PDA

View Full Version : SPECULATION: End of T3 / Beginning of T4



Platinumoxicity
14th May 2009, 20:17
I don't know if I can explain my point of view the way I want people to see it because my conception of the story is somewhat... strange. The second alternative is something that I've heard many times but I don't personally believe it.
So, correct me if I'm wrong:

Alternative 1: In the end of T3, the keepers have lost their power to "shape events" based on their prophecies. Garrett has been revealed to be the "balance the City needs."
Now you see, Garrett has mostly been the cause of imbalance that he personally has balanced in the last games. (He gave the Eye to the Trickster => Things went bad => He stole it back and killed him)
And (He gave the keepers the Compendium of Reproach, => Things went bad => Garrett saved the... night. :) )
The reason of Garrett being labeled "the True Keeper" is that he is the balance and also the inbalance at the same time. He is the one who truly can shape events because he has the "power" to tip the scales to either direction by direct intervention. This means that the keepers always had only an illusion of having control over the events, and since Garrett uncovered the corruption of their organisation, their role in the events following T3 has been diminished. Garrett is also no keeper. Nobody ever truly was. Garrett can go back to being a great, selfish thief, nothing more, nothing less, and we'll see where that takes him once again.

Alternative 2: In the end of T3, the keepers have lost their power to "shape events" based on their prophecies. Because Garrett uncovered the corruption in their organisation, their "powers" have somehow transferred to Garrett and he has become "the True Keeper". He is the only one now who can save the City, in case some terrible catastrophe strikes in the future. This transformation has made him less selfish and now he actually cares about the world, not just about himself. The events following T3 will have strong influences of Garrett's present status and he is something more than just a thief then.

So, tell me. What do you think happened? I'm going for the first alternative. Don't know why. Could have something to do with the fact that I subconsciously want Garrett to stay the way he is, but that's what I managed to read between the lines. Call me crazy. :nut:

And I won't bring this topic out anymore after this one. I promise. ;)

Platinumoxicity
15th May 2009, 09:27
You could have at least said that my point of view was BS, not just walk by like when the village drunk is preaching in the street and people want to avoid getting close to him. I didn't know how to make a poll out of this so I would have wanted that someone who has a different opinions would have straightened my facts out. :( I'm sure that if my ideas would have been absurd enough, someone would have come and said: "Didn't you play the games at all?".

Necros
15th May 2009, 10:24
I think there are many ways the devs can continue the story but these two options aren't too bad either. :) Though perhaps the truth, if we can only have these two views, lies somewhere in the middle, at least that's my guess. Garrett stays mostly the same but he is also a bit less selfish. I don't think he should have extra powers because the glyphs are now useless. Right? But even if they aren't, leave Garrett the same, no need for superpowers, except for the use of some secret glyph doors maybe. :)

HellKittyDan
15th May 2009, 10:25
I think that having Garrett going through all the events of the three games but then going "back to being a great, selfish thief, nothing more, nothing less" is really rather boring. All those experiences he has gone through and he never changes? It makes him seem rather immature.

At the very end of T3, when the girl tries to pick his pocket, he quite clearly identifies himself as a keeper. If T4 is a sequel set after T3 (as opposed to a prequel or a reimagining) then it makes sense to keep him in this role. I don't see him being as formal as the old keepers, and I definitely don't think he needs any superpowers for the role.

Platinumoxicity
15th May 2009, 11:31
But do you agree that Garrett was mostly the cause of the problems that he ended up fixing and the keepers just thought they were doing a fine job protecting the world? In my opinion, there never was any imbalance or balance. The things that were written in the books were written in the books and there was never anything that could have been done to prevent them. The keepers thought too much of themselves and Garrett got rid of them once and for all. I think the keepers were just a bunch of men who knew a little magic and had a bunch of books, just like the Hand brotherhood, for example. Garrett was called the true keeper just because he is the one who really changes things. He is the only keeper that ever was, because he was not trying to be.

Necros
15th May 2009, 11:39
At the very end of T3, when the girl tries to pick his pocket, he quite clearly identifies himself as a keeper.
That was just a nod to the original Thief. :)

Platinumoxicity
15th May 2009, 11:45
That was just a nod to the original Thief. :)

With that, do you mean that Garrett saw the coincidence so hilarious that he had to make a sarcastic comment about himself and the situation. If you did, I'd have to agree. :D

Necros
15th May 2009, 11:50
That too. :) But it was just the devs showing proper respect to LGS. Though of course he is the True Keeper, but I don't think he can take that role too seriously, if T4 is a sequel I bet we'll hear some sarcastic comments about it. :) Like making a joke after stealing something valuable saying something like this: "I'm surely the keeper of this little trinket." :D

Platinumoxicity
15th May 2009, 11:55
That too. :) But it was just the devs showing proper respect to LGS. Though of course he is the True Keeper, but I don't think he can take that role too seriously, if T4 is a sequel I bet we'll hear some sarcastic comments about it. :) Like making a joke after stealing something valuable saying something like this: "I'm surely the keeper of this little trinket." :D

That's exactly what I had in mind. And the former keepers should try to talk "sense" into Garrett and he should just: "Would you guys just go and "keep something" somewhere else" :D

Necros
15th May 2009, 11:57
That's exactly what I had in mind. And the former keepers should try to talk "sense" into Garrett and he should just: "Would you guys just go and "keep something" somewhere else" :D
:lmao: :thumb:

3edere
2nd Oct 2009, 20:31
Why the 2 solutions cannot have a root in common? In all the scenarios u proposed Garrett is indeed the critical referent for the balance of powers in the city BUT he was it despite himself. Every time he was asked to take side or face "the true" the only thing he wanted to do was just to send everybody to hell and carry on his life. Fine.

