PDA

View Full Version : knife vs sword



SNAKE-LORD
24th Feb 2004, 21:34
which is better and please state why you think so.

SNAKE-LORD
24th Feb 2004, 21:44
i have come to love the sword.
the guards have swords after all.
however a knife might be better it could be easly consealed.
i would like to have my cake and eat it too i guess. :cool:

Zante
24th Feb 2004, 22:49
Another feature that made Thief stand out from other "medieval" FPS's was that the player could actually engage in melee combat with a guard via the means of a dynamic collision detection script allowing for blocks, counters etc...

I think it should be left for the player to decide, with perhaps extra modifiers added to inhibit movement and stealth rating whilst carrying some of the larger items.

As for the dagger, I'd like to be able to take guards hostage in dire situations with the blade to their throat, causing "some" guards to think twice before proceeding. Letting the hostage go would result in him falling forward coughing as a means of yet another distraction for Garret to make his escape.

I know that at this stage of development nothing is going to change and I'm angry that this community has been so late in starting.

Mr. Perfect
24th Feb 2004, 23:50
Where's the "Undecided/dont' care" section?

wipeoutxl21
25th Feb 2004, 02:24
Originally posted by Zante
Another feature that made Thief stand out from other "medieval" FPS's was that the player could actually engage in melee combat with a guard via the means of a dynamic collision detection script allowing for blocks, counters etc...

I think it should be left for the player to decide, with perhaps extra modifiers added to inhibit movement and stealth rating whilst carrying some of the larger items.

As for the dagger, I'd like to be able to take guards hostage in dire situations with the blade to their throat, causing "some" guards to think twice before proceeding. Letting the hostage go would result in him falling forward coughing as a means of yet another distraction for Garret to make his escape.

I know that at this stage of development nothing is going to change and I'm angry that this community has been so late in starting.

Good points throughout your post, I completly agree.

HOC
25th Feb 2004, 02:45
what i'm wondering concerning this topic is this...

will you be able to bash down doors with the dagger? will you be able to destroy wood beams that block holes in walls? will there even be bashable doors or the wooden beams in the next installment?

wipeoutxl21
25th Feb 2004, 04:45
good point, diddnt think about that....maybe they will give us a crowbar like in HL2:)

Kerghan
25th Feb 2004, 10:33
I liked carrying the short sword around. I'd much rather have a sword then a dagger. Although, the 'dagger' really could be almost as long as the sword was in the previous games I suppose. Just because it's a dagger, doesn't mean it has to be real small. Are there any good pictures of how it looks in game yet?

Oh yea, if they gave you an option to choose between a sword or a dagger, that'd be great but I doubt that will happen.

HOC
25th Feb 2004, 12:26
if ya look at all the third person view screenshots, the dagger doesn't appear to be any longer than the forearm.

Acronomic
25th Feb 2004, 14:03
Originally posted by HOC
what i'm wondering concerning this topic is this...

will you be able to bash down doors with the dagger? will you be able to destroy wood beams that block holes in walls? will there even be bashable doors or the wooden beams in the next installment?

:rolleyes: That's not exactly what Thief is about, but I kind of agree, because you should have a choice what to do. Just like you choose not to kill guards or to kill them. :)

HOC
25th Feb 2004, 15:13
doesn't matter if ya agree or disagree. or what thief is or isn't about to you in specific. but thank you for sharing your opinion.

however, this does tie into level design to a degree. maybe not for the door bashing, but definitely for the wooden beams. although there were few moments where ya came across holes covered up with the wooden beams, there were still moments where ya could bash them away and do a little extra exploring for either additional loot/items or a shortcut.

Optik45
25th Feb 2004, 17:07
In Thief 1 and 2 I always wondered why Garrett had a dagger in the Cutscenes, but weilded a sword in the game. I have always been a real serious Thiever, but I did enjoy taking a different approach to the game every now and then spending a good amount of time perfecting my melee experience. I dont think I will mind the dagger aslong as I can still block with it.....I hope you can throw it too!

FrozenNorth
25th Feb 2004, 18:10
I would very much like to get that sword back...
here are reason why I think so:
1. In fight against guards with hammers&long swords a sword is always better than a miserable dagger
2. You can't really chop those beams with a dagger
3. I got used to the sword during the previous games
4. Thief is not about assasinations and taking hostages. IF you really must use your melee weapon (other than Blackjack) it's purely to defend yourself, not to stab someone in the back. Killing for "fun" is just not Garret's style, he likes it quiet and as little deaths&evidence as possible

In the end, IF they release those tools to make mods I bet there will be a sword-mod out the very next day to replace the dagger :D

Acronomic
25th Feb 2004, 18:45
Oh well, but nevertheless, the dagger sure is cool to look at. And who said that a dagger can't be used against longswords or hammers? Just dodge. :D

Gumdrop
25th Feb 2004, 23:03
I like the idea of a dagger over a sword. The old overhead sword slash was terrible (although useful for Haunts), so I'm looking forward to actually back-stabbing some innocents! :D

Who knows... we may be able to throw it! :cool:

FrozenNorth
26th Feb 2004, 10:45
Originally posted by Acronomic
Oh well, but nevertheless, the dagger sure is cool to look at. And who said that a dagger can't be used against longswords or hammers? Just dodge. :D

I wonder how they would do those dodge-things. They've said that the controls are "simple and powerful" (or something like that), so how would it fit to an Xbox controller to push several different buttons in needed order and to do it fast? And if you have gotten yourself in a situation with you against 3 hammerites/guards for example, a dagger and your dodges won't save you if the AI is smart enough...


Originally posted by Gumdrop
I like the idea of a dagger over a sword. The old overhead sword slash was terrible (although useful for Haunts), so I'm looking forward to actually back-stabbing some innocents!

Who knows... we may be able to throw it!

