Do you wan't a multiplayer in thief 4

[kin]

No thanks!

edit: If a mod can fix the "wan't"....

[Davehall380]

I have changed my opinion completley. Apologies for earlier comments. If this is real (and I assume it is), then it does look promising. I checked on TTLG forums following the link to the youtube video (and again I apologise if this has already been posted), but check out this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beCqO...eature=related

Even if it is fake (and I doubt it after reading the forum), the premise here looks fantastic. I have to say im converted to the idea!

[Davehall380]

It should be noted that this apparently has alot of bugs, and the OM will obviously become unbalanced. But the potential for Thief 4 to have missions designed for co-op and multiplayer co-op are obvious. Prehaps an expansion pack, for the developer to release levels online for a small price, for FM mods and community levels based around these ideas . . . the list goes on. Take for example the First CIty Bank and Trust. One player opening the vault whilst the other goes in, distractions in other parts of the level to allow the other to pass, ambushes etc.

There could be time-limit levels, grab the loot levels, competitive one-on-one (who can get to the target first? Someone sets of an alarm, making it harder for his oppenent to pass?) In a word. WOW

[kin]

And where is the stealth game play in that video? It looks like everyone is in rush. You see with multiplayer we are missing the point of the game which is stealth, tactic and patience. Where are all those?

[Burrick]

I think Thief MP could be a real long term motivation for playing Thief! It would add such a vast amounts of

REPLAYABILITY! SO PLZ EM PUT IT IN!

[Putorski]

Yeah true about replayability! I luv da idea!

[smalljil]

multiplayer? if its done well I am supporting it.

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Originally Posted by kin

And where is the stealth game play in that video? It looks like everyone is in rush. You see with multiplayer we are missing the point of the game which is stealth, tactic and patience. Where are all those?

Plenty of opportunity there for all the things you talk about. The players are obviously not playing in a stealthy manner and are mucking about to show off the world around them.

[Direlord]

i'd support some type of MP if it is done well.

[PlumsieTaker]

There's already plenty of MP games on the market.

Why ruin Thief?

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Originally Posted by PlumsieTaker

There's already plenty of MP games on the market.

Why ruin Thief?

I can't see why multiplayer would ruin any franchise, it just takes more development time

[PJMaybe]

I'm not against multiplayer as such but I just don't see what it will add to the game, so why bother wasting valuable time and money on it?

How is it any different from single player - except much quicker (and easier) because there are more of you?

As for replayability, T1 and T2 are still being played some 10 years after release and there was no multiplayer with them. Immersive story and gameplay, implemented well and extra single player missions and an editor would create more replayability than multiplayer ever would. I actually think MP in Thief would get very boring very quickly unless there were more missions being released.

[Hypevosa]

it's too loaded a question, because we don't know what thief's multiplayer would be like if they tried to make it... we don't know if the single player game would suffer for its existance. I think my answer is "I wouldn't MIND thief having a multiplayer component, but I don't want single player to suffer for it, and I don't want it to be like unreal tournament." I'd want multiplayer to be thiefy, not murdery.

[ZylonBane]

Originally Posted by oO_ShadowFox_Oo

I can't see why multiplayer would ruin any franchise, it just takes more development time

You just answered your own question.

[Davehall380]

The video shows the potential for multiplayer, and was developed by fans from TTLG who realised the potential. It would obviously require alot of refining (the rushing mentioned is something that the original game engine wasnt designed to cope with, let alone the levels designed). I can see alot of people wouldnt mind, and despite the fact that it would take longer to develope, im sure the rewards for that patience would be worth it. There are plenty of games out there on the market that provide multiplayer - but no that cater for that Thief universe multiplayer

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Originally Posted by ZylonBane

You just answered your own question.

So, you're saying that a franchise would be ruined because you have to wait longer for a release?

[ZylonBane]

Originally Posted by oO_ShadowFox_Oo

So, you're saying that a franchise would be ruined because you have to wait longer for a release?

Are you seriously this dense? Videogame development is business, and in business, time = money.

This is exactly why Looking Glass Studios DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE.

[Hypevosa]

looking glass studios doesn't exist because all their money was stolen by that bushido game or whatever it was... which then flopped in the epic tidal wave that is karma.

[ZylonBane]

Originally Posted by Hypevosa

looking glass studios doesn't exist because all their money was stolen by that bushido game or whatever it was... which then flopped in the epic tidal wave that is karma.