But what if, this ONLY time Garrett was asked nothing by anybody and he saw the chance to better pursue his selfish own interest by taking a role in which HE actually recognized his own gain ?

Pieter888
3rd Oct 2009, 09:52
My alternative:
Garrett finds out he is the balance himself -> get's cocky -> try to mess with the balance a bit -> messes it up badly -> Garrett has to save The City again...but from himself, being himself.

Who's with me?

kabatta
3rd Oct 2009, 10:46
Seeing the keepers as The City's historians I would tend to say that the future would be less known, thus more unpredictable. Please excuse my real life parallel, but I compare the glyphs with runes, used occasionally for encrypted writings and prophecies based upon the most logical line of the chain of past events. Once accepted the fact that the keepers are more obscure by nature, rather than mystical, enforces the tangible side of the universe. The metaphysical side is more enforced by the pagans, hammerites and mages. I speculate that the magical element and properties of the glyphs is borrowed by a certain extent. Also, from my own speculation, magical glyphs are symbols used to tap into the already existing magic fluxes, portals channeling it in a concentrated manner into the world. Ergo, I take my idea that the world's future doesn't necessarily changes to a more chaotic form, rather where the past events leads it.
*end of silly speculation*

huzi73
4th Oct 2009, 18:46
Nah, you guys are boring.THE INDUSTRY HAS EVOLVED. So must Garrett. Now that the uber glyph has been tatooed on his hand,he has glyph powers.
New uber glyph powers include, but are not limited to:


Garrett has become more sexy than EVER!!!


All women in the street must flash their assets for him if he walks upto them and presses the "use key".


He needs a beard like Kratos.


He needs a lightsaber, but a stealth one which doesnt glow. Think about it, its small, powerfull, an easily "COUGH COUGH" concealed in the event of a cavity search.


night vision like Riddik,


detective vision like Batman,


Entering the Wolfenstein veil,


The ability to stop, forward and rewind time


Summon hordes of Burricks


A gravity gun


A hot, horney, sidekick that has lifelike facial emotions


A Garrett mobile\bike /burrick


Hes freinds with Karras Di Vinci, a noble inventor who makes for him upgrades.


Bat rangs (Burrickrangs?)


Hes primary weapon is the Guitar Hero controller.


He has the entire blueprint of Cragscleft prison tattooed on his back.


Peter petrelli is his great grandson


Basso's sister is his landlord


He can consume foes and take their form to access restricted areas


He has a pipboy on his left arm


He has a nanosuit (MAXIMUM STEALTH FTW)


He... (ROFL! SORRY DUDES...)

kabatta
4th Oct 2009, 18:54
wrong topic....so wrong, but so funny. :lol:

huzi73
4th Oct 2009, 20:48
wrong topic....so wrong, but so funny. :lol:

I just HAD to... Will post more in the appropriate thread..

razorstealth
13th Oct 2009, 03:46
i had always thought that the end of thief 3 didnt mean a replacement of Garrett but rather a revival of the Keepers. Sure the same sort of thing happened when Garrett was young but he CHOSE thievery and the one who found him did not choose thievery. She had a glyph key appear, i just took that to mean she would "unlock the magic" so to speak. Things would be different, yes, but Garrett is still very young. Based on that ending movie i would say he still be in the early twenties, no way he is done.

jtr7
13th Oct 2009, 06:53
Déj* vu? (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?p=1202065#post1202065) ;)


i had always thought that the end of thief 3 didnt mean a replacement of Garrett but rather a revival of the Keepers. Sure the same sort of thing happened when Garrett was young but he CHOSE thievery and the one who found him did not choose thievery. She had a glyph key appear, i just took that to mean she would "unlock the magic" so to speak. Things would be different, yes, but Garrett is still very young. Based on that ending movie i would say he still be in the early twenties, no way he is done.

edit: so i voted reboot/change the setting but im talking about a glyph key exception or similar magic-works. no alternate universe or traveling back in time.




She didn't have a key appear, and the Mark on Garrett's hand is not a Glyph. The Keeper Order was destroyed, and everything they used to do what they did. They were not renewed, but knocked back so far it will be a long time before they can come back--the game says "forever", but that word's easier to bend. Also, Garrett left the Keepers in his early twenties, he was out on his own for quite some time building connections, and the games span at least 5 years. He's young enough, still.

xDarknessFallsx
13th Oct 2009, 07:09
Thief 4 doesn't need to be a continuation of Thief 3, or start where Thief 3 left off. Thief 4 could pretend Thief 3 never existed and write its own story involving Mechanists, Hammerites, Pagans, Keepers and Garrett. Maybe make it take place between Thief 1 and 2... or between 2 and a 3 never made.

I'd personally like to pretend Thief 3 never existed. Actually, that's what I often do. I've managed to block most of it out. Except for about four fond memories/moments I have of Thief 3, I don't remember much about it. Every other memory of it brings great feelings of disappointment.

So I don't care where Thief 4 starts, just as long as it picks up around the time Thief 1 or Thief 2 existed; not around the one week period of time where Thief 3 ruined everthing.

