. What does it pay? :D

It pays lots of fun and in-game loot

AngelRose777

07-08-2009, 07:38 PM

I'm not sure, but I think another main reason a lot of die hard Thief fans didn't like the this game was because it was on xbox. Considering I like xbox a lot more than pc, I'm coming from a different point of view. But I still agreed with a lot of the complaints Gman had (mainly the blackjack deal and the lack of or terrible quality of cutscenes).

Still...What kind of a thief carries a clunky sword?? And I personally LOVED the storyline (especially when it got downright creepy in that cradle place). I actually enjoyed this storyline better than the first two. The levels definitely weren't big enough, but the free roaming style play was still great. Being a lame faction errand boy was kind of annoying, but at least there was more freedom to do sidequests, unlike 1 and 2 where you stayed in a level until u were done and then had no choice but to move on. I would like the rope arrows back, but if we're going to go into the realism of character movement, I never once felt like garret was actually going up a rope, nor did his slinking down a hall feel real at all. I think the jerkiness of the 3rd garret's movements was an attempt to make it more realistic, not necessarily b/c of 3rd person (although that might be part of it too). The camera actually goes up and down as he takes one step after another.

Having said that, I do agree that it could have been done a lot better. Hopefully this time around it'll use a better engine (I haven't played oblivion, but fallout3 uses a stealth mode that plays similar to thief). Personally, I'm just glad I could play it on xbox instead of it taking up so much room on my computer.

jtr7

07-08-2009, 07:44 PM

What kind of Thief carries a ton of gear everywhere he goes, not to mention his huge bag full of gold, silver, and gemstones?

We haven't failed to mention we don't like the compromises made to accommodate the XBox. We say it quite often (cause it keeps getting brought up by somebody every week, or every other day, it seems). :p

Realism's not the point at all, so don't disappoint yourself about that.

AngelRose777

07-08-2009, 07:55 PM

Ever seen batman? He's got a utility belt and bunches of tricks up his sleeve, and yet he still manages to sneak up on people all creepy-like. The big bag of loot full of candlesticks and stuff.....well ok yeah that's hard to make realistic. Personally, I don't really care, but some people seemed worked up about it.

I don't see why they can't make it available for both pc and xbox. I love Thief on xbox, while others like it on pc. I was willing to overlook the flaws due to the change of system while others were obviously really upset.

PJMaybe

07-08-2009, 10:54 PM

I was willing to overlook the flaws due to the change of system

It was like breaking up and squashing a package just so you can fit it into the post box.

jtr7

07-08-2009, 11:15 PM

What PJMaybe said. Even the devs were not happy with the compromises the XBox imposed, wishing for "ten more megabytes" of memory. The only part they agreed with was the business end of it. But the grave mistake was squeezing a PC game into a space that couldn't hold it all, having to slice mission maps in half and rework the player controls, and then handing that compromised game to the PC players, too.

I really keep hoping--futilely--we won't have to explain it to everyone who doesn't get it, one..at...a...time, but after five years of it, I really shouldn't hope for a better future in Thief fandom (I just know it's going to get even worse with the new game, no matter how awesome it is, or not). I can't believe that after five years of having the information to explain what the problems are, and why they exist, and why they really are problems, people still claim not to know.

Batman's utility belt could not hold a quarter of what Garrett carries. Bad example. Worked up about it? YOU brought it up with an old argument about sword vs. dagger. Care for another round, taffer! Heheheheh!

AngelRose777

07-09-2009, 05:52 AM

lol Well obviously some people liked it since you keep having to defend the stance that there was something wrong with it. Besides, there's a lot more room on the 360 than the original xbox, so that should help. And if they make it for the pc AND xbox360, then you guys get your pc original thief type game, and I get the supposedly crappy stuffed-into-an-xbox version that I know and love ^_^ What's wrong with that?

jtr7

07-09-2009, 04:54 PM

Correct! Agreed! When talking about the past, we have a legitimate gripe. When talking about the future, we know there's no reason for memory issues, but the issues become what audience they will cater to. Take the correct information and learn.

donsgood

07-10-2009, 02:45 AM

i agree with some of your points

i would love to see the return of rope arrows, swimming, rich faction stories. Slow potion was cool too.

i also like the TDS additions of climbing gloves, 3rd person view (supporting both like in TDS is great and keeps everyone happy).

Cut-scenes are great as well.

Regarding the blackjack....even though in real terms you could knock someone out with a blackjack whilst facing them....the goal there is to promote stealth from the player...not malee attacking. It makes the game more difficult and imo interesting. I think it should be kept as per the original games.

The dagger actually makes sense with this way of thinking. A theif would find a large sword too clunky, it would impede his mobility. Also he is not there to fight, but to pass unnoticed. my vote is for a dagger.

Keepers, Mechanists, Hammerites...love them.

Platinumoxicity

07-10-2009, 02:54 AM

i also like the TDS additions of climbing gloves, 3rd person view (supporting both like in TDS is great and keeps everyone happy).