You might want to follow the advice of your own sig.

[Hypevosa]

Actually I'm just telling you what I read and was told by others. There was another game that Eidos was working on, it was actually called "Daikatana" not bushido (sorry, I goofed) and that a good deal of funding for TTLG studios was pulled in favor of funding THAT game, thus leading to the destruction of the company. Ironically Daikatana was made by ion storm...

Please, don't be snide to someone just trying to give you more insight into a topic - it's rude. If this information is false, then it's not a fault of my own. I'll go do more research.

http://www.abandonware.ws/daikatana.html

on a more ironic note, there's an add for daikatana on the back of my TMA instruction manual...

http://www.igda.org/Forums/showthread.php?postid=9162

an actual forum topic mentioning what I've told you

"I'll tell you why Looking Glass went under. One word: Daikatana.

Now you all think I'm on crack or something. "Woah, Raph. LGS didn't make Daikatana." "Woah man...are you going to use Daikatana as an excuse for everything?".

Eidos shut down LGS because they didn't have the money to keep it going. Why? Because they pumped millions and millions into Romero's Ion Storm, and more specifically, into Daikatana. I once read a figure (can't find it now) that Eidos put $20M into Ion Storm, which is why they ended up owning it afterwards. They also owned LGS. They needed to keep IS and Daikatana going to try and recoup some of their investment (it was supposed to be a hit, remember?).

So, Daikatana is the leech that sucked the life out of LGS.

Now there's a conspiracy theory for you.

R."

[jtr7]

Over-spending without recouping kills businesses dead.


Fact: Developers don't have all the time in the world to make the game until they are happy with it. Kill the myth in your minds.

[Hypevosa]

I wanna know what on earth possessed eidos to just hand them 20 million dollars? the demo they got for it must have been amazing.

They did the right thing for a business, they tried to recoup losses instead of just cutting them. I still wish they would have cut their losses instead, and not taken the money from TTLG but that's just naive.

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Originally Posted by ZylonBane

Are you seriously this dense? Videogame development is business, and in business, time = money.

This is exactly why Looking Glass Studios DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE.

Your blinding rage at those who have a different opinion to you is quite entertaining, tbh

You seem to be the one that is so utterly and completely misguided that you miss the point that titles with a multiplayer option are far more successful financially than exclusively single player games. But yet you still go swinging for people as if you are some fountain of gaming knowledge.

A vast amount of gamers in this modern age of gaming are firmly of the opinion that no multiplayer equals no buy. Especially with the financially orientated shift in gaming standards away from PC and towards console dependent releases, where the market is rife with second hand games and trade ins.

Regardless of the title or genre, a well executed multiplayer vastly increases a game's shelf life and replayability, which for the sake of your argument we will call "time"

Time that can then be used to pump out real money makers like expansion packs, new multiplayer maps and all other sorts of marketable items that will sell while the game is still at its peak of popularity.

We all know how active the hardcore Thief fans are, and how far the title has come because of the vast interest they've shown in expanding the series over 12 years. The massive mod front they've presented for the community, as you know, is probably one of the reasons why the game is still popular.

Adding a correctly executed online element to this formula, IMO, could possibly skyrocket the series to new heights, but you seem to pessimistically think that it could cripple the franchise because it would cost too much money to implement?

[Davehall380]

Once again would people please stop this pointless one-up manship. These forums are supposed to be constructive, yeah sure be critical but try to avoid being negative.

Anyway, im glad that some people agree with me that multiplayer has plenty of opportunities within Thief - for thoose that dont like the idea, no-one will force you to play. If your arguement is based around the time that the developers will need to put in (and thus the strain on finance), then I really think thats an issue for the developers to worry about.

They will be looking to these forums for feedback on what people want. Lets not provide them with the problems of time management and cost effectivness! A multiplayer release doesnt have to be shipped with the game either . . .

[ZylonBane]

Originally Posted by oO_ShadowFox_Oo

A vast amount of gamers in this modern age of gaming are firmly of the opinion that no multiplayer equals no buy.

And a vast number of gamers couldn't care less about multiplayer. So don't go whining that Eidos should shoehorn multiplayer into a fundamentally single-player game. Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Oblivion, Fallout 3 -- to name a few -- did just fine without multiplayer.

I like strawberry jam, but I'm not such a blithering moron that I insist that everything I eat have strawberry jam on it. The same goes for multiplayer. It has its place... and a Thief game is NOT that place.