Platinumoxicity
13th Oct 2009, 08:11
I'd personally like to pretend Thief 3 never existed. Actually, that's what I often do. I've managed to block most of it out. Except for about four fond memories/moments I have of Thief 3, I don't remember much about it. Every other memory of it brings great feelings of disappointment.

So I don't care where Thief 4 starts, just as long as it picks up around the time Thief 1 or Thief 2 existed; not around the one week period of time where Thief 3 ruined everthing.

I don't think that the story in TDS (Yeah, it's not Thief 3 it's TDS. :) ) sucked. It had a good story that was as surprising as the ones in T1 and T2. The story was just handed to a bunch of lazy half-assed devs that would've been better off making the game for the Dark engine. Those devs ruined the story's chances of getting presented in a form that it deserved.

esme
13th Oct 2009, 11:19
it wasn't entirely the devs fault, they were working with an intransigent management and a butchered engine and had to change the story to fit with the demands of both

huzi73
13th Oct 2009, 14:29
it wasn't entirely the devs fault, they were working with an intransigent management and a butchered engine and had to change the story to fit with the demands of both

I vehemently disagree that the engine is to blame.Sure it sucked, but if you look at the mods using that VERY same UE2 engine, you will see, that large levels were totally possible, EVEN on the Xbox. A weak plumber blames his tools. A weak dev blames his engine...:rolleyes:

esme
13th Oct 2009, 15:27
I vehemently disagree that the engine is to blame.Sure it sucked, but if you look at the mods using that VERY same UE2 engine, you will see, that large levels were totally possible, EVEN on the Xbox. A weak plumber blames his tools. A weak dev blames his engine...:rolleyes:they couldn't have rope arrows or swimmable water because one unnamed (and hopefully never to be employed at coding again) developer rewrote the renderer so it no longer supported the necessary features, they didn't have the resources to fix this act of butchery so the story had to be altered to fit with the features they could use

the level sizes were constrained due to the platforms they were releasing the game on

the design suffered because of the butchered engine

this partial quote from jtr7 bears reading


...some dev quotes..

It's sort of a funny story how that happened really. The creation of the Flesh engine wasn't really planned. Early on in the development of DX2 and T3 we bandied about the idea of using dynamic shadows for gameplay. A certain programmer who will remain nameless was given the task of adding this into the Unreal engine. He went off on his own for a couple weeks and programmed an entirely new per-pixel lighting renderer. No one really asked him to make a completely new engine, but we didn't mind at first because it looked pretty cool. This was before we discovered the crippling limitations it would put on us.

It wasn't until we had worked with it for a while after said programmer was let go that we found out how crappy the engine really was. By the time we realized how much it sucked, we were already beyond the point of no return and just had to try to make the best of it. Out of necessity our efforts shifted from design to figuring out how to get the game to actually run. Instead of developing the game we wanted, we had to develop whatever we could get to work. We had to cut features left and right, shrink down the levels and comprimise our design because of the craptacular engine and physics implementation, and the difficulty of fitting it all into 64mb of Xbox memory.

DX2 suffered the most from this because it was our first try in the engine and we were under a lot of pressure to ship the game for Christmas. T3 fared better because we had more experience on how to get a game working and didn't have to make quite so many comprimises. Still, if we had stuck with Unreal we could have made both games a lot better, I think.

razorstealth
13th Oct 2009, 16:58
of course tis Deja vu, the idea applies to both threads. So I am confusled.. Maybe I'll watch the end video again make sure I'm not totally butchering details. what was the glowing mark that appeared when he caught her? If not keeper glyph magic then what is it and speculatively what could it mean? If the keepers are really done that is rather sad, I enjoyed encountering the Enforcers, but my overwhelming concern is with the possible loss of Garrett as THE main character. So I'm trying to interpret the implications of TDS ending video to find out if Garrett remains.

Hecateus
13th Oct 2009, 20:00
My alternative:
Garrett finds out he is the balance himself -> get's cocky -> try to mess with the balance a bit -> messes it up badly -> Garrett has to save The City again...but from himself, being himself.

Who's with me?

:wave:

Though i am not sure how to do this without some Time Travel events/powers which seem to be unpopular to certain frequent posters here. I think it could work well.

to OP, It is interesting that the Key glyph/tattoo/burn/scar on Garret's hand was not noticed until he grabbed the girl, during the end movie. MIght be she had something to do with it; or maybe the Glyphs morphed into something new??

Platinumoxicity
13th Oct 2009, 20:15
to OP, It is interesting that the Key glyph/tattoo/burn/scar on Garret's hand was not noticed until he grabbed the girl, during the end movie. MIght be she had something to do with it; or maybe the Glyphs morphed into something new??

The Eye burned the mark on Garrett's hand when it was put in it's place.

What we didn't see was that was the Eye given a similar insignia on itself, like the form of Garrett's hand or something on its surface. The Eye said it itself... Something in the lines of "We have both been key players in history for a while". The final glyph was "the lock", Garrett and the Eye were both "the keys". None of them by themselves would've made any difference. I don't think the key on the back of his hand should have any significance more than just being a "recording" of a past event.

