Garrett's Persona - Discussion about his inner character

[Platinumoxicity]

Let's just stop all this. The fact is that Garrett doesn't support murder. -Not because he's a good person, but because he's an egomaniac. He wants to show off to himself that his job can be done without violence, even though it might make things more difficult or dangerous for him. Isn't that exactly the reason why people play on Expert -difficulty? More challenge? That's true immersion when not only the player feels like the game character, but it also seems like some of the qualities of the player have leaked into the game character from the real world.

Why do we never see hundreds of videos online of people playing Thief on the highest difficulty, ghosting or otherwise enforcing extreme difficulty on themselves? Because noone cares, and noone cares about the fact that noone cares. People play Thief on high difficulty to beat themselves, just like what Garrett does when he sets ridiculous objectives for his missions. Games like Call of Duty and Counter-Strike are different, where the only source of enjoyment in the entire game is the ability to brag and show off to other people. Those gamers spend hours and hours editing video material to show only the parts of their gameplay where they're doing great, and those videos find their way online by the thousands.

TLDR; In Thief you show off to yourself. In COD you just show off.

[theBlackman]

Not bad Platinumoxicity. Thief is one of those games where the object is not to "Beat" the game, rather to improve your skills as a player. And as you say, the player who understands the game creates his/her own obstacles to enjoy the pleasure of increasing the difficulty.

Thief, like the game of pool, is one where you defeat yourself. True, in Pocket Pool or Billiards you have an opponent, but the fact is you lose the game by playing poorly, not because the opponent plays better.

Thief is one of those where you defeat yourself by being impatient. by rushing through and not paying close attention to the play options.

[Nightwynd]

Originally Posted by Tryst

Why not just condense the whole post into the fact that you don't condone the death penalty? When a person is being released from prison to murder again because they cannot be cured of the desire to kill, I'm sure relatives of the victims would thank you for your soft heart.

Why, because I thought there was more to it than that. At any point I didn't argue whether there should be a death penalty or not. Obviously, I think there ought not to be one.

Instead of continuing the vicious circle, why not look further into it? There is a reason cause to why the killer is killing. Maybe he's crazy, in that case he should be held from the community. Mental institute, anyone? Or are you going to kill everyone that's crazy? Maybe he's just angry, maybe something else. Obviously, I wouldn't release anyone with intention to kill. I thought that much was clear.

And I agree. Garrett was right doing what he did, he was a hero. Murder or not, inconclusive.
This time it's not about murder, anyway. It's more of a discussion about (personal) ethics and morale.

You guys say it's an act of good to kill a bad man.
I say killing is not an act of good at any time. Follow this simplified analogy: On a scale of 10 bad vs. good (0 being worst, 5 neutral and 10 the best), killing never hits over 5.
It's neutral when pure self-defense.
Letting Karras execute his plans would probably be 0.
What Garrett does, hits probably 4. Somewhat neutral. Outcome is that he undeniably saves lives, which is a good thing - making him a hero. Still the fact that a human life was lost can't be a good thing. Why would it ever be?

Since I'm clearly not getting through to you I won't bother going further and being too serious about things on an internet forum. As I've done already.

EDIT Plat: Agreed. I will not say another word about this.

[BigBoss]

Originally Posted by theBlackman

Not bad Platinumoxicity. Thief is one of those games where the object is not to "Beat" the game, rather to improve your skills as a player. And as you say, the player who understands the game creates his/her own obstacles to enjoy the pleasure of increasing the difficulty.

Couldn't this be argued for any single player game?

Originally Posted by theBlackman

Thief, like the game of pool, is one where you defeat yourself. True, in Pocket Pool or Billiards you have an opponent, but the fact is you lose the game by playing poorly, not because the opponent plays better.

Thief is one of those where you defeat yourself by being impatient. by rushing through and not paying close attention to the play options.

And couldn't this be argued for the whole genre? One of the few hallmarks of all stealth games is patience.

[Tryst]

Originally Posted by BigBoss

And couldn't this be argued for the whole genre? One of the few hallmarks of all stealth games is patience.