If they go with the TDS approach, yes it keeps everyone happy. Except those who'd like to play in 1st person because it's fubar'd by 3rd person. Yeah, I know. EM will probably do a better job than ISA.

The dagger actually makes sense with this way of thinking. A theif would find a large sword too clunky, it would impede his mobility. Also he is not there to fight, but to pass unnoticed. my vote is for a dagger.

The dagger actually doesn't make sense with this way of thinking. A thief would find a short blade useless because you can't do anything else with it than murder unsuspecting victims. He is not there to murder people but pass unnoticed.

smalljil

07-10-2009, 02:58 AM

what's wrong with tds? well not much! i loved it for it's intriguing high quality storyline. i only missed therope arrows from tma.

Hamadriyad

07-10-2009, 03:25 AM

Hmm... Didn't you miss briefings,didn't you miss swimming, didn't you hate terrible 3d in-game cutscenes?(at least awkward Garrett?):rolleyes:

But I love TDS too, so much. It has great storyline and great atmosphere.

esme

07-10-2009, 03:37 AM

Regarding the blackjack....even though in real terms you could knock someone out with a blackjack whilst facing them....the goal there is to promote stealth from the player...not malee attacking. It makes the game more difficult and imo interesting. I think it should be kept as per the original games...you could only knock an AI out when facing it if it didn't know you were there, it wasn't a melee attack

FriendlyStranger

07-10-2009, 04:11 AM

what's wrong with tds? well not much! i loved it for it's intriguing high quality storyline. i only missed therope arrows from tma.

Story is a subject of taste, but you didn't find the game was lacking a bit more than just rope arrows?

PJMaybe

07-10-2009, 04:35 AM

Story is a subject of taste, but you didn't find the game was lacking a bit more than just rope arrows?

I felt the story itself was very good but it could have been told in a better way. What I didn't like about it was the plot and Garrett's nature had changed so much but I'm not going to dig that one up again...

tarhiel

07-10-2009, 03:43 PM

I agree with you, Gman, and have nothing to add.

Except: Please, EM, return back those mission briefing videos WITH texts from those manuscripts, books, prophercies, etc... Every text matched with what was going to happen in level/ or happen before that level.

That was awesome.

Fatherwoodsie

07-11-2009, 07:14 AM

agreed. the black and white toned pictures were awesome.

Burrick

07-11-2009, 09:11 AM

yeah man I enjoyed these cutscenes too. that's one of the few things I liked better about tma.

JohnnyB_©

07-11-2009, 11:49 AM

I disagree about the Engine used.

The graphics were awesome and made me love the game even more than the previous titles.

I dunno about the potentials of the particular Graphics Engine to handle bigger enviroments however yes levels were small in everyones eyes but the breath taking atmosphere made us not look far away when playing.

jtr7

07-11-2009, 04:28 PM

It did not meet its potential, and it's not subjectivity that the levels were small, they were small and even more limited than the previous titles per square-meter. All of TDS could fit in two previous levels. But this is not the majority of the devs' fault. My breath wasn't taken away, but expelled in shock. I was impressed at times, but overall it was the continuity break that blew it for me. The graphics never mattered before because the game and atmosphere created by the imagination was stronger.

Flashart

07-12-2009, 12:53 AM

I'd argue that TDS fulfilled a lot of it's remit. It garnered universally positive reviews, and witness how players who've never played T1/T2 can't understand the criticism that it gets. I've said before I don't know how happy the dev's were with what they had produced, but I'd guess they were broadly satisfied with the way it turned out.
T1 and T2 are made from broadly the same ingredients while TDS was obviously made in a completely different way, and this is what I think is it's problem. While it's fair to compare the gaming experience given by the different titles, some of it's limitations are simply because it can't do it. T4 is obviously further down the from T1/T2 and I think this could mean that some of the non-negotiables from the early titles are going to have to be re-imagined, else we get the "climbing gloves" issue again.
Superior graphics rule the day at the moment, are there any terrible looking games anymore?
But superior gameplay seems to be a rarer commodity, I hope this gets an equal priority.

Burrick

07-12-2009, 01:06 AM

I disagree about the Engine used.

The graphics were awesome and made me love the game even more than the previous titles.

seconded:thumb:

hellknightlizz

07-12-2009, 02:12 PM

I didn't enjoy the clunkyness of first person. That's the main thing. Apart from that I would say either the small areas, the weird guard a.i at times, the loot percentage, the lack of readables and the blackjack and dagger problems! The game seemed a bit basic or stripped down thief in a way. I can't remember right now but what was the time gap between thief 2 and tds? 5 years? That's means for any financial viability ion would have had to aim the game slightly more mass market... Possibly the reason for xbox and third person?

jtr7

07-12-2009, 03:48 PM

Graphics are secondary, Burrick. If they are given top priority, you rob yourself of the depths of the games. Your imagination is superior, let it work for you.