Hecateus
13th Oct 2009, 21:01
oops

R_Soul
13th Oct 2009, 21:21
I think the keepers were just a bunch of men who knew a little magic and had a bunch of books
I disagree. It was the Keepers who sealed the Hammerite cathedral when the Eye caused that spot of bother with the zombies and the collapsing buildings and so on. I'd give them a thumbs up for that:
:thumb:

If you think of the balance as a long-term thing, I think the Keepers did a pretty good job. Somehow the Trickster came into the world as Constantine. Even without the Eye he seemed to have quite a bit of power, as we see in his home and the briefing movies where we see wine drops growing shoots. I think that if Garrett had not been available, Constantine would have found another way of getting the Eye.

Since Garrett was the only person capable of bringing down the Trickster, I think that by allowing him to cause the problem in the first place, the Keepers were ensuring he understood the gravity of the situation, and had enough background knowledge so sort things out.

So I think that up until that point the Keepers did a good job. In Thief 2 we heard a prophecy about a "sanguine metal dawn", but that never happened, so clearly not all prophecies are fixed. In the end they gave Garrett enough info to lead him to the events which defeated Karras, thus restoring the balance.

It does seem that the Keepers messed up in Thief 3, with all that arguing amongst themselves, but then they were being manipulated by the Hag so it wasn't all their fault. If it hadn't been for the Hag, I think the balance would have been restored after Thief 2, instead of those pagan areas encroaching into the City and open conflicts between them and the Hammers.

Although the Hag was giving the Keepers their prophecies all along, I reckon she would have been threatened by the Trickster and Karras, so while those threats were around, she was contend to not mislead the Keepers, who thus did a good job.

jtr7
14th Oct 2009, 00:52
The Eye burned the mark on Garrett's hand when it was put in it's place.

What we didn't see was that was the Eye given a similar insignia on itself, like the form of Garrett's hand or something on its surface. The Eye said it itself... Something in the lines of "We have both been key players in history for a while". The final glyph was "the lock", Garrett and the Eye were both "the keys". None of them by themselves would've made any difference. I don't think the key on the back of his hand should have any significance more than just being a "recording" of a past event.

Yer out of control, Plat'!:nut: I agree the Mark shouldn't be a real sign of a real key imbued within Garrett, though.

The Eye wasn't given a key mark. And you think the things I say are interpretation? That's flat-out making stuff up 'cause you can't remember what The Eye said: "We have much in common, little man. We are both marked...destined always to be part of history...never just observers." See how it's written? The word "marked", in this context, is defined as "destined always to be a part of history..." Not the physical key Mark. Garrett was always marked before he got the key Mark (canon capital 'M'). The Final Glyph is not described, ever, as locking anything away. At this point, it's pure wishful-thinking on the fans' part, 'cause too many cannot imagine the Keepers and their powerful tools are gone, left "only" with their knowledge of The City, important inhabitants that needed an eye kept on them (Hand Mages), connections, informants, messengers, other Keeper keys, The City's deepest secrets, The City's forgotten areas and buried past, and the far-reaching history--which apparently means nothing to the fans for some inexplicable and never-explained reason.

What also remains a mystery--and if EM doesn't get the answer from the LGS/ION devs, we can't say EM knows either--is what was meant when the creators of the Final Glyph, and who made the blood Pact with the Sentients, said the Final Glyph would result in the "annihilation" of the Sentients. It could mean all but The Eye lost their sentience. It could mean a couple of them were literally erased from existence. We don't know what the devs meant by "annihilation". We were not shown The Eye in the Receptacle after it was over, so that's an unknown. Anyway, Keepers mostly like their keys to be hunks of stone, often magical, when not mechanical.

The Keepers also didn't yet know what Dyan's Staff was about: "Dyan is often seen with a staff, although it has not been available for study."--and we never saw it in TDS, so it's still an untapped source. She had visions and instructions from Viktoria. Artemus and Carmen Cantata got along well enough, and she either really had the crystal ball she could see into Garrett's future with, or Artmeus was a little bird whispering in her ear when he wasn't leaving notes with her--but the point is, she likely could see into Garrett's future, and she liked him. I'd be disappointed if he had no further contact with her about the future when things get crazy for him again. She wasn't the only one who could see into the future. If the Hand Mages are a focus of a future title, they could see into the future, and help Garrett make his moves against the Necromancers.

Platinumoxicity
14th Oct 2009, 08:00
Yer out of control, Plat'!:nut: I agree the Mark shouldn't be a real sign of a real key imbued within Garrett, though.

The Eye wasn't given a key mark. And you think the things I say are interpretation? That's flat-out making stuff up 'cause you can't remember what The Eye said: "We have much in common, little man. We are both marked...destined always to be part of history...never just observers." See how it's written? The word "marked", in this context, is defined as "destined always to be a part of history..." Not the physical key Mark. Garrett was always marked before he got the key Mark (canon capital 'M'). The Final Glyph is not described, ever, as locking anything away. At this point, it's pure wishful-thinking on the fans' part, 'cause too many cannot imagine the Keepers and their powerful tools are gone, left "only" with their knowledge of The City, important inhabitants that needed an eye kept on them (Hand Mages), connections, informants, messengers, other Keeper keys, The City's deepest secrets, The City's forgotten areas and buried past, and the far-reaching history--which apparently means nothing to the fans for some inexplicable and never-explained reason.


