THE CITY WATCH 2012 - News/Tweets -UPDATE: EM & Crystal Dynamics collaboration for TR

[Hypevosa]

It's just bothersome to some that we have to stoop so low in character design as to fill the scar/eyepatch of power trope that's been used hundreds of times at this point. It isn't necessary, and is, at this point, a genuinely cliche concept.

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by Hypevosa

It's just bothersome to some that we have to stoop so low in character design as to fill the scar/eyepatch of power trope that's been used hundreds of times at this point. It isn't necessary, and is, at this point, a genuinely cliche concept.

ordinarily I would agree with you 100% but he did have his eye ripped out with what was basicly sharp, pointy sticks! I would find it more unbelievable if he doesn't have scaring on his face!

[cGREGgo]

The talk about zombies already being dead & knocking them out...

Reminds me of a goofy; funny as ; Starburst commercial with a zombie...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdUSpiC8MsU

[Platinumoxicity]

Originally Posted by zcapp96

ordinarily I would agree with you 100% but he did have his eye ripped out with what was basicly sharp, pointy sticks! I would find it more unbelievable if he doesn't have scaring on his face!

Still, the appearance where he has a scar is only seen ingame. During the cutscenes there is no scar.

And you know why ingame appearances are always different from cutscene appearances in older games? Technical constraints. In modern games every character looks the same ingame and in cutscenes because there is less restriction on real-time visual detail. But Thief 2 and Deadly Shadows are old games, and Garrett looks entirely different ingame than he does in the cutscenes. Real-time ingame footage has many restrictions. Pre-rendered cutscenes have none because they are pre-rendered. Therefore we can conclude that if there is an inconsistency between ingame appearance and cutscene appearance, the cutscene appearance is always the more accurate one because it has total artistic freedom. That's exactly why Garrett has a cloak in all the cutscenes and promo pictures, but is missing the cloak ingame in both Thief 2 and TDS. Technical limitations.

And if that logic is too forced, well, Deadly Shadows is a special case because it also has ingame pre-rendered cutscenes that were made within the restrictions of the graphics engine. And even there Garrett has no scar, nor a glowing eye, because he has the original player model, which was recreated as close to his cutscene appearance as the game engine would allow. So not only is Garrett scar-less in the unrestricted pre-rendered artistic cutscenes, but in the restricted ingame cutscenes too, because Garrett's original player model seen in those videos was based on his true appearance seen in the cutscenes.

But as the TDS ending's "master/apprentice" advocates have proven, with Thief the exception must be the norm. Disregard 99% because 1% is different and then use only the 1%.

[Hamadriyad]

Originally Posted by zcapp96

Seriously?!?!?!? The IN-GAME appearance of Garrett isn't canon?!?!?! Sorry but you cannot dismiss what he actually looks like because you would prefer he didn't have a scar! It has no bearing on how the game plays anyway so what does it matter, particularly if you play in first person mode.

So ingame model is what he actualyy looks like and cutscenes are not ? Sorry but you come up with ingame model because you prefer -god knows why- he has a scar.

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by Hamadriyad

So ingame model is what he actualyy looks like and cutscenes are not ? Sorry but you come up with ingame model because you prefer -god knows why- he has a scar.

I don't care one way or the other if he has a scar. Personally I think it makes more sense if he does have one as he had his eye ripped out by twigs. The comment I was picking up on was the assertion that something that is contained within the game itself is NOT canon. That is a clearly ridiculous statement, at best you can say that it is ambiguous. I thought that this would actually fit better into Platinumoxicity's viewpoint that we should never know what he really looks like! Wouldn't it be better to put a big scar on your face during the mission so that anyone that does see you would describe you as such when in reality you have no such feature?

[AlexOfSpades]

I'm sorry, but that cutscene doesnt even leave space enough for arguments. Its unbelievable how you people are even fighting about this.

If they wanted him to have the scar, it would have been depicted in the cutscene. They had low tech back then but it wasnt that low. Viktoria's vines came horizontally leaving no possibility for scars. Only if she came vertically with the vines she would be able to cut him like in the scar, which wouldnt even make sense as she didnt cut his face open to get the eye - she simply plucked it out. She didnt want to kill him, she just wanted his eye. Just means to her end. Just pluck it out, there we go, no need to screw his face. Viktoria is a smooth operator.

Its phisically impossible to leave a scar like that. Its like shoving a needle in your arm and having a long cut scar appearing. How the hell did that happen?

The cutscene SHOWS no space for scars. The vines that appear later... if they made that scar, his face would be COVERED in scars then because he was entirely covered in vines. He wasnt wounded with those (otherwise he would have died). So the vines arent sharp to the point of cutting.