That is just what Thief-games are not about. Garret is not a coward who backstabs his enemies (EDIT: And not innocents in any situation!!!) w/o even giving them a fair chance. (Well that depends on the player how he/she plays the game but I think that it just doesn't fit Garret to murder anyone. And on top of that he is a PROFESSIONAL so he doesn't want to leave any signs that could get him in trouble with authorities...(victims of his visit propably know that Garret did it because they already know his style, but they can't do anything about it 'cos they don't have foolproof evidence)

Gumdrop
27th Feb 2004, 16:01
Ah but that is one of the strong points of the first two games: You can play different styles. I like ghosting, but it's always fun to hop over the fence once in a while. :)

Optik45
27th Feb 2004, 17:07
Who cares if Murdering innocents isnt Garretts Style. Dont get me wrong I like ghosting missions but I can recall how many hours I spent killing innocent scientists in 007 Goldeneye, that doesnt fit James Bond's style, its just plain ole fun :)

I do hope you can throw the dagger, and if not I atleast hope that Arrows stick into your enemy instead of just dissappearing, thats always a fun little effect.

wipeoutxl21
27th Feb 2004, 21:56
I love killing innocents, like in mission 2 in thief 2, the ware house mission. There are those two peasants talking in between the crates. I always sneak up on em from above and shoot one of them with an arrow only to jump down and slash the other to pieces with my sword! Hahaha....

coldplay_josh_106
28th Feb 2004, 00:54
I love the sword why they replace it! I Hope that when you use arrows though that instead of them dispearing when you fire them at guards, they stick in them so that once youve taken em down you can collect your arrow back again!

jabpn
28th Feb 2004, 03:33
sword or knife...hmmmm....well for all intensive purposes is there truly anything to do with a knife that can't be done with the blackjack? (in the current games)....personally I think that they should make it possible to pick up a sword from a dead (or unconscious guard) but keep the restrictions of using a sword the same as the first two games. Such a change in the game design (knife instead of sword) indicates to me that they are implementing something that will take advantage of the new knife add-on. I do hope they don't plan too many small levels though as exploring was one of the greatest features of Thief that I loved. Well....here's to speculation :confused:

Jersey
29th Feb 2004, 15:09
Originally posted by jabpn
....personally I think that they should make it possible to pick up a sword from a dead (or unconscious guard) but keep the restrictions of using a sword the same as the first two games...

I could not agree more. And I think you should have the option between dagger and sword (and maybe both?) in the loadout screen. The sword is of course a large tool, so maybe Garret should have more freedom of movement without it. Maybe be able to crouch deeper, or even go prone while carrying dagger, but not when carrying a sword.
On the other hand, a dagger is not ideal for defensive purposes...

This would probably give more motivation for replaying levels, as both the dagger AND the sword have both advantages and disadvantages.

SNAKE-LORD
29th Feb 2004, 18:08
wow lots of valid points have been posted so far so good.
i had forgotten about bashing doors as i have not done that for sometime.
sorry mr. perfect i think everyone should have an opinion on this.
was not trying to leave out anything.
i did not take it into consideration that somebody might not care at all.
was just trying to give logical choices.
is ther a way to change this poll?
As always at your service,
SNAKE-LORD.

Vrbas
29th Feb 2004, 19:31
I want the sword back!! What happens when you are spotted by a guard, out of flashbombs and any other escape items, and no where else to run? You aren't going to turn around and fight "dagger vs. longsword" with a guard who has more skill than you. Maybe Ion Storm thinks it is too easy to defeat a guard with a sword. I don't think it is most of the time. Like when the guard you are fighting does a 5 hit combo on you and then overhead slashes you to the ground (which by the way happens alot to me). The new "dodge" effect they mentioned seems pretty cool but i would rather have the sound of 2 swords scrapping against eachother in a successful parry. Plus, like jabpn said, what can you do with a dagger that you can't do with a blackjack? Besides killing someone, having them scream their bloody guts out, and having to clean up the mess you left? I said it before and i will say it again....You can't make a game better by taking things away from the original and replacing them with others.

one classic thief
1st Mar 2004, 03:46
In my opinion, the dagger will force people to rely on stealth more, since you know you won't have the back-up option of just duking it out and killing the guard you're up against. And the other side of me just likes to back-stab every once in a while. After all, if Garret isn't supposed to kill, why give him arrows? It's all about choice (except the choice of which weapon you want :rolleyes: )

TMoo
1st Mar 2004, 18:34
Why focus on the swords and daggers? The most thrills you would get comes from knowing that if you get discovered you might deal with 1 opponent but not several at a time. Garreth is supposed to be a weak, stealthy, swift caracter. A thief of profession, not a soldier.

Kerghan
1st Mar 2004, 18:57
Why focus on the swords and daggers?

Because some people actually enjoy slaughtering the guards or at least being able to defend yourself if you are seen. When I played through T2, I took out all the guards whenever I could (in stealthy ways usually) because a guard down is one less guard to deal with. Some people think "OMG, you're supposed to sneak past them" but it really depends on what the player wants to do, not what other people expect the player to do.

As for the sword vs dagger argument, the dagger in the screenshots looks long enough to me, but carrying a sword is part of Garret's character. Just like rope/vine arrows are part of Garret's character. If too much is changed like that, he just won't be the same Garret we've come to know and like.

Fortunately, from the screenshots it looks like Garret really hasn't been changed all that much except for the dagger and the rope arrows.

Acronomic
1st Mar 2004, 22:02
Originally posted by Kerghan
Some people think "OMG, you're supposed to sneak past them" but it really depends on what the player wants to do, not what other people expect the player to do.

Yeah that's what I've been trying to say... personally I would like the dagger because it would make a certain amount of variety in taking out guards. Let's say you go to a certain place with really evil people you don't like at all. :) I'd like to be able to use the dagger instead of the blackjack at that point, and I certainly wouldn't use the sword for such an operation.

clayman
1st Mar 2004, 22:44
Definitely prefer the player to have the option. Or to use neither. Many FMs for this game (I'm assuming a level editor) will be intentionally designed to be bloodbaths, for those the sword might work better. Sneak/kill designs might mean the dagger, just in case a Ghost can't get by. :)

Mike Fang
2nd Mar 2004, 01:31
While Garret really isn't that weak, he's got to be strong enough to pull himself up a wall by either rope or climing gloves and how many people do you know who can do that, a dagger is really a better choice in terms of mobility. A sword would get caught on things as he tried to move around.