Oh, I forgot to put the [Speculation] -disclaimers on that thing. I'm just throwing around ideas for those who can't reach the most reasonable conclusions.

razorstealth
14th Oct 2009, 22:32
too many cannot imagine the Keepers and their powerful tools are gone, left "only" with their knowledge of The City, important inhabitants that needed an eye kept on them (Hand Mages), connections, informants, messengers, other Keeper keys, The City's deepest secrets, The City's forgotten areas and buried past, and the far-reaching history--which apparently means nothing to the fans for some inexplicable and never-explained reason.

What also remains a mystery--and if EM doesn't get the answer from the LGS/ION devs, we can't say EM knows either--is what was meant when the creators of the Final Glyph, and who made the blood Pact with the Sentients, said the Final Glyph would result in the "annihilation" of the Sentients. It could mean all but The Eye lost their sentience. It could mean a couple of them were literally erased from existence. We don't know what the devs meant by "annihilation". We were not shown The Eye in the Receptacle after it was over, so that's an unknown. Anyway, Keepers mostly like their keys to be hunks of stone, often magical, when not mechanical.

That is an interesting point, because the Keepers are simply Scholars now their control and balance is gone. Perhaps all of the different factions the Keepers have kept apart and/or hidden (like The Sunken Citadel, and the Hand Mages) wont be able to resist coming out to play. I can imagine all the groups converging on the City night after night and possibly multiple factions uniting to fight each other like Kurshok and the Pagans.. In many ways this chaos might just best the chaos the Keeper Enforcers created as they attacked anything that moved trying to find Garrett. razor likey..

jtr7
15th Oct 2009, 00:17
As long as everyone stays Balanced, meaning, no Faction destroys the others (and The City while they are at it). I also could do without the fighting all over without giving Garrett a way around it all. All the AIs in the streets with all the objects clustered like that, gives the computer too much to do and requires lowering the amount of objects in the maps elsewhere--lower detail in The City, which we want to see more of.

Platinumoxicity
15th Oct 2009, 07:27
I really think the game should go back to the way it used to be in T1. Forget about "the factions". There are no factions. There are Garrett and the City. In T1 it never crossed my mind that there are these "teams" red, green and black operating in the City. I just thought there was a City where people were living their lives and Garrett was making a living stealing from the richest ones. It didn't need anything else. No "green base" or "red base" or "faction-respecto-meters". Just honest working people and dishonest criminals, and Garrett who steals from both.

Hypevosa
15th Oct 2009, 09:37
to deny that factions exist would be a failure to understand human nature. We group with people who are like us or who attract us for some reason, and Garrett's universe is no different. Factions do and should exist but Garrett should not be involved with any faction but his own, as he isn't a normal person who flocks to likeminded individuals. Garrett should only do it if it's good for him, regardless of who else may benefit or be hurt by it.

jtr7
15th Oct 2009, 09:43
:thumb:

Platinumoxicity
15th Oct 2009, 13:32
What I meant was that the business of large factions in the City should have no bearing to the business of a private entrepeneur like Garrett. For example if you're a soap salesman, how does the extremist PETA movement affect your business, and how does it show in your everyday life? Garrett is no politician of a terrorist. All the jobs Garrett pulled in T1 were for himself, he had no allies and he didn't do anything for the benefit of a faction because (even the pagans weren't really a faction back then). I'm not saying that we should deny that the factions exist, but the game should have that same feel that we had on the first playhrough of T1. The game should focus on Garrett. The feel was one of the aspects of "immersion" in T1. Even though the world was rich in readables and useless detail, they were mostly in such a cryptic form that it made the player not care, and really made Garrett (as well as the player) focus better on the job at hand. This was like the game was actually injecting the player with Garrett's personal apathy towards everything, it made you think like Garrett.

Hypevosa
15th Oct 2009, 14:13
While I can't deny the awesomeness of the original game, I don't know if T4 should be all about Garrett. While I love him as a character, I don't see us getting any more character development after what's already happened to him. If we want an AMAZING story, I don't think we can get it by just focusing on Garrett like in the first game. It'll probably come up to a new faction, one not dealt with in depth before.

That or we can abandon the idea of an awesome story and just rob nobles and corrupt merchants blind for 15 missions, just trying to pay the rent and accrue enough cash to retire....

jtr7
15th Oct 2009, 23:59
You don't think Garrett finally being free of nagging prophecies and having finally knocked off the Keeper Order isn't ripe for new challenges?


Although I've said it before. If they can't get Garrett right, including getting Stephen Russell, then it would be better for EM if they just started over with all new characters and settings, just so it will be obviously not the same.

Hypevosa
16th Oct 2009, 04:41
You don't think Garrett finally being free of nagging prophecies and having finally knocked off the Keeper Order isn't ripe for new challenges.

No, I don't, considering he has no driving force anymore. The keepers drove him to do nearly anything of interest outside robbery. While he has matured as a character, I don't see him becoming the divine paladin of neutrality (oh the irony) seeking out those who have too much power and taking them down a notch (not to mention he'd obviously be committing the same fallacy that cost the keepers their power). The most interesting thing that could come of him not being part of the keeper order anymore, would be the fact that a good number of them are probably after his ass for what he did. Without someone pushing him in some direction all the time, Garrett will do what he wants, period, meaning it would be a meaningless series of high difficulty robberies, culminating in retirement. That is not an amazing storyline by any stretch of the imagination, as there's no inherent conflict.