If there was a scar anyways it would have been at least shown on T2:MA, at least in the box cover or in the cutscene that shows him polishing the eye. However it wasnt there. Not even in TDS there was a scar during the cutscenes (as explained above).

Lastly, only TDS shows him with a scar (and sometimes). So if we PRETEND that he had the scar all the time in DS, still statistically 67% of the Thief games depicted him WITHOUT it, which means most of the fanbase is already used to the fact he does not have it or at least SHOULDNT.

It was a ridiculous move from EM when making DS, its completely cliché and overused. It will ruin Garrett's originality. I AGREE with the MASK concept, but i disagree strongly against the scar. It makes no sense guys.

Sorry

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by AlexOfSpades

The cutscene SHOWS no space for scars. The vines that appear later... if they made that scar, his face would be COVERED in scars then because he was entirely covered in vines. He wasnt wounded with those (otherwise he would have died). So the vines arent sharp to the point of cutting.

It was a ridiculous move from EM when making DS, its completely cliché and overused. It will ruin Garrett's originality. I AGREE with the MASK concept, but i disagree strongly against the scar. It makes no sense guys.

Sorry

I would disagree that the cut scene shows NO space for scars, the area of his face in question is in shadow so we don't see what happens there, but I guess that is just nit picking. I would state again that I don't care one way or the other, I play in first person mode so never really see his face anyway.

I would point out that EM did not make DS, it was Ion Storm which, I understand it employed many of the same people that worked on T1 and T2. Maybe if the people who first came up with thief decided to give him a scar in DS then we should consider it canon.

[Blue Sky]

As pointed out already, they must have changed the player model quite late on in the day (i.e., after they'd already animated and pre-rendered the cutscenes), so it may have been some kind of last-minute decision by faceless, evil, corporate executives wanting to make Garrett look more cool.

If you play TDS in first person, you'll never see Garrett's massive eye scar.

Anyway, why are we arguing about this when we should be... Erm... Arguing about something else.

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by Blue Sky

As pointed out already, they must have changed the player model quite late on in the day (i.e., after they'd already animated and pre-rendered the cutscenes), so it may have been some kind of last-minute decision by faceless, evil, corporate executives wanting to make Garrett look more cool.

If you play TDS in first person, you'll never see Garrett's massive eye scar.

Anyway, why are we arguing about this when we should be... Erm... Arguing about something else.

I just think it is funny that some people are so adamant that there is no possible way that someone ripping someone else's eye out with sticks and leaving them for dead would leave even a small mark. No way. Not at all. Surgical precision. (then why do they not use twigs in all eye surgery?).

[thieffer]

Originally Posted by AlexOfSpades

If there was a scar anyways it would have been at least shown on T2:MA, at least in the box cover or in the cutscene that shows him polishing the eye.
Sorry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTXAYNRtBac - i think this cutscene answers all the questions unambiguously in deed!

Also, in terms of Thief canon to say it bluntly, i think, square enix and eidos montreal should treat the Deadly Shadows game as if it never was and sort of wipe the slate clean.. or at least with a lot of distance towards that last chapter of the Thief series)

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by thieffer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTXAYNRtBac - i think this cutscene answers all the questions unambiguously in deed!

Also, in terms of Thief canon to say it bluntly, i think, square enix and eidos montreal should treat the Deadly Shadows game as if it never was and sort of wipe the slate clean.. or at least with a lot of distance towards that last chapter of the Thief series)

What was wrong with deadly shadows? (I'm just talking story line here not engine problems and the like). I thought it was a well worked and interesting story and consistent with the first two, probably because the same people wrote it!

[Platinumoxicity]

There's nothing wrong with the idea of Deadly Shadows. It just wasn't executed as well as the previous ones were. Disregarding the story would be unacceptable. But there are details that clearly show that some designers weren't thinking straight. Garrett has a wanted poster and is attacked on sight (and sound) by the police on the streets? I don't remember ever showing my face to any of the police in Thief 2. All the fences and shops know Garrett by face and name despite the fact that knowing anything about dangerous criminals can be lethal and is incredibly stupid. Everyone else also seems to know where Garrett lives because all kinds of thugs and assassins always appear there. And "illegal establishments" are marked with special signs, and there are shops called for example "The Well Equipped Thief" (not suspicious at all) And third of the City's population seem to be pagans even though the last place you'd find them living in is anywhere near those cursed stone buildings made by dirty manfools. Crystals were all made to glow and make noise because the developers thought that xbox players are total morons, and obviously also thought that there aren't enough moss and water arrows already available for the player. Garrett also selectively cured his egomania by no more actively mocking the idea of murder, but also replaced this lost non-lethality policy with the obsessive compulsion to steal more than is reasonable.