Also, while a dagger can't be used to bludgeon a foe to death, it can be used like a scorpion uses its stinger. It could be they'll have you dodge enemy attacks, looking for just the right opportunity to strike at their neck or something.

triniphen
2nd Mar 2004, 01:39
i would prefer a dagger above all. the sword slows ya down. the only sword i liked was C's cause it made the zombies pop like bloated ticks. twas fun.

Jaramide
4th Mar 2004, 22:34
Originally posted by clayman
Definitely prefer the player to have the option. Or to use neither. Many FMs for this game (I'm assuming a level editor) will be intentionally designed to be bloodbaths, for those the sword might work better. Sneak/kill designs might mean the dagger, just in case a Ghost can't get by. :)

Just what i think too. A dagger is definitly more Garrets style i think. Remember that killing is supposed to be unproffesional and Garret is the greatest pro there is. Besides as Clayman said. A sword at the hip would probably knock things over if you got the slightest careless. A dagger makes alot more sense.
By the way something that would be really neat would be if you could in addition to leaning use the knife as a mirror to look around corners. Doubt they will put it in but would be very cool none the less.

Fossa
5th Mar 2004, 06:13
The ability to block and parry with the sword was awesome in the original, I'll give you that. At the same time, I like the idea of more people playing Thief 3 the CORRECT way (Read: My way) I.E. total stealth.

Beat Thief Gold and Thief 2 with max loot stolen, zero kills, zero detections/confrontations. I cringe when I think about how many people set it to easy and bow-sniped, hacked, and slashed their way through some places.

Helblind
14th Mar 2004, 09:17
I just thought of this...

Garrett had better not lose his sword!

He stole it for Victoria and the Trickster in the first game.

It's part of the story. It's magical. You cannot get rid of it now!

TheOriginalNobody
14th Mar 2004, 16:12
Actually, Constantines sword seemed to disappear in thief 2 and was replaced with a regular sword. Maybe the sword was destroyed when Constantine died? Or maybe the keepers took it.

Morpheus445
14th Mar 2004, 17:47
hmm...that would be very very interesting. Perhaps you could use intimidation by pulling out your weapon rather, I imagine some guards would prefer not getting into a fight. Perhaps bribery would be a useful technique as well as blade to throat interrogation tactics.

bonobp
15th Mar 2004, 16:29
a dagger or fits garrets´character a lot better, swords are not handy. both a thief or an assanssin would prefer dagger over sword.

TMoo
15th Mar 2004, 17:14
to Kerghan.

I also took as many guards out as possible. What i am aiming at is you should not be able to engage a group of say 4 soldiers at once and have the alarm sound and you could still stick around and pick them off one by one in closecombat.

You'd better want to single them out, stealthy and unnoticed by the other guards.

AI is important here.

Chaosbourne
26th Mar 2004, 22:00
Who needs either when you have the blackjack!

Bertuccio
27th Mar 2004, 04:58
the short sword from the other games was barely longer than the dagger, and was not nearly as long as the longswords guards used. Neither would be a good weapon to use in a fair fight with a guard.

Besides, I don't see any evidence that the dagger will be different than the short sword at all. It looks like it's just another of those annoying things they're doing to bait the "expanded audience."

Peter_Smith
27th Mar 2004, 06:08
I agree with Chaosbourne. You don't need either sword or dagger in most cases, and a BJ is preferable. However, if you just have to kill someone, for one reason or another, the dagger may force a stealty approach to the victim. Thus, I think the dagger is closer to the stealthy essence of the game, as the developers see it. Yes, getting rid of the sword may limit melee potential, and perhaps some fun, but I for one will not miss it. I do not use the sword for head-on conflict if I can avoid it. For back stabbing, the dagger should work just as well.

Also, the point is not lost that a dagger is more thiefly. It makes a lot of practical sense to carry that rather than a big clanging thing that will get in the way and make noise when it hits the furniture.

rubberchicken
27th Mar 2004, 23:16
I'll miss the good old-fashioned sword-fighting, but honestly the dagger does make more sense overall. After all, if Garrett's a guy who counts on stealth and agility to keep him alive rather than brute force, he's probably not going to want this four-foot-long piece of metal weighing him down all the time - especially not when he's already got that cumbersome bow.

Of course, it'll be interesting to see how the Bonehoard/Lost City/Escape! -style levels go now that he no longer has the sword. Garrett is the stealthy knife-in-the-back type, not the wicked monkey-knife-fight type, meaning that toe-to-toe confrontations will either be very tough (which is good) or very un-Thief-like (which is bad.)

On the killing/no-killing front - while I agree that the original games did allow you to go on a rampage, the Expert difficulty level always forbade the killing of humans. Does anybody know if this is going to remain the case in the made-for-TV version, or is it another annoying little detail that's going to conveniently disappear?

Adahn
29th Mar 2004, 23:00
I would rather keep the sword since you could use it as a last resort against the guards if thigs turn bad, I just can't imagine how can you kill someone with a dagger if he is armed with a longsword, its just unrealistic. And I also liked to think that Garret can put up a good fight if his back is against the wall, like I did in that mission in T2 when you have to escape the city.

Huntress
29th Mar 2004, 23:30
Well just for the sake of argument...I'd rather kept the sword. As far as my playstyle, I much preferred to BJ my way through mostly...rarely used broadhead arrows or sword but when it was necessary (spiders/Haunts, etc.) then by gosh I sure don't want to have to depend on a dagger!!! :D Yes, I agree that perhaps a dagger would be more thiefy like but in this type of gameplay would seem a bit one-sided (guards favor) and that I wouldn't like to try to defend myself with that kind of weapon. I had enough difficulty even doing it with a sword much less a dagger if necessary but then I'm still reminded of the fact...that they are/have changed the game a lot from what we've seen in T1/T2 and why they didn't call it T3...as it will be different in many ways and apparently you won't have to bash any wooden structures cause the problem won't exist (since logically you shouldn't be capable of doing it with a dagger) etc....Ta and Good Hunting!

Bertuccio
31st Mar 2004, 05:19
-he's probably not going to want this four-foot-long piece of metal weighing him down all the time- Rubberchicken

Gwah.. it's a shortsword ppl. Rapiers (http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~wew/fencing/blades.html) were four feet long. The guards longswords are four feet long. Shortswords and daggers are not greatly different lengths (1-1.5 foot blade) and the argument that daggers are more stealthy is bunk.

grafixmonkey
2nd Apr 2004, 23:49
I prefer the choice. Not in the Options menu per se, but in the form of being able to maybe buy a sword or pick one up from a guard for that mission. The sword is useful for one big thing - protection. You can block with it if a guard starts trying to wail on you, and use that delay time to pull out a flashbomb or speed potion and get away.

The knife is more realistic. I think it should be the default "always in" weapon. It's small, portable, concealable ("You shove the sword into your pants pocket. Ouch."), and potentially silent. You can't perform a silent takedown with a four foot long sword, it's too awkward. But it would be useful for certain missions and circumstances, depending mostly on the gamer's playing style and tendency to get into trouble - ideal candidate for a shop or an in-mission pickup.

I also can't see fighting zombies off very effectively without a sword. You only have so many water arrows in a mission... and sometimes those zombies have been multiplying like bunnies all the years they've been trapped together underground in the dark, bored to tears...

Fanuilos
3rd Apr 2004, 07:56
Originally posted by one classic thief
In my opinion, the dagger will force people to rely on stealth more, since you know you won't have the back-up option of just duking it out and killing the guard you're up against. And the other side of me just likes to back-stab every once in a while. After all, if Garret isn't supposed to kill, why give him arrows? It's all about choice (except the choice of which weapon you want :rolleyes: )

Exactly my opinion. You don't need to fight as a thief. The only thing the dagger would be in assasination missions. You can use arrows just as well to kill someone, but sometimes it's easyer to stab him/her in the back. And why do you want to bash open a wooden door when you can easy lockpick those?

LobsterCreature
3rd Apr 2004, 15:50
I just hope there won't be any assasination missions. I think there's a whole game series called Hitman for that kind of activity.
Blackjack is good enough for regular guards, and gas weapons take care of those other hard headed characters.

So i don't really care whether it's dagger or sword.

By the way, has there been any confirmation that T3 has gas arrows?

grafixmonkey
4th Apr 2004, 05:28
Originally posted by Fanuilos
Exactly my opinion. You don't need to fight as a thief. The only thing the dagger would be in assasination missions. You can use arrows just as well to kill someone, but sometimes it's easyer to stab him/her in the back. And why do you want to bash open a wooden door when you can easy lockpick those?

The first few times I played 1 and 2, I had to fight as a thief. In the story, Garrett can handle a small combat if he has to, and IMO should be able to in Thief 3 too. Your only way out of a detection situation should not be to run away until the guards reset, or load a saved game. (I hate having to load a saved game over and over.)

I have a friend who places the Autosave button next to his movement keys, just so he can autosave every 45 seconds and have a restore point. He once spent 5 hours trying to figure out a way to avoid dying in a combat situation in some game or another. He finally gave up and just watched his death sequence in disgust, only to find it wasn't the usual death sequence - it was a cutscene! The "death" was a planned part of the plot and he was sitting there loading save points for 5 hours trying to avoid it. So I don't count loading save games as a good alternative to a sword. Same with running away until the guards reset. You're just taking advantage of the AI programming then.



And no assassination missions for the king of stealth, who always seems to be politically involved with the fate of the world? Come on, if you'd had a chance to put an arrow through Karras' head in Thief 2, Garrett would have taken it. Besides, I didn't say it had to be a successful assassination mission. Remember in T2 walking into the police chief's room to blackmail him, and finding him extremely and violently dead? Anything can happen on a mission. Besides, Garrett took any decent-sounding mission that earned him his next month's rent. I don't think he'd turn someone down if they wanted to see some drunk cheating merchant lord dead, and wanted to give Garrett enough money for rent and a new sword. ;)

LobsterCreature
4th Apr 2004, 09:35
Believe me, i would have had more imaginative ways to end Karrass than an arrow or a sword.

I just think it would be more Garrett's style to rob the drunk cheating merchant lord clean. And besides last time he got a job from a major player, the old bugger took his eye.

But hey, who knows what those folks in ISA have in mind for us taffers.

MaD-SaM
5th Apr 2004, 12:28
We have people who complain that thief 3 is going to be more combat orientated and then people who want the sword back, which is essentially only for killing people. You're either all different people or something isn't right here. :eek:

I'm sorry, but the only reason I am seeing from people who want the sword back is "It kills things better!" - Look at the practical side of it:

-A long sword is going to be heavy, noisy, and get in the way a lot of the time when Garrett needs to jump, climb, crawl and generally navigate scenery. Not good for someone who is trying to sneak his way around the place.

A dagger suits Garrett, simply because it is light, small and definitely a quieter weapon and after considering Garrett's stealthy nature it can be just as deadly - a backstab!

A dagger just places emphasis on Garrett's lack of head on combat ability and shows off the Guards greater ability with their swords (bigger weapons) and this is a good thing, and something I personally don't want changed.

Woohoo for daggers!

LobsterCreature
5th Apr 2004, 12:41
I agree that dagger is more stealty. But if Garrett is descenting into some cave filled with ghosts n' goblins, zombies or any kind of grotesque beings, surely he would like something bigger than a butter knife as a precaution.

ERR
6th Apr 2004, 21:15
Did any of yall ever stop to think that maybe the dagger and the shortsword are infact the same weapon. Maybe since the new designers of thief are trying to appeal to a bigger audience (i.e. xbox gamers) that maybe they just call the shortsword a "dagger" because they know itll sound cooler and attract more fans not used to the ways of Garret.

Personally I am one of those xbox kinda guys and the thought of a sword being carried around by a thief appauls me!

So maybe Edios new that and they decided to just call it a dagger when infact it is was a shortsword all along.


P.S. quit complaining, just be glad there is a Thief 3 anyways. and if your not glad then dont buy and and shut up and get off this forumn.

van_HellSing PL
6th Apr 2004, 21:19
You know, being rude to other members isn't exactly the wisest thing to do when your new on a forum... :rolleyes:

ERR
6th Apr 2004, 21:46
I aint new, new name maybe, but not new.

ERR
6th Apr 2004, 21:47
But your right, it was rude of me. Didnt mean for the last part to sound rude, twas a jest.

Arkane6966696
6th Apr 2004, 23:07
I picked the last option, cuz its correct. Depending on what difficulty you choose you have to either NOT kill anyone or you just can't kill servants since there harmless! Either weapon would be useful but then again it all depends on what your goals really are ;)...

tealsmith
6th Apr 2004, 23:08
Originally posted by ERR
Did any of yall ever stop to think that maybe the dagger and the shortsword are infact the same weapon. Maybe since the new designers of thief are trying to appeal to a bigger audience (i.e. xbox gamers) that maybe they just call the shortsword a "dagger" because they know itll sound cooler and attract more fans not used to the ways of Garret.

No, that's not the case. If you play Thief: TDP or Thief 2, it's an actual sword Garrett carries around. The videos and images of Thief 3 show that the new weapon is, in fact, a dagger.

LobsterCreature
7th Apr 2004, 17:21
Garrett must have a degree in human anatomy, since he can kill a man instantly with a single stab.

Whatz His Name
7th Apr 2004, 18:03
Originally posted by LobsterCreature
Garrett must have a degree in human anatomy, since he can kill a man instantly with a single stab.
Well, he is a Master Thief. He has been trained to use lethal weapons. Along with that training, he would naturally be taught the ways to kill people.

grafixmonkey
10th Apr 2004, 06:32
I'm sorry, but the only reason I am seeing from people who want the sword back is "It kills things better!"

You forgot blocking. I would sometimes use the sword to block a guard's attacks while I look for a good way out of the room in T1 or T2. It's also an excellent zombie deterrent. It was impossible in some levels to get through without being seen by a zombie. Just think if you had to be within stabbing range to even touch a zombie with your weapon, and had to forget about being able to bash them on the head and knock them down? Zombies don't give a crap if you stab their body, they don't bleed or hurt. They do react to blunt trauma or large, swinging, severing trauma, like a sword can deliver.

Mainly, I want to have some ability to block. That can be done with a dagger, and as long as there's a way to take out zombies without wasting the water arrows that you want to use for torches, it should be ok.

Orumph
12th Apr 2004, 02:32
Originally posted by Whatz His Name
Well, he is a Master Thief. He has been trained to use lethal weapons. Along with that training, he would naturally be taught the ways to kill people. Yep, you don't need a degree in anatomy to sneak up behind someone and shove a knife in thier neck. It's pretty self explanatory to me.

But I would miss the sword. I loved sword fighting. That was always great fun.

Clang,, shinnnggg, clank clang, shhhhiiiinnnnnnggkkkk

man I will miss that.

Actualy, i would perfer to have both. But, realisticly it would be difficult to sneak in and out of places with a sword hanging off your belt and not make a huge clang sound all the time. This is just a game, If I wanted realism I would go do it all for real.

Although, in those days I would have both. Leave my sword hidden away if I didn't think i would need it while I pulled off a job and go back to it. If needed, leave it and steal another one.

LobsterCreature
12th Apr 2004, 09:03
Originally posted by Orumph
Yep, you don't need a degree in anatomy to sneak up behind someone and shove a knife in thier neck. It's pretty self explanatory to me.

Actualy, i would perfer to have both. But, realisticly it would be difficult to sneak in and out of places with a sword hanging off your belt and not make a huge clang sound all the time. This is just a game, If I wanted realism I would go do it all for real.


Yes but stabbing someone in back or chest is another matter, so i still vote for Garrett, Ph.D. :)

Well it's not very realistic when Garrett carries tons of loot in his pockets, so I think we can forget realism in that field. But it would be fun to have a melee with those craymen again...

grafixmonkey
12th Apr 2004, 20:17
Name ANY game that had realistic inventory. Space Quest 3: "You shove the ladder into your pants pocket. Ouch." Unreal Tournament, you can carry like 15 or more heavy assault weapons. Call Of Duty got kind of realistic, but I still don't see a way for a soldier to have a pistol, 10 hand grenades, two WWII era weapons that could include an anti-tank rocket-grenade and a machine gun, as well as upwards of 400 rounds of ammo for each gun. Even then the inventory felt restrictive when I wanted to carry a sniper rifle.

If Thief was realistic it would be no fun. You have to sacrifice realism for gameplay, always. Heck I can't even stand playing Counterstrike for very long, because the gunfighting is so realistic that it's not much fun compared to, say, its cousin TFC, or Unreal Tournament.

And yeah, the sword fighting was lots of fun too, I'd miss it a lot. It was a great stress reliever when Garret just wouldn't do something right (not my fault of course... :rolleyes: ) and I felt like getting him into a fight with as many guards as possible and seeing how long he'd last.

LobsterCreature
12th Apr 2004, 21:36
Or monkey island 2 where Guybrush takes an ape and puts it into his pockets (or the Banana picker in MI 1). That was great. Yes i agree the inventory system doesn't have to be realistic, maybe my statement sounded little negative. But it's good that Thief is realistic in some fields like AI or lighting systems. I actually would like Thief to have more detailed damage system like the one in DX1. And it would be nice to try that DX1 inventory system in thief too...

I don't think that realism hurts every game. Just look at "Tom Clancy's" games rainbow six, ghost recon. Or operation flashpoint. I couldn't imagine those as normal FPS.

grafixmonkey
12th Apr 2004, 22:33
True, some genres benefit from realism in different places than others. I think the original Thief inventory system worked really well for that kind of game. I picture the "slots and blocks" system like in Deus Ex 1 and System Shock 2 being more useful for role playing games, where you have a persistent inventory through the whole game but a large selection of objects you can carry, and they want to prevent you from hoarding every item you pick up and limit your access to ammo and varieties of weapons. In Thief though, you only have a few basic weapons, you don't have a choice between a rocket launcher or SMG or pistol or rifle or flamethrower etc. and also the need to carry expendable tools and healing. You just have your bow, knife/sword/whatever, and a variety of arrows.

Oh yeah, and best "unrealistic" inventory system of all... The Final Fantasy games. :D

"You're carrying... 99 Cure1, 99 Cure2, another 99 Cure2, 99 Silver Katanas for Edge to dart, 99 Battle Axes for Edge to dart, 99 Scottish Claymores for Edge to dart, your new Paladin armor, 6 suits of chain mail, 11 suits of Leather, 9 suits of Cloth armor, your old Dark Knight plate mail, your old Shadow Knight plate mail, ... .... .... .........." for pages and pages... No wonder you couldn't jump over that one little rock that was preventing you from going to the next area instead of through the whole cave maze! :rolleyes:

LobsterCreature
13th Apr 2004, 12:21
I'm not sure, but isn't there going to be some sort of stockpiling in T3. Garrett will keep all the stuff he has collected from previuos missions and he can use them in the next mission. If this is true will we see Garrett carrying 99 fire arrows, 99 gas arrows, 99 bottles of beer, 99 healing potions etc. in the last missions? I think it would be best if he could carry a reasonable amount of stuff around like in T1/T2, where you couldn't usually get more than 3-5 gas or fire arrows. Stockpiling is a good feature though. I can't remember how many times I had to use all the money for useless stuff in T1/T2 just because I couldn't bank my loot.

I haven't actually ever played Final Fantasy games, just watched the movie and that was enough for me :eek: ! I know that it doesn't have anything to do with the games (???), but I have never owned a console or the PC versions of those games and frankly i'm not even interested.

I wonder why they couldn't put some limits to FF's inventory system. Isn't it supposed to be a RPG? I mean even the legendary Dungeon Master had inventory limits and that was in the 80's!!

grafixmonkey
13th Apr 2004, 17:14
That's a good point - since the missions will be "enter at will" and there's the whole global economy thing, maybe inventory will be an issue. I guess they might be coming up with some plan for limiting it somehow... hopefully not via the "blocks and slots" method, maybe by weight of objects.

I was talking about the early FF games, for Super Nintendo. I stopped around number 7 where they started thinking the only reason people played the game was to watch the graphics when you cast spells. I actually know people who played 7 and 8 who would cast a spell, and go to the kitchen for a snack while the spell graphics were playing. The early FF games had an inventory system where you just had 250 or so inventory slots, where the name of an item could reside. Once an item with a certain name was in the inventory, adding more of that item would stack them and put a number in that slot next to the name. There was plenty of gold, and shops never ran out of items. Your inventory was "full" when all the name slots were taken, so you could carry some 250 different types of item, but any number of each type.

And when THAT filled up, you could use a carrot to summon a Big Chocobo, and he had EVEN MORE space that you could fill with stuff!!! (you were never meant to be resource limited in that game. :rolleyes: )

FF doesn't compare well with any of the RPGs that you've played on PC. It was a top-down, character centered on screen, "walk around the world and get random encounters and see cinematic story cutscenes and fight pre-arranged boss characters" game. It had pre-determined characters and they would enter and leave your party etc. according to storyline most of the time. Nothing whatsoever like Might&Magic or Krondor or Morrowind or any of the PC titles.

LobsterCreature
13th Apr 2004, 18:52
Originally posted by grafixmonkey
...you could use a carrot to summon a Big Chocobo.

Possibly the reason why I won't touch FF games in my lifetime!:D

It would be interesting if Garrett's abilities would depend on how much stuff he carries with him. More weight, the slower Garrett would be able run and jumps would be lower too. But that probably is too complicated...

Talking about weight, I wonder if Garrett is still able to carry a body and climb ropes/ladders at the same time. That would be fun to see in 3rd person.

grafixmonkey
14th Apr 2004, 22:25
Originally posted by LobsterCreature
Possibly the reason why I won't touch FF games in my lifetime!:D

It would be interesting if Garrett's abilities would depend on how much stuff he carries with him. More weight, the slower Garrett would be able run and jumps would be lower too. But that probably is too complicated...

Talking about weight, I wonder if Garrett is still able to carry a body and climb ropes/ladders at the same time. That would be fun to see in 3rd person.

I don't like that level of realism with inventory. I don't want to have to worry about how much I'm carrying on a mission, or have to get rid of some of my tools to be able to move normal speed. That's for role playing and Tom Clancy games. It doesn't fit the gameplay of the Thief series. Next we'll be rolling for Garret's "Stealth" and "Strength" stats when we start a game, managing food and having him eat twice a day, and making sure he visits the little boys' room frequently enough to avoid getting a stealth penalty due to smell from "accidents". :rolleyes:

Oh and while we're at it, give him a family, make you lay out build and furnish his house, and we can make it a plugin for The Sims. They already have a "Thief" profession, this could be it! :D

LobsterCreature
15th Apr 2004, 17:21
Originally posted by grafixmonkey
...managing food and having him eat twice a day.


Garrett has a bottomless stomach. He can eat all the food in a kithcen in just a few seconds. You'd think that would slow him down! I wonder if Garrett will be able to stockpile his food in T3, I can already imagine the smell of rotten ham...

grafixmonkey
18th Apr 2004, 17:46
LOL... I loved doing that at the end of a mission. Just switch to the "Food" item in the inventory, and hit the button as fast as you could to hear him munch through an entire fortress' worth of food supplies like an 8-foot squirrel on crack in a Planters factory.

Skanky Burns
13th May 2004, 03:43
I don't mind either way with dagger or shortsword. A dagger cuts through banners just as well as a sword, which is pretty much all I use it for. Plus a dagger is more thief-like.

We aren't armoured like guards, why should we be armed like them? :D

grafixmonkey
13th May 2004, 15:46
We aren't armoured like guards, why should we be armed like them?
That's an easy one. Because we're not wearing any armor!! :D

two words: Block, Run.

Skanky Burns
14th May 2004, 07:05
:lol:

Ahh, but then we would run faster holding a dagger than holding a sword. Of course, we would run fastest of all not holding either. ;)

BloodRiot
14th May 2004, 10:37
My humble opinion: Ditch the sword. If possible, give the dagger a tool like use and not just a back stabbin weapon.

Let's face it. I know you all as players may want to use a sword and hack away... dont let me or anyone stop you. But the truth is, a thief will prefer not to kill anyone and sneak his way into and out of the places he robs.

It's not practical to climb, run, jump with a heavy metal object that slows and tires you and might hit something and therefore make loud noises that attract unwanted attention.

Sure none of this probably is in the game anyway... but it's plain common sense. Using and extreme example, it's the same reason Garrett (or ANY OTHER thief for that matter) wears full plate armor. Try Sneaking, climbing, running with one... in the ded of the night, you'll wake up the entire city.

Well since people do make a fuss about it, i can never say no to something optional... i mean.. I for one dont need a sword... so i can simply not use it.. the same way im not gonna use 3rd person view. But all im saying is, the sword was removed cuz of logical practicality.

Cheers.

Gorman Truart
14th May 2004, 16:37
Anyone played The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King? Polar opposite of Thief, but I like em both. I take Aragorn and Anduril and clean house, and swords are frickin COOL, man, COOL. But I like the idea of stickin a guy in the back with a dagger and watchin him drop. But the game will probably make the guards much more difficult to kill once they're on to ya. Then you'll want Narsil.

grafixmonkey
18th May 2004, 18:27
I played LOTR: the Fellowship, and it sucked so bad I was laughing out loud at the poor quality of the game, and very very glad that I'd just borrowed my cousin's CD while he was over for xmas. The only good thing about the game was the model of the Shire. (looked very nice.) Yet another title riding on the cushion of popularity from the movies while hacking together some half-functional interface and worthless gameplay.

And while we're at it, Garrett shouldn't use a bow and arrow. The arrows are too bulky and loud, the bow is too long to actually maneuver with (bow's a lot longer than a sword, you know), and the string goes "Twang" when you shoot, even if you have poofy things on the string to dampen the vibration. I think he should use a blowgun. Much stealthier.

And he shouldn't wear pants. The inseams rub against each other and make noise. He should definitely either wear a kilt, or go in the buff.

Gorman Truart
20th May 2004, 22:56
Well when you're as well endowed as I, pants significantly stifle the slap-slap of your jubblies.:cool:

grafixmonkey
21st May 2004, 20:40
That's true. I bet Garrett has some serious jubblies... Ballet tu-tu then!

U4EA
11th Jun 2004, 12:32
I've not used the knife a single time yet. I love ghosting so a lot of the complaints that many people have with the game (knife vs sword, arrow trails, loot/shop balance etc) don't really bother me. All I've spent money on so far is 2k for the gloves.

Speesh
11th Jun 2004, 13:10
I would prefer a choice. The dagger may be smaller and more efficent, but I liked the sword as well. The sword is what got me into thief 1 in the first place. It made it more fun to fight the guards when you weren't playing seriously.

fpk
15th Jun 2004, 12:59
I like the combat with a sword, with a dagger you can't block the attacks and it is defenseless. However I think it is ridiculous to bring a sword out on the street or doing missions, the big bow is huge enough to attract guards,

asmodian
15th Jun 2004, 14:17
Constantines sword is not missing you can see it mounted above the fireplace in garrets home in thief 2. I assume since, since garret is on the run then, that it probably gets appropriated by truats men.

Dagger is just find for combat i took on 2 hammerhaunts in catacombs w it and they didnt lend a hand on me. Yes u cant block w dagger but can dodge.

gar_goyle1
15th Jun 2004, 17:50
I believe a knife is better for several reasons:

1) being a thief means being unencumbered by a large weapon;

2) need a weapon "just in case";

3) Garrett reminds me of a soft-hearted assassin at times, therefore he should carry a dagger;

4) the knife is easier to use and faster as well.

Cheers!!!

Thiloniel
17th Jun 2004, 22:04
A knife is easily concealed and is small and quick... a two handed sowrd isnt exactly normal for a thief to carry about....

Blue Ghost
18th Jun 2004, 08:17
I think historically thiefs carried any weapon they could, though thieving back then was more ambush/mugging kind of stuff in the streets, or grabbing what you could at the bazar or markets.

If you want to discuss stealth options then a dagger may feel right, but a sword on the back, to me anyway, isn't all that impractical. This is assuming one knows how to use it. Swords were typically three feet long or shorter (two handed monstrosities not withstanding), and swords were typically taken from the dead on the battlefield (cross culture practice in the old world; from European Serfs to Japanese peasants). So a thief having a sword probably wouldn't be all that uncommon.

Additionally a broadsword is a special type of sword that had an extra wide blade. I think the theory was that the larger the blade the more weight and energy could be injected into the weapon's edge, and hence unto the target when the weapon was swung. What Garret had in the previous Thief installments was not a broadsword, but a longsword, the standard run-in-the-mill type of sword, usually carried by knights and other soldiers of the period.

What is sounds like you all are talking about is specialized equipment for stealth operations. Ninja and Middle Eastern assasins carried swords and scimitars respectively. Ninja swords, carried on the back, were usually straight and measured just over two feet in length. And the only reason they were used was because the mountaineers of Japan (the "lawless" who paid no heed to the local lord) was because they couldn't afford real Samurai swords. They usually ditched the straight edge weapon once they aquired a real sword off a dead samurai (again usually as a token taken off a battlefield).

The only thing I didn't like about the sword in the previous Thief installments was the over head slash from behind. To me that seems a real inefficient way to cut down an enemy. I'd think the best way would be to use the sword as an oversized dagger, and plunge or jab it into the guard or zombie, verse bringing it down like a meat cleaver. Then again I'm no expert on the subject. Just my feelings on the matter.

In future games I'd like an option of equipment; sword, dagger or both, and the infamous rope and grappleing hook that was shown on the cover of Thief 1, but never seen in the game. Ditto with the crossbow and coil of rope draped around Garret's shoulders.

Just my two copper pieces of wisdom.

rob444
21st Jun 2004, 18:38
It's not a kitchen knife he is running around with, it's a dagger ;)
I feel the dagger is much more realistic than carrying a heavy clumpsy swords, thieves are suposed to be silent right? :)

grafixmonkey
21st Jun 2004, 20:55
I think he should carry a frozen turkey and a potato gun.

But he doesn't, he carries a dagger. Jeez, will this thread ever die?

Hide
22nd Jun 2004, 00:08
I think each of us should choose the way he wants to play and have fun.

So personnally, I would prefer a personnal secret room (remember? :) ) in Garrett own house so he could choose his weapons for every mission...


Well then, if you like to improve your fighting techniques, take the sword with an attack and a parry button and go through the game easily...

Well concerning the fight dagger/sword... I just can't tell... I m down to the 2nd part of the museum, have done it all in Expert mode and have never fought sword vs dagger. I prefer climb a wall, go over the guard and jump in his back to use my beloved blackjack, or aim at his head and... hide the corpse...


Finally it is up to each player to be his own Garrett... Some will be murderers and never let anyone living behind... Others will be more pacific...
Personnally, I only use my dagger for 2 things :
- Backstabb an ennemy wich cannot be stunned...
- Backstabb an ennemy whose goal is to kill me... I mean, not while protecting his master's house... but one guy whose mission is to kill me (ie The 2 guys and the woman after the 1st mission or any enforcer.... omg I do not even know if it is possible to use blackjack over an enforcer...)
So it is part of everyone's roleplay...

The_Insane
13th Jul 2004, 21:11
you should buy ur weapons first !!! u start the game with the blackjack only. then creep around ,avoid guards( cos u can't win at all with no weapons) and collect loot to buy ur weapons. there should also be bigger stores and more thieving stuff like the rope arrow and more traps. an upgrade option to upgrade ur bow and sword. it's lol to trash the practice dummy in ur house.

system_dude
13th Jul 2004, 23:13
i really miss the sword! the dagger is rubbish

Forever_Frozen
13th Jul 2004, 23:26
In my opinion, the dagger does seem more realistic for a thief to use. Some points:

1. A sword can't be consealed very well. And a thief would conseal his weapons just incase he is caught or seen on the streets.

2. A dagger is smaller and light weight; swords are heavy. Imagine trying to run from a group of guards holding a heavy sword or a light dagger. Sure, the sword is better to use in combat, but against a group your pretty screwed anyway.

3. when I picture a thief, i think of a dark, sly, kinda person. I don't think I would ever see a thief useing swords or other big weapons.

---but---

I still like the sword more then the dagger :eek:

The_Insane
13th Jul 2004, 23:34
me too, dagger s ok but the sword is better and cooler .Garrett can do some tricks with his dagger.just go stand behind someone and watch his dagger or do nothing and watch, he'll do something.

btw: you can't throw a sword...they should have made an option to throw your dagger.

Silent_Hitman47
14th Jul 2004, 01:54
I like the dagger more. I want to buy one and be able to walk to blockbuster feeling safer. Plus a thief is sly and I don't see a sword fitting that category. I just love the dagger.

hagatha
14th Jul 2004, 05:06
After my first game of Thief 1, in which I tried to kill all the guards with arrows and my sword, I realized that the game is far more fun for me as a pure sneaker with my blackjack only. Thus my sword has only ever been used to slash wall hangings since my first game, and my knife has been used not at all. I only ever use normal arrows to cause a disturbance, and Fire arrows are for monsters and lighting torches. Or blowing things up as required.

I like the idea of the guards all waking up the next morning with goose eggs on their heads, wondering how on earth they all ended up in a big pile in a dark corner...and the Boss wants to know, too.

wolfsbane
15th Jul 2004, 02:16
Originally posted by grafixmonkey
I think he should carry a frozen turkey and a potato gun.

But he doesn't, he carries a dagger. Jeez, will this thread ever die?

no, but you made me laugh. that's worth something

:)

jm

Thatguy
15th Jul 2004, 17:22
Why cant we just pick up the swords/hammers/etc. that the guards drop? :/

[JpC]Shadow
16th Jul 2004, 06:40
Originally posted by Zante
Another feature that made Thief stand out from other "medieval" FPS's was that the player could actually engage in melee combat with a guard via the means of a dynamic collision detection script allowing for blocks, counters etc...

I think it should be left for the player to decide, with perhaps extra modifiers added to inhibit movement and stealth rating whilst carrying some of the larger items.

As for the dagger, I'd like to be able to take guards hostage in dire situations with the blade to their throat, causing "some" guards to think twice before proceeding. Letting the hostage go would result in him falling forward coughing as a means of yet another distraction for Garret to make his escape.

I know that at this stage of development nothing is going to change and I'm angry that this community has been so late in starting.

Thief isn't an fps.

CWFY
19th Jul 2004, 07:53
There is no reason why you could not have both. You can cary an unlimited amount of loot so its not a weight isue, and if you did get into a "toe-to-toe" fight with a guard or city watch etc... then a sword would be usefull, but it would cause a major loss to the stealth aspect as you would be less concerned about being caught as you can turn and fight.

darraghcoy
19th Jul 2004, 21:53
Miss the sword for the occasional bout of combat- but a knife is great for sneaky backstabbing. I'd personally like to have both.