Garrett has no new challenges except:
Deciding who to rob (without help from the keepers)
Watching his back for ex-keepers with a grudge (but he's almost always had someone on his back for something)

jtr7
16th Oct 2009, 05:17
How'd my question mark become a period? :lol:

Necromancers, or some other powerful threat threatening his life and his way of life will always be a driving force, morality aside. Add a smidge of morality by showing him spreading atrocity, and he will once again use his skill-set to undermine and destroy the enemy from within.


His hobby keeps him challenged and happy. ACT I in the older titles was always him doing his usual thing, but getting hooked into the plot. He does jobs for hire, collecting on commissions, and anything that seems out of the league of one thief can be passed on to him. As before. The template is good and it can provide a strong foundation again and again.

glyph07
16th Oct 2009, 11:36
and who made the blood Pact with the Sentients, said the Final Glyph would result in the "annihilation" of the Sentients. It could mean all but The Eye lost their sentience. It could mean a couple of them were literally erased from existence. We don't know what the devs meant by "annihilation". by jtr7

Jtr7, please don't bite my head off for asking this...but where did u read or found out about the Sentients and the "annihilation" thing? I've played all games but TGold. Now, I might get a bit distracted at times, but usually I'm one of the players who read literally everything is left written around in the game. :eek:

P.S.
I don't want to imply that's not true and all, I'm just fascinating by your post cause I'd have loved to deduct all that by myself! :D

jtr7
16th Oct 2009, 23:24
Here ya go. I won't bite anybody's head off for asking without angry incredulity. :flowers:


AULalbrechwritings: "The Writings of Albrech, Volume Three
Who shall watch the watchers? Who shall keep the Keepers? Alas, there is no one. No one to watch us. No one to keep us. This conclusion fills us with dread. For even a Keeper should not be left unchecked. So it became our work to plan for the worst possible contingencies. If at some distant time in the future, should the Keepers become unbalanced, then only our work now would stand in the way of disaster. This is why we labored so long and hard to create the Last of All Glyphs. Yet our best thinkers were not satisfied. What if, for some reason unknown, it came into play too soon? Before these future Keepers had a chance to complete an important task? So we devised the Sentients, each a separate key, each with a will of its own. The Heart, the Crown, the Paw, the Chalice, and the Eye. They would not consent to the journey, which would culminate in their annihilation, until the time was ripe and the One was present. To ensure success, five Keepers were recruited to make the crucial sacrifices. And so, the Last of All Glyphs, our safeguard, stands ready against Keeper corruption. I hope we have done service to the future. May the Unwritten Times never come."

glyph07
17th Oct 2009, 11:10
Cheers mate! :p

glyph07
17th Oct 2009, 16:30
1) Can someone also tell me who decided that the kid Garrett found at the end of TDS is a girl?! Almost everyone mentioning this character in various threads, referred the kid as a "she"...has the sex been generally agreed or it has been officially stated by the game devs?
_____________________________________________________________________

2) Speculating instead over Garrett's future, I was wondering if the issue related to the "what's gonna happen next" can be viewed under a slightly different angle, which is the following:

Taking for granted that the main character needs to be refreshed by new situations able to putting him, and consequently the game player, into circumstances which inevitably enrich the character knowledge of himself


WHAT IS/ARE THE ASPECT/S OF GARRETT' CHARACTER U'D RATHER SEE CHALLENGED?

If the story can be developed around this point, would not the rest of his world respond consequently? Basically, instead of following an A to Z story development path, we do the exact opposite. We establish what we want to achieve and then see how everything can lead to that.

Hm...it's just an idea of course...so...don't be harsh in dismissing it and making me feel crap ok? I/m a sensitive Taffer! :D THANK U!

jtr7
18th Oct 2009, 02:21
She looks like a girl and the voice is the same as T3's Lauryl, T2's Lily, and T1/G's spooky "feed us" "we're hungry" ghostly child's voice in Constantine's realms--Terri Brosius. I only know of three people who've not been able to tell she's a girl, only one freaked out about it.


I'll have to think uopn your other question. It's a good one. :)

Namdrol
18th Oct 2009, 07:08
1)


WHAT IS/ARE THE ASPECT/S OF GARRETT' CHARACTER U'D RATHER SEE CHALLENGED?

If the story can be developed around this point, would not the rest of his world respond consequently? Basically, instead of following an A to Z story development path, we do the exact opposite. We establish what we want to achieve and then see how everything can lead to that.


I've just done a Dexter marathon of the the first two seasons and I couldn't help but see Thief connections despite the obvious differences. (Dexter even wears a hooded cloak at one point!)
The moral ambiguity of the heroes actions and the effect it has on innocent bystanders.
And granted if you play Thief properly, Garrett's not a murderer but his actions will still have consequences for those around.
The serving girl sacked for allowing things to be stolen.
The Lord bankrupted and all his staff thrown out into the cold.
So yes, I think it would be interesting to see Garrett's life challenged in a similar way to Dexter.

glyph07
18th Oct 2009, 13:42
Ok, I admit it, I did not recall the voice of the kid recognising it has been used before for girls of different sorts (alive or dead or in between worlds).

But to be honest, I didn't pay much attention to this aspect due to the fact that in the business of voicing over characters, either in movies, or animations or games, very often boys and girls play the part of the opposite sex because:

1) production wants to save money
2) "white voices" have timbers very similar and can easily play both sexes.