Not so much. Splinter Cell is essentially a stealth genre but you don't need patience to play it. Apart from a couple of missions that specify no killing, you can headshot every enemy under cover of shadow and blaze through it. Not quite the same when you have to creep right up behind an enemy to blackjack them, you need to watch their movements to time it properly.

[theBlackman]

Originally Posted by BigBoss

Couldn't this be argued for any single player game?



And couldn't this be argued for the whole genre? One of the few hallmarks of all stealth games is patience.

No. to the first question. I've played many single player games where patience is not even a vague consideration or necessary,

As for the second THERE ARE NO STEALTH GAMES EXCEPT THIEF. So the question is itself invalid.

The so-called stealth games available have brief moments where one tries to be stealthy, but as a STEALTH game, to paraphrase, THERE IS ONLY ONE!

None of the war games posing as STEALTH are a STEALTH game. One may come along where stealth is the primary objective, but none have made it yet.

True, thief has objectives (goals) that are specific to complete a mission. But the primary thrust of THIEF is STEALTH regardless of the goals.

Don't be seen.
Don't be caught.
Don't make a ripple in the quiet of the pond surface.
Be invisible, unheard, unknown.

In other words BE STEALTHY.

[Nightwynd]

Originally Posted by Tryst

Not so much. Splinter Cell is essentially a stealth genre but you don't need patience to play it. Apart from a couple of missions that specify no killing, you can headshot every enemy under cover of shadow and blaze through it. Not quite the same when you have to creep right up behind an enemy to blackjack them, you need to watch their movements to time it properly.

To be fair, SC can be ghosted just like Thief can.

Furthermore, even Thief can be completed on expert quite easily in a way that one knocks every single AI out. But that's no fun, is it? Same applies to SC, IMO. The player can pose own goals to oneself, making the game more challenging.

[theBlackman]

Nightwynd Hey! "to be fair". Now you are sounding rational. Are you sure this is the right place for that.

[Platinumoxicity]

Originally Posted by Nightwynd

To be fair, SC can be ghosted just like Thief can.

Only Splinter Cell 3 can be ghosted with reasonable odds of success, because all the other games in the series have been designed to have varying challenges for the player, and not all of them can just be bypassed by sneaking by. Splinter Cell 4 is a weird hybrid, where half of the missions have you force yourself to take the lives of innocents to keep your cover, and half of the missions are strictly pure ghosting missions where being detected is always game over.

[Nightwynd]

Originally Posted by theBlackman

Nightwynd Hey! "to be fair". Now you are sounding rational. Are you sure this is the right place for that.

I dunno.

MAYBE I should've used
BIGGER FONT
to make it seem less so. Any Better?

Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity

Only Splinter Cell 3 can be ghosted with reasonable odds of success, because all the other games in the series have been designed to have varying challenges for the player, and not all of them can just be bypassed by sneaking by. Splinter Cell 4 is a weird hybrid, where half of the missions have you force yourself to take the lives of innocents to keep your cover, and half of the missions are strictly pure ghosting missions where being detected is always game over.

Fair enough. That wasn't my point.

Point was that SC can essentially be played with the same principals in mind as Thief.

"Don't be seen.
Don't be caught.
Don't make a ripple in the quiet of the pond surface.
Be invisible, unheard, unknown."

SC can be tried to be ghosted, at least. On the other hand, Thief doesn't have to be ghosted.

I haven't played SC4, tho. Chaos Theory is the last one I played.

[Hypevosa]

Originally Posted by Nightwynd

Furthermore, even Thief can be completed on expert quite easily in a way that one knocks every single AI out. But that's no fun, is it?

Yes, it is fun. I have alot of fun with it, because, if you can actually accomplish it, you've achieved something. You may argue that Ghosting takes more skill, but I must say that it's really easy to stay far away from AI, where playing the sandman requires you somehow get behind every single one of them AND not ever be seen, even if tools are allowed.

That and I feel like I've actually earned the following period of peace I have when looting the entire level.

You should try it sometime - especially in the very difficult levels like where you have to Kidnap the mechanist guy. Getting behind some of those people without all the security systems going off is an amazingly difficult process - though there are sections where (if you play your cards right) you can gas 5+ people at once with a well placed gas arrow - and I must say that's very satisfying.

Oh, and obviously I mean on expert.

[Nightwynd]

"Fun" was a poor choice of words, then.

I admit having piled up all the unconscious bodies on a mission - and it is fun.

[Hypevosa]

I may or may not be guilty of placing people in bed together unconscious and throwing a few wine bottles about to incriminate them...

>_>

<_<

*cough*

[BigBoss]

Originally Posted by theBlackman

No. to the first question. I've played many single player games where patience is not even a vague consideration or necessary,

As for the second THERE ARE NO STEALTH GAMES EXCEPT THIEF. So the question is itself invalid.

The so-called stealth games available have brief moments where one tries to be stealthy, but as a STEALTH game, to paraphrase, THERE IS ONLY ONE!

None of the war games posing as STEALTH are a STEALTH game. One may come along where stealth is the primary objective, but none have made it yet.

True, thief has objectives (goals) that are specific to complete a mission. But the primary thrust of THIEF is STEALTH regardless of the goals.

Don't be seen.
Don't be caught.
Don't make a ripple in the quiet of the pond surface.
Be invisible, unheard, unknown.

In other words BE STEALTHY.

Why do you use such large fonts when addressing me? I can see perfectly fine.

As for your fist little part, I encourage you to try splinter cell then on hard. It is impossible to sprint through that.

Here is a speed run for the first level of thief (all other levels are in the sidebar) just to show how patience is equally optional as SC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1ZTmfzdQqo

Just read the second part so I guess there's nothing to be said.

Edit: What do you guys mean when you say "splinter cell can be tried to be ghosted" do you mean zero spots, zero kills? Because that can be done on any difficulty for the first 3 games(outside the obvious scripted parts: Grinko,shetland ect ). I think the reason there were missions in the 4th game where you had to kill people was hinted in the title of the game "Double agent"

[Nightwynd]

Originally Posted by BigBoss

--
Edit: What do you guys mean when you say "splinter cell can be tried to be ghosted" do you mean zero spots, zero kills? Because that can be done on any difficulty for the first 3 games(outside the obvious scripted parts: Grinko,shetland ect ). I think the reason there were missions in the 4th game where you had to kill people was hinted in the title of the game "Double agent"

I meant just that. Cause there are scripted parts, it can't, in the purest of meaning, be ghosted - also much because I don't recall the missions so well since it's been so long since I played SCs and also to avoid unnecessary nitpicking. I'd count the playstyle you described as ghosting.

[BigBoss]

Oh I see. Yeah, I believe there was one person(Grinko) you had to kill in SC1 and there was a gunfight with his lieutenant like 2 levels before, but I'm pretty sure he could just be knocked out. SC2 the las level in the airport you had to kill that one legged guy and his 3 friends from activating the bomb, and for SC3 I'm pretty sure the only one you had to kill was Shetland but that was pretty much a cut scene which brings the total body count to 6. But those guys were in a total of 3 levels of those games so like the other 32 levels in them could be properly "ghosted".

Then Sam gets murder crazy in 4 and 5 so who knows what the body count is in those.

[theBlackman]

Small type on black is hard for me to read BB that is the only reason.

[Platinumoxicity]

Originally Posted by BigBoss

Then Sam gets murder crazy in 4 and 5 so who knows what the body count is in those.

In 4 Sam needs to kill (or knock out) the russian ship crew, make a choice about shooting a helicopter pilot, assassinate the pakistani nuclear scientist, make a choice about shooting another NSA operative, make a choice about killing an entire cruise ship load of innocent people, make a choice about shooting his boss, and in the end he has to kill all the 6 or so terrorists one by one.

But the majority of the time in SC4 is spent ghosting the terrorist HQ, because if he does any harm on anyone or is seen in a restricted area, the game is over. So SC4 is actually the one game in the series that has killing restricted the most.

[Vae]

Originally Posted by theBlackman

Small type on black is hard for me to read BB that is the only reason.

Press (Ctrl) and (+) to zoom in.
Press (Ctrl) and (-) to zoom out.
Press (Ctrl) and (0) restore the original size.

This is a better solution than enlarging just your own text, as now, all text/images will be larger...

[Nightwynd]

Or, if you've got a scroll wheel on your mouse you can, like in the examples above, hold Ctrl and use the wheel to zoom in/out.