Hellknightlizz: The time gap was less than two years, from the time LGS wrapped up, to the time they moved to ISA and began on TDS. Yes, the financial considerations are the reason for the XBox and 3rd-person decisions, although it was only a couple of people that were pro-3rd-person, and they convinced Warren Specter--a man who admitted he didn't understand Thief.

Mass marketing will make them money, but the fans will turn their backs on anything that takes less brains, holds hands, and is marketed to children, and the entire industry should encourage less mindlessness, flash, and superhuman avatars.

They would be closing the doors on a demographic, while deluding themselves they aren't, if they continue to move away from Thief's roguishness and strengths.

PJMaybe

07-12-2009, 10:47 PM

The fact it was on the Xbox.

I dont think its the fact it was on xbox. It was the fact that the PC experience was inferior to what it could have been because it was made for xbox too. I don't care if its available on your mobile phone, just so long as they develop it primarily for PC.

Not going to happen, me thinks :(

CerraMorgan

07-13-2009, 07:57 AM

Mostly stuff everyone else mentioned but why miss the chance to voice my opinion. Will my opinion make any difference in how Thief IV is designed? Probably not, but who knows.

Things I hated about TDS:
No rope arrows
No swimming
Crappy zoom - what was with the b&w dots? Virtually useless, couldn't even see what I was trying to zoom in on. (Kudos to Cracked Gear who managed to have the zoom working the way it should in the Silence Pt1 FM. It's the first TDS FM I've played where it worked in a way that I actually used it)
Choppy, jerky, clunky, hard to control motion.:mad2:
Weird blackjack usage. I missed my blackjack. Started ghosting missions just to avoid having to deal with the whole blackjack issue. Where I couldn't ghost, I started killing AIs. Which brings me to the next point:
No incentive to avoid killing. In fact, with the blackjack problems I felt that players were essentially encouraged to run around killing everything in sight.
Difficulty levels just made things harder but didn't give you any real reward for trying a harder level so there was no incentive to try the harder difficulty levels. I replayed every mission of 1 & 2 on each difficulty level just because there were extra objectives that weren't available at the lower difficulty levels.
Controls were weird. What was the point of changing the defaults so much? Water arrows s/b key 4 not 8, darn it!
The final "mission". What the heck was that? An unkillable super-Gamal that existed simultaneously in every place Garret needed to go? This always struck me as a "well, we really don't know what to do to end the game gracefully, so let's just do this and hope no one notices".:confused:
Tiny maps.
Load zones. &*&*^%&$&% load zones!
Not enough rooftop exploring.
Loot glint. Made it way too easy. It was like the game was designed for people who like to run around killing stuff and the loot was an afterthought.
Third person view. Tried it once - completely ruined the experience.
Gear carrying limits. OK, so it was more realistic but honestly, collecting ridiculous amounts of gear was half the fun!
No briefing cutscenes.
Stacking boxes, or even just dropping a useless item, was incredibly difficult. If I hear "uh uh" one more time...

Things I liked about TDS
Throwing holy water instead of holy water arrows. Took some getting used to but I liked the residual effect of the puddles.
Breaking boxes
Mantling effects
Wandering cats
Climbing gloves (in moderation, they were kind of fun - but rope arrows were better)
Thiefy stores
Wandering the city, even if it did get rather boring after the first couple of "nights", since it always seemed to be the same people following the same routes.
References to T1 & T2. I seem to recall a gravestone referencing Ramirez and his love of burricks that had me rolling on the floor laughing.:lol:
Getting to wander the Keeper Compound and use Keeper Glyphs
In-game continuity - daily updates on the city notices about how many thefts, murders, etc.
Places you couldn't get into unless you completed other missions first.
The "bonus" jailbreak mission. An incentive to get caught!

My favourite stuff from any Thief:
Cutscenes
Secrets! Loooove the secrets.
Optional & bonus objectives. Right up there with the secrets.
Huge maps
FMs

Nate

07-13-2009, 11:36 AM

CerraMorgan just did a very accurate summery of the pros and cons of TDS!

It's nice to see someone else who can give credit to TDS where it is due while also being able to point out the serious flaws.

PJMaybe

07-13-2009, 01:50 PM

I'd agree with most of CerraMorgan's comments too but a few more aspects of TDS I did not like:

1. The awful blue colour everything actionable turned to - what's the point in having superior graphics if loot and bodies turn blue when you try to have a good look at them.
2. The dramatic change in Garrett's character - which I've babbled on about loads already in these forums.
3. The invisible wall that stopped you going down the tunnel to the museum before you were 'allowed' to. Surely they could have done it in a better way than that?
4. Reputation with factions. Garrett's a thief. No-one likes him and they only work with him when its for mutual benefit (e.g. strange bedfellows T1 and Vikoria and Garrett in T2). They don't make friends with him and invite him round for tea. Allowing Garrett to roam freely around pagan villages or Hammer temples just didn't seem right.
5. Leaning was non-existant as an actual lean - it was just an alternative step.

Something else I did like about TDS:
1. The dynamic shadows looked cool - but it would have been better if my shadows caught the guards attention. They said that would be implemented in development but I'm sure it didn't work :scratch:

CerraMorgan

07-13-2009, 03:18 PM

Some excellent points, PJMaybe. I also missed the leaning ability, I kept falling off of things when I tried to lean. And forward lean wasn't possible at all.

I forgot a couple of other things that I really liked about TDS. One was the ability to pinch out candles. There are a few T2 FMs that implement this ability but I don't think the original T2 had it.

Another was the effect of shooting moss arrows to temporarily blind & choke guards. That was loads of fun! Plus being able to use water arrows to grow moss was quite useful.

Hypevosa

07-13-2009, 03:24 PM

the problem with leaning in TDS is that they made him move his feet, instead of keeping them in the same general spots. This resulted in falling often when leaning from extraneous places. Stand up right now (you may not have done it for a while) and try to lean forward and side to side without moving your feet much, maybe an inch or two... It can be done, and to someone a little more spry than us (Garrett) it can probably be done fairly proficiently. If you make an upside down T with your feet, you can even lean without moving them much, for if Garrett was on a thin beam or something. For some reason, in TDS, they thought that a master thief is incapable of such movement needing to use their leg for stability - which led to Garrett falling off many things. I hope for T4 we get our spry Garrett back - leaning every which way (maybe even backwards, you know, for when that guard is peering forward into the shadows at you, you can do the limbo under his chin lol).

jtr7

07-13-2009, 03:53 PM

Also, in most instances, leaning is done near a wall or pillar, so the hands could support further leaning, as well as bending one knee.

esme

07-14-2009, 03:11 AM

I agree with CerraMorgan but would add the following

Dislikes

the climbing system that welded the player to a flat plane, no climbing round to the other side of a ladder for instance, or turning round to jump to an intermediate level platform when halfway up a ladder
the blackjack animation sequence, get behind the AI,it helpfully moves into the correct position, then Garretts arm raises and all you did was get behind it
no limits on the joints on ragdoll animations, legs do not bend that far
lockpicking that drags the player right in front of the lock and locks their field of view so all they can see is the lock
being able to pick up the AI after I KO'd them but not being able to pick up whatever they carried, like swords or torches, it didn't really matter much as the other AI would ignore the sound of them falling and subsequently walk right over a dropped sword in the middle of a hall without comment, it just broke the immersion
Likes

I liked the lockpicking method of visualising the tumblers
being able to push most things that weren't fixed to the scenery to see behind them

Quad

07-20-2009, 12:10 PM

What Thief is about is ... being a thief. It's the thrill to discover, reaching a solution in the giant maze (because you knew there was a way anyway). And also the adrenaline after being discovered too ;-).

Now, Deadly Shadows does not give that. It's not a thief-simulator, it's just a game. To make it worse, it was too darn easy. As if someone was holding my hand and pointing out "go there, take this, do that". Most of the levels were way too obvious. I was always playing someone else's game and I never was Garrett.

The AI was very flawed (obviously after the difficulty-bug was fixed). They never scared me, not once. One exception was The Cradle, but that's both genius and misplaced in the game when you compare level-design. In Thief1/2, I really really hated the zombies. Every new level, I was anxcious about what it had to offer me. And while standing still and listening.... hearing the voices of the zombies, I thought "Oh God, not the zombies !". But at the same time, I couldn't miss them. They put my senses to maximum, made my movement very precise. And just by the sound of them.... bah, DS is a barbie-game compared with them.

Money and DS ... huh ? I rarely used anything. At the end, I just had too much money but it was so irrelevant. What was I supposed to do with it ? The price was finding that rare piece of treasure or secret room. Does Eidos think I'm stupied and blind ? They practically give the treasure. Doing that was taking away my satisfaction, the price what thievery is about.

Climbing gloves... can you be more silly? I refused to use them. Not a single time. Talking about a waste of programming-resources....

Most of the city/Village in DS looked very good. Unfortunately, it only looked good, because not many buildings were accessable. The message was simple : "Be glad we made the cardboxes for you, but don't expect us to create a real village, are you crazy ! What thief would ever want to climb on roofs, break into houses, avoid villagers and escape without notice??" ME ? Hell no, I just want to shoot guards with a multibarrel cannon.... * ironic, isn't it *

I played T1 and T2 on very hard only. Sometimes, it felt like playing chess in 3D. It gave me thrills. The graphics weren't even on par with games from that time, but it didn't matter. They were full with atmosphere, danger, treasure. Sometimes I did things and asked myself "am I supposed to be able to do this ?" Then I looked back and thought "I don't know, but it worked !!"

I played most of the better FM, on hard of course. There are people out there with so much talent ! And then came DS... my god, I sometimes thought they gave me the wrong dvd. My own dvd with fanmade missions is soooo much better !!

Deadly Shadows ... I'm sorry, it was fun, easy, stupied at times. I can't remember I ever got excited. The Cradle was crazy in the head and in my opinion, totally misplaced in the game. I can't imagine the uber-barbie-hardcore players of 8 years old could handle that level without crying or having nightmares. It got in my head alright.

What I want :

Well, what has already been said already by previous posters.

But especially : bigger (than DS) levels AND 300% better leveldesign. For crying out loud, DS' level is going from point A to B in one straight line imo. Make my life harder please !
And the AI. I want them to scare me in a logical way. I want to fear them, eager to avoid, keep pushing the downarrow like crazy and hoping that the shadow is just dark enough so they can't see me!

As a matter of fact, if Eidos would make a remake of T1 and T2, with today's gfx and 5.1 audio, included the top 40 Fan Made missions and strap it in a box, I would buy it yesterday already. Very seriously.

Eidos, please... for once, don't let the kids or consoles dictate what you have to do. Make a thief-simulator. Make me wet my pants for being scared. Make me smile when I reached the hardest level ever. Satisfy me !

KittyCatAngel

07-20-2009, 01:21 PM

It's just so nice to read all these posts and see that so many others fans feel the way that I do too.

With THIS much input at their fingertips, Eidos has no excuse to mess this UP! (No pressure)

Quad, I agree with you 100% about EVERYTHING you said! The movement in the first 2 Thief games was so precise. No flailing about like a walrus, knocking over cups and things unintentionally. I don't even do that in real life as much as Garrett does in TDS :/

I lie. But Garrett is a thief and has no excuse.

Things I disliked in TDS:
-EVERYTHING that Quad said.
-Ragdoll - I know the "plonking" of bodies from the first 2 games was unrealistic, but the ridiculous extent of the ragdoll physics in TDS was even worse.
-I dunno, I liked the graphics in TDS (no more than the previous games though), but I felt a little depressed. Like they were a little gloomy for my liking, the older games had a bit more colour and PIZAZZ! But that's just me.

Things I liked (because TDS was not a complete disaster IMO):
-Putting out candles by pinching
-Holy water flasks for throwing and the puddles left behind. Although going back to arrows wouldn't bug me in the least.
-Oil flasks. Now, don't get me wrong, I can DEFINITELY see why they bugged fans, but I mean come on... it's funny... "HELL'S BELLS!!!"
-Cats
-The general interaction of certain tools such as water arrows helping moss to grow, and moss arrows being used to choke enemies.
-Levels like The Cradle
-Story was great. I liked it a lot, as well as the design of the hag. Just wasn't crazy about how the levels were implemented around it.

I think what's important here is realising that this game was never made for the general market of gamers. We're a special breed, Thief players :nut:

This game needs to made for a certain type of gamer, and from the looks of the comments, that type of gamer is one that values the strength of his/her imagination over graphics, values the strength of immersion over 3rd person view, and values the type of storyline that can only come from a world as fantastic as the Thief world without sacrificing itself for something more mainstream.

Do us right, and we'll follow you straight to the last Thief game. Well, I will anyway :)

SloopJohn

07-21-2009, 05:32 AM

I think the integral thing is that Eidos Montreal respect and understand the 'spirit' of the first two Thief games and translate this into Thief 4 as best they can.

By spirit I mean the details and the thought that went into the game from the sepia cutscenes, to the trademark music, to that undefinable atmosphere, to the feel of how the game played, to the wonderful dialogue, to the history of the City itself...

Deadly Shadows, for me, whilst being an enjoyable game, showed little respect for the spirit of the first two installments of the series and thus it was a disappointment among those who had been following the games since 1997.

I think it says a lot that 12 years after TDP's initial release most of us Taffers are still as impassioned about the first two games as we were when we emerged just outside of Bafford's mansion and that thick, enveloping ambient music overwelmed our crappy stereo speakers....

TheWoodsieLord

07-21-2009, 08:54 AM

>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.

[/LIST]
________________________________

I completely disagree with the fact that TDS had a bad storyline. To me, TDS is, in general the best of the thief games, and the plot was amazing. When I played the game for the first time, I was simply too interested in the story to notice all of the petty little things that everyone else marks as great flaws. Why, you ask. It's really simple. The first two games were related to the pagans and mechanists, none of which are in any way related to Garret personally. Since I played TDP first, I always wanted to know more about Garrett, as he was the most interesting character ever, and I was dissappointed in the fact that you do not really learn anything about him in the first two games (except for the cutscene before the training mission in TDP).

I liked TDP because I found the pagan faction interesting, and it introduced a whole new type of gameplay to me, but I never see anyone pointing out it's flaws, and it had a fair share of those:
- You faced the undead in almost EVERY mission. You are supposed to be a master thief, not a grave robber, and they were way too slow to be scary.
- Seeing creatures like the Burricks in TDP really dissapointed me. What kind of master thief sneaks in order not to get seen by ANIMALS, and since when can you blackjack them?
- Requiring like 10 arrows to shoot down one guard (I do not know if this feature is present in TDS as well, as I never actually killed a guard there)
- Garrett, the master thief, sounds like somebody is throwing bricks next to his feet while he walks. And the whole thing with materials was waaaaay overestimated. In real life, if you walk slowly and carefully on marble, you don't get heard.
- Most of the missions in TDP really didn't have anything to do with real thievery, I mean, you are not a thief if you steal a horn from an ancient tomb overrun by the undead. This was largely fixed in TMA where you actually do things a real thief does.
- In real life, when you shoot a guy in his head with an arrow, he dies despite being aware of your presence. (this is a flaw present in ALL the thief games)

As for TMA, I really have no negative comment to give concerning level design. I loved all the levels, as they were simply perfect, but then again, when it comes to gameplay, I'm pretty sure that there are two immortal guards on the ship in the warehouse level, but other than that, perfect (except for the materials thing which was not changed). TMA was exactly what a sequel should be, an improvement of the first part. And also, in the first game, I got the feeling that was some kind of machine - always professional and cold and everything. But at the end of TMA, Garrett went to kill Karras because of a personal reason, and that, in my opinion, added a lot to the story.

Now, we reach TDS. I heard a lot of comments against TDS, and I disagree with some, but TDS, just like all the thief games, had it's flaws:
- Garrett looks differently in-game, in 3-D cutscenes, and in the drawn cutscenes.
- The maps were small
- The percentage thing with the loot was really stupid.
- The thing with killing rust mites - even if you DID kill some of them, how do the hammers know it was you?
- Guards can't climb ladders (but then again, they can't do that in the first two games either)

Yes, TDS does have some flaws, but in my opinion, it has a lot less than the first two games. Some say that it sucks because you are supposed to be Garrett, and that 3rd person ruins that - if it does, then switch to 1st person, that's simple. Furthermore, I think that you start the game in 1st person. Some say that TDS is too easy and not challenging enough, but then again, Garrett is a master thief so that stuff IS easy for him.

But nothing amends for those flaws more than the story. In TDS, you simply learned so much about the world. Like the keepers, for example, they were there since the game started, and still, you knew almost nothing about them. And also, the story was in touch with the stories of the first two games. Gamall was there since TMA, and you never learned anything about her until TDS. And, finally, a threat worthy of the keepers has arisen - something that actually threatens them. And also, so many characters from the first games die - Artemus, Caduca, Orland... and then there was the Cradle, and the game ending which was great. Yes, TDS does have flaws, but so do the other thief games, but what many don't understand is the difference between differences and flaws. Just because you don't like a game does not mean that there is something wrong with it.

KittyCatAngel

07-21-2009, 10:57 AM

I completely disagree with the fact that TDS had a bad storyline. To me, TDS is, in general the best of the thief games, and the plot was amazing. When I played the game for the first time, I was simply too interested in the story to notice all of the petty little things that everyone else marks as great flaws. Why, you ask. It's really simple. The first two games were related to the pagans and mechanists, none of which are in any way related to Garret personally. Since I played TDP first, I always wanted to know more about Garrett, as he was the most interesting character ever, and I was dissappointed in the fact that you do not really learn anything about him in the first two games (except for the cutscene before the training mission in TDP).

Fair enough, everyone is entitled to their opinion regarding their favourite Thief game. Personally, I don't WANT to know too much about Garrett as I'd feel distanced as a player.

- Seeing creatures like the Burricks in TDP really dissapointed me. What kind of master thief sneaks in order not to get seen by ANIMALS, and since when can you blackjack them?
Last time I checked, burricks represented a consciousness just like any other animal has. And all a blackjack does is render you unconscious.

- Guards can't climb ladders (but then again, they can't do that in the first two games either)
Guards are ladderly challenged :D

Now, we reach TDS. I heard a lot of comments against TDS, and I disagree with some, but TDS, just like all the thief games, had it's flaws:
- Garrett looks differently in-game, in 3-D cutscenes, and in the drawn cutscenes.
I know it's easy to see that as a flaw, but it's something I have appreciated in all the games. Garrett looks different A LOT in all the games! And I've always taken it as a queue to imagine him whatever way you like.

Just because you don't like a game does not mean that there is something wrong with it.
And similarly, just because you like it, doesn't make it unflawed ;)

That being said, I think you made a lot of valid points :) But the older Thief games do have one advantage when it comes to flaws... they're OLDER.

PJMaybe

07-21-2009, 11:36 AM

Just a comment regarding WoodsieLord's issue with the materials. I agree completely that the noise Garrett made was unrealistic. As a master thief you would expect him to wear soft soled shoes (or some sort of foot wear at least) that made almost no noise on hard surfaces. But think about how silly this would have made the game. You would be able to run around with no regard to creeping or what you were stepping on. Where's the fun in that? You simply have to have some kind of challenge and I thought the footsteps thing was a great one. Not at all realistic for a pro thief but without it the game would have been crap.

There were many unrealistic (perhaps incredible would be a better word) things about T1 and 2 which were okay for me because they improved the game itself.

jtr7

07-21-2009, 12:59 PM

Yes. It was meant for player feedback and to slow the player down. I'd rather have that than a sound meter.

Trickster

07-22-2009, 11:35 AM

I always saw the "tap shoes" effect as a portrayal of Garrett's great sense of hearing combined with his concentration on the environment. It showed the tension of a situation where any little noise could get him killed.

jtr7

07-22-2009, 01:06 PM

You could imagine it that way, yes.

KittyCatAngel

07-22-2009, 01:13 PM

esme

07-23-2009, 02:42 AM

I always imagined him to be wearing fabulous heels.

But that's just me.
so he's a bit like dumbledore from harry potter then

:lmao:

now I know what he spends his money on

and why he hasn't got a girlfriend, and probably why he left the keepers, it explains sooooo much

absolutely loving this idea :thumb: :flowers: :lol:

Quad

07-24-2009, 04:49 PM

Hmmm... I've reread all the posts again. I feel like an idiot. Initially, after writing my first message, I felt good, satisfied because I could ventilate my frustration about DS. It wasn't bad, but it could've been so much better. My overall complaints didn't looked so stupied, I hope. But now I've reread everything again and now I feel I have nothing left to defend. It all has been said. Now it's waiting for a very long time for the decisions the DEV's are going to make and even though I truely believe a lot of them are very eager to put their soul in the new game/sim, they WILL be pushed back by the management who don't see this as a game, but as a product. It's not their game, just "a" product which has to sell for the financial benefit for the company and the real dev's will have to bend to their will to make it happen. I'm sure there's no lack of talent though. There's where DS lost it soul. In my opinion the biggest let-down : it lost its identity. Gone were the original members of Through the Looking Glass and I might be wrong, but Thief was/is their brainchild, the one thing they lived for for many months, probably neglecting social events, just to make it happen, to bring their dream alive. And what a dream it was !!! It's not the same for the new team to take over and to do it again. Ever drank beer non-pastheurised (or how it's written?). I can assure you, it's illegal, but so damn good ! Thief 1 felt weird, but it felt so darn good ! Luckily, there was Thief 2 which gave us more, better, just a perfect game. But then, Deadly Shadows felt like it was sterile. It's beer alright, but not what I was hoping for. Too kind, too flat, just a bit too much "too"... it looked a lot better, but I'm looking after taste and emotion and being the worlds best thief, not looks. Just like almost all the fans of 1 and 2 admit.

I feel sad. Technologically, Thief 4 will be once again better visually wise. But how are they going to give it a soul again? I don't know... maybe the dev's will listen to us and go forward by looking back again. Simplicity looks so damn good, but it's not so easy to achieve it. Should I go for less? Hell no !

I want to grab all the chances in the world to make this game standing on my shelf and be proud looking at it... after completing the huge involving levels on expert level (or beyond) and tell myself : "Quad, you ... are a Master Thief ! BE PROUD !". And then a lot of little voices all over the world will cheer for the dev's for delivering a new gem in the darkness !

Maybe there will be a gathering of thousands of Garrett look-alikes at the Eidos Montreal HQ one day, discretely giving all the developpers their real "thank you" from the bottom of their hearts.

ps. wouldn't it be great to realise that on Expert level, onlylet's say 30% of all the taffers worldwide would be able to complete it?

jtr7

07-24-2009, 04:55 PM

\o/

Epiphany!

Except, most of the Thief devs from LGS did make TDS--even though some were only consulting--but there was the XBox contract and different people in charge that admitted they didn't get Thief. Not to mention, the fire went out of them when LGS shut down. They knew they would never be able to complete the trilogy, lost their Super Upgraded Dark Engine ("Siege Engine"), and after they had sought or got other jobs, they were surprised to be called back to complete the trilogy. Mindsets and hearts were never the same from LGS, which many of them called their "dream job". Depressing. And that doesn't include all the crap that happened while they were making TDS.

maddermadcat

07-24-2009, 05:23 PM

I liked TDP because I found the pagan faction interesting, and it introduced a whole new type of gameplay to me, but I never see anyone pointing out it's flaws, and it had a fair share of those:

- You faced the undead in almost EVERY mission. You are supposed to be a master thief, not a grave robber, and they were way too slow to be scary.
- Seeing creatures like the Burricks in TDP really dissapointed me. What kind of master thief sneaks in order not to get seen by ANIMALS, and since when can you blackjack them?

These flaws were pointed out by fans, and LGS listened -- this is why TMA has Garrett doing more thief-like things than TDP.

- Requiring like 10 arrows to shoot down one guard (I do not know if this feature is present in TDS as well, as I never actually killed a guard there)

If they're not alert, you can kill them with one shot. The whole point of the game is to stay unnoticed, so naturally LGS made an effort to make things difficult for the careless thief.

- Garrett, the master thief, sounds like somebody is throwing bricks next to his feet while he walks. And the whole thing with materials was waaaaay overestimated. In real life, if you walk slowly and carefully on marble, you don't get heard.

Yes, it might not be entirely realistic, but it's necessary for game purposes, just like the last "flaw."

- Most of the missions in TDP really didn't have anything to do with real thievery, I mean, you are not a thief if you steal a horn from an ancient tomb overrun by the undead. This was largely fixed in TMA where you actually do things a real thief does.

Same thing as the first one.

- In real life, when you shoot a guy in his head with an arrow, he dies despite being aware of your presence. (this is a flaw present in ALL the thief games)

You love repeating yourself, don't you? I don't, personally, but here goes anyway: this is not a flaw, but rather, necessary for gameplay's sake.

I'm pretty sure that there are two immortal guards on the ship in the warehouse level

Not sure, but the first time I played that level, I cleared the ship of guards. I recall being able to wander around it undisturbed.

Yes, TDS does have some flaws, but in my opinion, it has a lot less than the first two games.

You only listed two actual flaws (which are actually rather subjective, as I liked the undead missions), and the rest are either rephrased earlier items or things that would've broken the game if they weren't present.

Genuine flaws the first two games share are the sometimes buggy rope arrows (and in my opinion that it's much too easy to kill with the sword). TMA had its share of problems as well, such as the casing and masks missions.

jtr7

07-24-2009, 05:58 PM

I think Woodsie's got a corrupt game if any AIs other than the harmless phantoms are immortal (okay, the Fire Shadows, too). If you have immortal AIs, your game is corrupt.

It's a game, not reality. Not reality at all. Just like chess pieces don't act like humans, but represent them, and move according to rules. The player-feedback features were all meant to SLOW YOU DOWN and remind you to be stealthy. These things are adjustable, as well as the AIs' sight and hearing. There's a gameplay reason they tuned the game to have these settings. Game mechanics, not a reality simulator. The more you play the role of Garrett, using the objectives to gauge what the mission is designed for, everything makes more sense.

ELEVEN missions out of sixteen in Thief Gold had NO undead. EIGHT out of thirteen for TDP.
EIGHT missions out of fifteen in TMA had no undead to contend with, and the ones that did had one or two each.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i106/jtr7/LightGemAnimation.gif
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i106/jtr7/HUD_TDS_LightGemAnimation.gif

LordGervasius

07-25-2009, 01:57 AM

not reading this whole thread but I agree with OP. Definitely a ton of room for improvement. Unfortunately most of it is just sticking to the original formula and giving it a fresh coat of paint.

TDS had some cool levels like the cradle and the seaside mansion. TDS had a cool storyline and a nice idea with the factions.

Poor execution, console bastardization, and missing huge thief elements will always make this game a joke in my mind

Fatherwoodsie

07-25-2009, 11:08 AM

bring back the old green light gem! so much better!

Mastone

07-26-2009, 05:29 AM

I only ever played Thief3 and compared to other games i think it's a well balanced game, sure there were glitches, but they

never annoyed me as much it seems to annoy some of you :)

And i thought it was a good balance between an open world and storybased -game.

The blackjack wasn't that annoying to me i consider it well balanced, it could be less rigid and without the arm lift so

that you can approach someone from behind on a slight angle and hit them when you want, i only think it's logical that you

can't blackjack them when you stand facing them, it would make the game to easy and i don't know how you guys played the

game but i could only find those semi dark shadows most of the time and if someone was facing me when standing in one of

them and i could just hit them and drag them away the game wouldn't be that exciting.

I liked the factions only it was to easy to be friends with all of them, which made it easier to enter buildings and certain

area's of the city.
I would like to see a cause and effect system here, like a hydraulics system if you steel much from the pagans, they will

hate you for it but because the hammerites are there adversaries they would like you more,in the beginning of the game you

would be neither liked nor hated by any of the factions, but during advancementin the game when you will be more famous a

thief the overall level of they liking you will drop and if you don't take sides they will all hate you equally, so for

obvious reasons it would be wise if you picked a side and maybe they can add a RPG element here; if you are liked by the

hammeites for instance they can make you better armour nifty gadgets etc when you are liked by the pagans they will make you

more effective potions and naturebased skills like transforming into a mouse so you can enter a building unnoticed, or

change into a bird when you need to go from one to another rooftop or getting magic beans which you can use to get over

citywalls, if you would align with the keepers you could get a cloak which renders you invisible for a certain amount of

time, the ability to do magic by the use of glyphs so instead of having to climb over a wall to enter some castle or grow a

beanstake you can write a glyph on the wall which opens a doorway, instead of a rope arrow you can throw a glyph tablet in

front of you and you can walk over to your destination.
It also would be neat if the armourshop would be controll