That's y even if I too found the voice of kid not particularly mainly, I didn't put too much importance into that. The kid could have been easily younger than Garrett's age when he was found by a Keeper and that explained its "little bird" voice! :rolleyes:

Whatever, just wanted to explain...:thumb:

Platinumoxicity
18th Oct 2009, 20:46
I hope the gender of the child is irrelevant because I hope she was a 1-time-appearing character that won't appear in T4. Actually, I think all of the mistakes in TDS should stay in TDS. The kid should be filed under "What Ion Storm did wrong" along with ridiculous pagans, magic wands, body awareness and such, and quietly ignored.

jtr7
19th Oct 2009, 03:29
Ok, I admit it, I did not recall the voice of the kid recognising it has been used before for girls of different sorts (alive or dead or in between worlds).

But to be honest, I didn't pay much attention to this aspect due to the fact that in the business of voicing over characters, either in movies, or animations or games, very often boys and girls play the part of the opposite sex because:

1) production wants to save money
2) "white voices" have timbers very similar and can easily play both sexes.

That's y even if I too found the voice of kid not particularly mainly, I didn't put too much importance into that. The kid could have been easily younger than Garrett's age when he was found by a Keeper and that explained its "little bird" voice! :rolleyes:

Whatever, just wanted to explain...:thumb:


Never in Thief. They knew better. I remember being weirded out by hearing a woman do a little boy's voice in Godzilla movies when I was a child. I thought that was bizarre practice. Terri voices girls the same way every time. I forgot to mention she did the child Gamall in T3, as well.

Hecateus
19th Oct 2009, 06:06
So yes, I think it would be interesting to see Garrett's life challenged in a similar way to Dexter.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Platinumoxicity
19th Oct 2009, 06:44
So yes, I think it would be interesting to see Garrett's life challenged... blablablaa

How exactly is Garrett's life is challenged by some people getting fired and others going bankrupt?

Namdrol
19th Oct 2009, 07:19
Conscience.

He's a Thief, it's what he does, but we've seen he has honour and a sense of (reluctant) duty.
And remember what I said was in the context of comparing Garrett to Dexter, two anti-heroes. (After watching 24 episodes in 5 days.)

Can indiscriminate stealing be justified?

But no, I don't want Garrett to stop being a Thief, this is just idle BS I'm tossing around because to take away or even question thieving obviously eviscerates the game.
And I can't see EM dwelling on the psychological make up of their main character!

Platinumoxicity
19th Oct 2009, 07:26
Garrett's ability to reason overwhelms his conscience. He knows that feeling sorry for someone is a weak moment and at that time he can be taken down more easily.

Namdrol
19th Oct 2009, 07:53
Garrett's ability to reason overwhelms his conscience. He knows that feeling sorry for someone is a weak moment and at that time he can be taken down more easily.

Exactly, which is where the challenge to Garretts life comes into play.
It's the struggle between feeling and reason.

Platinumoxicity
19th Oct 2009, 12:43
Exactly, which is where the challenge to Garretts life comes into play.
It's the struggle between feeling and reason.

OMG that's so taffin' cheesy. Reminds me of Ridd.ick in that sucky Pitch Black sequel, on the moment Ridd.ick tried to fight for the life of Jack (the girl) he was shot, beaten up and almost roasted to death. In the original movie Ridd.ick kept his cool and simply let Fry be killed because she annoyed him.

Other example, in Hitman: Blood money when Diana came to visit 47 in person, 47 trusted her and turned his back for 5 seconds and Diana shot a poison syringe in his neck.

Strong and lonely characters in movies and games, when written well, are not like that because it's "cool". They're like that because they're smart. And when there's a new director or a bad writer in the sequel they always try to add needless drama to a character it clearly doesn't fit to. That's when great characters turn to just plain characters.

Don't trust women. You may lose and eye or 2.

huzi73
19th Oct 2009, 14:19
example, in Hitman: Blood money when Diana came to visit 47 in person, 47 trusted her and turned his back for 5 seconds and Diana shot a poison syringe in his neck.


Don't trust women. You may lose and eye or 2.

Well, you obviously didnt see the bonus ending of Hitman Blood money did you?
where 47 isnt actually dead and Dana stabbed him with the same poison we see in an earlier mission which makes a person simply seem dead, whereas there is an actual antidote which can revive the person.(Dana wore the antidote as lipstick, and revived 47 by kissing him on the lips, just before they lowered his coffin at the end. How, otherwise would they be making a Hitman 5?)

ah well.....

Namdrol
19th Oct 2009, 14:46
Yea, whatever.
As I said, idle BS.
Triggered by a post, tv and boredom with doing drawings for a planning application.

Platinumoxicity
19th Oct 2009, 14:46
Well, you obviously didnt see the bonus ending of Hitman Blood money did you?
where 47 isnt actually dead and Dana stabbed him with the same poison we see in an earlier mission which makes a person simply seem dead, whereas there is an actual antidote which can revive the person.(Dana wore the antidote as lipstick, and revived 47 by kissing him on the lips, just before they lowered his coffin at the end. How, otherwise would they be making a Hitman 5?)

ah well.....

Of course I saw it. The point was that 47 broke his most important rule for 5 seconds and it could've had serious consequences if Diana would really have wished him dead.

Namdrol
19th Oct 2009, 14:48
And of course, I didn't see it.

glyph07
19th Oct 2009, 19:53
It's very interesting what u have observed. It seems that all of u have automatically implied that to challenge Garrett's character, so dry and cynical, we would necessarily enter the intimate world of feelings...yet, that's not absolutely necessary, nor it's necessary to get into Freudian psychology to dissect Garrett's behavior.