Then there are obvious compromises caused by limited resources. Female guards were all fired because they would require special bone structures and separate models. Mechanists disappeared without a trace and were explained away with a few lines of text because making that took about ten million times less development time. The City was shrunk into a size equal to or smaller than the Sealed Section, which ironically is part of the Old Quarter that is part of the City hub in TDS. Paradox eh?

There are a lot of things about the details of TDS that make no sense when you think about it because obviously the game was marketed to a new audience unfamiliar with Thief. Which just happened to be the audience that, as the stereotype states, would not think too deeply about it even if they were familiar with Thief beforehand.

[thieffer]

Originally Posted by zcapp96

(I'm just talking story line here not engine problems and the like).

-yeah, well, it's just that i'm having hard time no to concieve all those elements as a whole, and as we don't really know for sure if the developers are now heading for the sequel/prequel or a complete reboot of the series i just find it would be a good idea to sort of reboot only the last part (probably keeping the story effectively written by the original staff) - but it's solely my pick on it of course..

[contrarian]

Originally Posted by Blue Sky

Anyway, why are we arguing about this when we should be... Erm... Arguing about something else.

I hate to say it, but he's right.

Can we please argue about something else? I really wanna argue about something other than a scar on a video game character.

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity

The City was shrunk into a size equal to or smaller than the Sealed Section, which ironically is part of the Old Quarter that is part of the City hub in TDS. Paradox eh?

and as we all know, nature abhors a paradox....(cue puff of smoke and the appearance of........Kain!!! - now there's an idea, Garrett has to investigate the arrival of a green skinned stranger...)

Would agree with the poor choices in the hub, would even add that it was a mistake for us to see his apartment, surely a master thief would not be so skint. I liked the idea of the hub but poorly executed, after stealing the wine from that pub (for example) a couple of times it became repetitive so then didn't bother, which then made the hub pointless.

[zcapp96]

Originally Posted by contrarian

Can we please argue about something else? I really wanna argue about something other than a scar on a video game character.

No you don't.

[thieffer]

Originally Posted by contrarian

I really wanna argue about something other than a scar on a video game character.

a magical blackjack to knock the zombies unconscious was a wonderful subj. to argue about - i facepalmed for like 15 minutes or so (i hope i'm not getting banned for bringing it up all over again, hah)

[contrarian]

Hub=Lazy programming.

I don't want to revist the same area time and time again. I, like most gamers, have a touch of A.D.D. We get bored easily.

Before each mission, show me a cool 1 minute cinematic, let me choose my tools, let me play the mission to the end.......and do it all over again in another setting.

I know this sounds like TDP and TMA, but it worked for me and I never found it repetitive as I did in TDS.

However, the programmers of today are not like the programmers of yesteryear. Chances are we'll see blue portals taking us to another part of town that we've been to a dozen times before. Yawn.

[cGREGgo]

Originally Posted by thieffer

a magical blackjack to knock the zombies unconscious was a wonderful subj. to argue about - i facepalmed for like 15 minutes or so (i hope i'm not getting banned for bringing it up all over again, hah)

LOL - Indeed! I think we need one, how else are we to get thru a level with zero kills?

By the way, 6 months after Thief 3 was released, Garrett had plastic surgery covering up 90% of his scar. OMG, I thought you guys knew that!

(And you call yourselves thief fans!)

[thieffer]

Originally Posted by cGREGgo

how else are we to get thru a level with zero kills?

by considering that killing someone who is already dead is not really a kill for instance? (and i'm not even commenting on the fact that getting through the level with zero kills and zero whatever is a pretty sick idea in itself..)

[cGREGgo]

Lots of people play like that, you should try it sometime. No weapons...

[AlexOfSpades]

Magical Blackjack = Using the Holy Water bottle to blackjack.

No, really. Look at the shape. Its pretty much a mace upside down.

Made of breakable glass.

Full of very deadly holy water. (Undeadly? idk)

[xAcerbusx]

Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity

There's nothing wrong with the idea of Deadly Shadows. It just wasn't executed as well as the previous ones were. Disregarding the story would be unacceptable. But there are details that clearly show that some designers weren't thinking straight. Garrett has a wanted poster and is attacked on sight (and sound) by the police on the streets? I don't remember ever showing my face to any of the police in Thief 2.

You don't?
There was an entire mission (Ambush!) devoted to the premise of Garrett being cornered by City Watch who knew exactly what he looked like because one of his underworld contacts had sold him out. And given that the City Watch was in Karras' pocket, and Karras knows exactly what Garrett looks like, that further enhances the possibility that Garrett is a wanted criminal all over the City.

[thieffer]

guys from destructoid related the leaked trailer news - in their hilarious fashion as usual: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZKHy...ilepage#t=472s