What about putting G into serious deep s''''''''t? In all games he, because of his key role x the balance, turns out to cover a privileged role, sometimes not even deserving it. He could despise the Keepers because he knew some of them were beside him whatever. He could call the Hammerites and Pagans crazy because he knew before or after they would need him.

What if he truly tasted what being alone (as Garrett often asked to be) means? What if he would need to beg for help?

HI! HI! GUYS! SORRY, THIS IDEA IS REALLY CRAP! :lol: BUT MY POINT REMAINS STILL: WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO THINK OF SOMETHING CORNY TO CHALLENGE GARRETT PERSONAL VIEWS!

Hecateus
19th Oct 2009, 22:18
New thought (for me), the girl at the end of TDS is an assassin out to get G. /speculate

jtr7
20th Oct 2009, 01:16
She's Garrett's and Viktoria's love child, raised by Dyan and Larkspur, then sent to Garrett when she was ready. She's part wood nymph, so she knows how to charm a man into doing reckless things, such as taking her in. Then things get scary.

Platinumoxicity
20th Oct 2009, 06:20
But if she's his kid, why whould she have to "charm him" to take her in when she can just keep nagging: "But I wanna, I wanna I wannaaa!!! x-O " -Isn't that what little kids usually do?

jtr7
20th Oct 2009, 06:21
Puppy dog eyes work better than tantrums.

Hecateus
20th Oct 2009, 07:02
She's Garrett's and Viktoria's love child, raised by Dyan and Larkspur, then sent to Garrett when she was ready. She's part wood nymph, so she knows how to charm a man into doing reckless things, such as taking her in. Then things get scary.

Well, they don't show any overt romance between G and V, but she certainly caught his eye. :lol: Maybe that's all a wood nymph needs to reproduce. :flowers:

glyph07
20th Oct 2009, 08:09
That's a fact! He has achieved that self sustaining inner balance typical of the lay priests.

No children around, no love and specific women.

How is it possible that we are unable to identify 1 feasible and winning aspect of Garrett that can be challenged in T4 and that can turn his world once again upside-down?

What is the thing that he would hate most to happen?

What is the thing that he actually wish for more than anything?

If none of the 2 applies, 'cause his a "day by day" sort of bloke, then...dunno, this option doesn't leave much space to work on.

HELP!!!! :mad2:

P.S. One thing though, it seems to me that if there is one human reaction recognisable in G. is anger...I believe that he can really get pissed off!

jtr7
20th Oct 2009, 09:30
I guess I should tell people who hadn't heard me say it before:

There was no love between Viki and G! If he had sex with her (Ouch! Ugh!), it was her manipulation, not any real desire from him.

Hey, maybe the girl sprang from the mingling of Garrett's and Viki's blood on the stone after the blood oath to work together. Mansie foolsie blood feeders them spruces and thistleaids! I'm kidding.

glyph07
20th Oct 2009, 12:45
Mansie foolsie blood feeders them spruces and thistleaids! I'm kidding.

Love it! :lmao:Now I know y I like to read your posts!

Yet, here we are...no solutions at the horizon...come on jtr7 do ur magic and propose something really good! :thumb:


HOW WOULD U LIKE TO SEE GARRETT CHALLENGED!

jtr7
21st Oct 2009, 00:08
I'm thinking on it. I hope there's no hype in waiting, 'cause it could easily be lame. :lol:

glyph07
21st Oct 2009, 04:13
Silly! :p

glyph07
22nd Oct 2009, 11:11
"We chose our profession in defiance of the greed of the monarchy. We will not live for the sake of taxes to fatten the nobles pockets. We choose to live the only life available to those who would be truly free. We are thieves." -Wall Plaque in the Thieves Guild

I want Garrett to lose his freedom, completely, and yet being frustrated by the "parvenu" of space he's left with. I want him to free like a tiger in a large cage...large yes, but still a cage and I want him to be abandoned by all.

I guess I'd love to have a T4 more gloomy, and dark, BECAUSE IT IS TROUGH THE MEANS OF A BIG CRISIS THAT A TRUE REBIRTH CAN HAPPEN...AND OF COURSE THIS WILL BE SEEN IN T5! :D

jtr7
23rd Oct 2009, 16:54
You hit on it. Garrett was most terrified when he really believed he was done, when he had no control over his future, and couldn't know he would be rescued. As soon as he was given his freedom back, he didn't follow the Keepers out of Con's mansion, but went deeper in by choice. Take away his control of his own destiny and he'll show a rare side of himself.

glyph07
28th Oct 2009, 20:33
Ouch! Don't think I like that...I'd rather have Garrett finish her off! :eek:

jtr7
28th Oct 2009, 23:32
Who? What?

glyph07
29th Oct 2009, 10:13
It was only a joke, just to say that I'm not very happy to give a relevant role to the girl...boy...hm....still think the kid might be a boy after all with a very angelic voice!

Ouch! I reliase now that I might have made a mistake with the thread! Mine was a comment after a post of someone over the role of the kiddy found by Garrett!


S O R R Y !!!! :p

jtr7
29th Oct 2009, 10:17
I just didn't know who or what you were referring to, or if it had anything to do with what I or the posters above me said. :lmao: