PDA

View Full Version : FOR THE DEVS: What was wrong with TDS you may ask?



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

Nightwynd
31st Mar 2011, 07:11
Wha- a Parry!? Acerbus, you intently keep insulting the core values of THIEF!!!!! Blasphemy!







Sure. I could live with parry moves. :p Or even a dagger which would have at least some kind of ability to block attacks.

BigBoss
31st Mar 2011, 07:41
- Swords are 60 lbs.
- You can't sneak through a window with a sword without waking up the whole neighborhood.
- The sword is noisier than the dagger, even when sheathed.
- The sword causes one to be more visible, even when hidden under a cloak.
- The sword is clunky.
- The sword is impractical.
- Swords are floppy.


No one wins from talking about something as pointless as this..........

Vae
31st Mar 2011, 07:53
I'd have to say that "blocking" is only one of two key reasons why the sword is better as a defensive weapon...the other is the aspect of "reach"...

The reach of the sword, is just as important as blocking for defense, because:

1) It creates a much larger "threat zone" between the enemy AI and the player...as the enemy AI fear the reach of the sword, and are partially kept at bay...In this way, the "threat zone" that is created by the reach of the sword, has a defensive effect.

2) This same "threat zone" also works defensively in a different way. Because of the swords reach, it allows the player to maneuverer and strike the enemy AI at a safer distance...So again, because of reach, it helps protect the player from harm.

3) The length of the sword would also provide a superior ability to parry, if implemented...Assuming it was a short sword....The addition of parrying wouldn't be blasphemy, because parrying, or the lack of it, is a peripheral element...not a core element.

ToMegaTherion
31st Mar 2011, 08:26
As I've said before, the argument that the sword was better because blocking is "defensive" is cute, but fails for two reasons:

- It's only defensive on an instantaneous level: the point is still to kill the enemy while losing as little health as possible. If you're trying to block with the sword as part of an escape strategy, rather than a kill strategy, you're almost always guilty of bad play.

- If you use the block function during a Dark Engine sword fight, you are almost always guilty of bad play anyway. The optimal strategy is almost always to attack constantly.

Nightwynd
31st Mar 2011, 08:36
Attack constantly while running ridiculously around your opponent in circles. Same goes for dagger, btw.

I've always considered the best argument for sword being "the adventurous aspect of Thief".

Undeniably, the sword outshines the dagger in missions where there are non-human AIs. That's where the reach of the sword is very practical.

It would be good if one got to choose whether to take the sword or not before a mission on the load-out screen, for example.

Vae
31st Mar 2011, 08:57
Yeah, I've always supported the sword representing the "adventurous" aspect, the blackjack representing the "in-City burglary" aspect, and the bow, a ranged version that fulfills both aspects.

Sword, Blackjack, Bow...

The weapon/tool-set that compliments the full-spectrum THIEF experience...:)

xAcerbusx
31st Mar 2011, 09:02
It would be good if one got to choose whether to take the sword or not before a mission on the load-out screen, for example.

Having both in the game, and being able to choose which one to take before each mission would be preferable. Or maybe even having both. Just because Garrett has a sword doesn't mean he doesn't have a 'sidearm', as it were. Though, admittedly, by that point, he's getting a bit weighed down.

If they choose to re-introduce the shops from Deadly Shadows, then it might also be cool to have other models of sword and dagger and even bow to purchase as you go along, each with their own unique reach, attacking and defensive properties.

Vae
31st Mar 2011, 09:32
In spirit, I don't have a problem with adding some extra weapons, even if they're not really needed...since the core weapon set covers the various aspects well...The main issue I have with it, is that it steals away time from more important development priorities.

DarkDagger
31st Mar 2011, 09:35
Having both in the game, and being able to choose which one to take before each mission would be preferable. Or maybe even having both. Just because Garrett has a sword doesn't mean he doesn't have a 'sidearm', as it were. Though, admittedly, by that point, he's getting a bit weighed down.

If they choose to re-introduce the shops from Deadly Shadows, then it might also be cool to have other models of sword and dagger and even bow to purchase as you go along, each with their own unique reach, attacking and defensive properties.

You took it from my mouth. :D
Players will always go this and that so give them the chance of choosing.

Nightwynd
31st Mar 2011, 10:28
If they choose to re-introduce the shops from Deadly Shadows, then it might also be cool to have other models of sword and dagger and even bow to purchase as you go along, each with their own unique reach, attacking and defensive properties.

Vae had a good point on this one.

It would be great but considerable effort should be put into variable weapons and tools and their properties to make them not seem and feel generic.

I'd say the best option is what you suggested earlier in the same post: Having both and being able to choose either - or both of them before the mission.

Hypevosa
31st Mar 2011, 10:45
I've always been a proponent for including both in the game simultaneously, as evinced by my thread I made about the very subject oh so many eons ago.

What would be important to me is, if dagger fighting is meant to actually be a viable method, it needs to vastly improve over TDS's system, and yet still be something that's more player skill related than something like Assassin's Creed has where you just press a button or two to accomplish a deadly counter attack. I imagine it would work like this during a dagger vs sword/hammer/mace fight:

At normal combat range the enemy would still engage you with their weapon - as these weapons have enough heft to maintain their momentum on a swing, the primary tactic at this distance would be to dodge, duck, jump, etc to avoid blows and get closer.

Moving a little closer (to the point where the player could begin to cut outreached arms), the player could use quick cuts, the hap hazard slashes from TDS. These wouldn't actually kill someone, but they would cause pain to set in, and fatigue as blood ran - making the opponent less combat effective. This is where slashing is employed in both knife fights and rapier battles. Neither weapon has enough heft for slashing to genuinely damage the opponent (movies always embellish things a bit), but shallow cuts were instead used to distract the opponent and make them easier to take down.

Moving to an even closer range, the player is no longer in the threat range of the enemy, but is now within the dagger's effective distance. All melee weapons aside from a dagger are useless at this distance as they cannot damage the player since they cannot take advantage of leverage and force. The players attacks change to stabbing attacks, which cause high damage to the opponent. However, the opponent will also attempt to regain the advantage of reach they had before, pushing the player away, jumping back, or even striking them with a pommel to momentarily daze them as they back away. If they aren't properly weakened first by shallow cuts, or distractions of other nature, then this means they'll be quicker to respond to the player being in their face, and more effective when they do respond.

Thus, the system has more depth than get in range and hold the attack button while drinking instaheal potions. You now have weapon reach taken into account, as well as proper technique. Opponents will try to keep you at bay, and will be largely effective in doing so until you weaken their defenses. Mobility and maintaining proper distances becomes the key to victory. If necessary, hitting the "block" key as the opponent is actually swinging the weapon (not as they bring it back) could parry a blow to make an opening.

Bow users would likely pull a dagger of their own once the player was that close to them, or just push them back the same as others - though they would be much easier to take out in general.

I feel I could be very happy using a dagger in combat while playing thief if it felt as fun and in depth as the fights I had in TDP and TMA with the sword. I just can't justify Garrett casting aside one of the tools he was raised with and still has a vast amount of ability with - it seems foolish, something I'd hope he grew out of after the first game. Removing the sword entirely just doesn't seem right.

Vae
31st Mar 2011, 11:23
I think anything more than one blade for Garrett is unnecessary, and of course that one blade would be the sword, for various obvious reasons...Garrett is not a weapon specialist, nor should he be...and having more than the core set (sword, blackjack, bow), would just distort his character, and dilute the various application of uses of his primary weapon set...ultimately diminishing creative thinking...Less tools, more creative applications for them, is better.

However, I really like the idea of having daggers and other weapons developed for enemy Ai, in order to make them more distinctive, challenging, and just plain fun for THIEF...Like daggers for archers, for example...this makes sense, and makes archers distinctive, rather than them trying to shot you with the bow while your circling around them with the sword...and they wouldn't just pull out a sword and fight like a guard...they would have there own unique approach.

This could be done with various weaponry, and applied to unique classes and creatures, in order to create a welcomed, and enhanced THIEF experience...:)

Platinumoxicity
31st Mar 2011, 13:39
I don't oppose Garrett having a smaller blade just in case, like we see him using in the briefing of "Framed", and in the promo video of TDS when he cuts the string of the purse. But we are talking about a videogame here, and I really don't see any practical purpose in gameplay's perspective for a dagger or a knife. It was completely useless in TDS, and I don't see how it would be useful in Thief 4.

Hypevosa
31st Mar 2011, 13:59
I don't think it's a matter of dilution if he were to carry the dagger from TDS on his person to complement the sword from the first games. It's not a matter of becoming a weapons specialist - we're not talking about giving him a quake style 1 through 0 repetoire of nasty, unique weapons, as evinced by falling back on half those numbers for unique arrows. It's a dagger, a simple and elegant addition to an otherwise complete City Thief's collection.

As I've said, I feel it's just as much a dick move to take the dagger away from the people who enjoyed it from TDS, as it was when it was done to those of us who so thoroughly enjoyed the sword in TDP, TMA. "We came first" is a petty argument, even if I empathize with it. Both blades are part of the fiction, and if we're going to say he should carry the sword, as I believe he should, then there's no reason he couldn't carry the dagger as well. There are situations, outside backstabbing, where having a blade that doesn't require the space/time to draw or maneuver is advantageous, where the thin and easily manipulated in small space are desirable attributes, and where speed poses a very tangible benefit over reach.

However, the time must be taken to advance the TDS dagger beyond what it was, and into something more useful. Something that has more applications than stab it dead, and that also has a combat system which requires player skill to make it work. The TDS dagger needs to be advanced to the point where it's considered a worthy addition to the thief equipment set. The question is, do the devs have the time? They are the only ones that have the answer to that question.

Should only one be viable, I'd choose the sword in a heartbeat - however that doesn't mean the dagger shouldn't still be there. It doesn't matter if it only popped up to cut a painting hastily from its frame, or to shimmy a door open, or to disarm a pressure plate. It's the little things - attention to detail and the interweaving of fiction that really make some games so awesome. I'd appreciate giving the TDS dagger a nod at least, out of respect to the audience that was robbed of it.

Platinumoxicity
31st Mar 2011, 16:21
The dagger should have enough use for it to be a worthy addition to the game's arsenal. In TDS it had one very, VERY limited use. You could sneak up on the 2 or 3 Haunts under Ironwood, and kill them from behind with a backstab. That's too limited to go through the trouble of actually adding the weapon to the game. When you have a weapon that's on default inventory slot 2, and is equipped by default when the player presses the attack-key, and that weapon is suitable for dealing with 2 specific individual enemies in the entire game, that doesn't make any sense. The dagger should have some significance for the gameplay if it wanted to be taken seriously as a weapon in the primary weapon selection keys.

A good example: Splinter Cell: Chaos theory. You grab a guy and threaten him with a knife, so that he talks. The knife isn't a selectable weapon, but it's still there, handy if needed. In Thief you're supposed to listen to conversations and read the readables, but isn't it obvious that the further you go down the "let's kill everyone" -lane, the less those players have patience or attention span to waste time on reading stuff? For those players there could be an option where they can just ask less than politely what they want to know, at knifepoint.

Things like cutting down paintings from the frames, well... I just can't see how this could be implemented as a dynamic action, not even in third person. It would look stupid no matter how you program it, and be just a waste of time. Forcing open simple locks with the knife would also be a worthy use for a knife. Or opening those little windows from the outside, you know, flipping the latch open through the gap in the middle. All of these possibilities are simple passive actions, and they still don't make a good case for having a small blade as an actual selectable weapon, but rather just one of Garrett's tools he has handy.

I know that every time some old fan is bashing the dagger and defending the sword, it sould like just appealing to the nostalgia factor of it and disregarding the daggers "thiefiness" (a term that still remains undefined by those who insist on using it) But the main thing is that the dagger as an official weapon that has an attack function and an inventory slot, it's completely useless in the context of Thief and it's protagonist.

Vae
31st Mar 2011, 19:01
Things like cutting down paintings from the frames, well... I just can't see how this could be implemented as a dynamic action, not even in third person. It would look stupid no matter how you program it, and be just a waste of time. Forcing open simple locks with the knife would also be a worthy use for a knife. Or opening those little windows from the outside, you know, flipping the latch open through the gap in the middle. All of these possibilities are simple passive actions, and they still don't make a good case for having a small blade as an actual selectable weapon, but rather just one of Garrett's tools he has handy.

I know that every time some old fan is bashing the dagger and defending the sword, it sould like just appealing to the nostalgia factor of it and disregarding the daggers "thiefiness" (a term that still remains undefined by those who insist on using it) But the main thing is that the dagger as an official weapon that has an attack function and an inventory slot, it's completely useless in the context of Thief and it's protagonist.

Agreed...As I've said before, there's really no need for the dagger, when the sword is in the game...Garrett doesn't need two combat blades. The sword, with the inclusion of an ancillary utility knife or boot knife, gives him everything he needs as far as blades are concerned. The knife is appropriately designed for such things as cutting out paintings, cutting purse strings, forcing entry, and disarming traps...and it should be an auto-selectable tool, like the lockpicks.

ToMegaTherion
31st Mar 2011, 23:12
Attack constantly while running ridiculously around your opponent in circles.

I'm not actually sure this is the best approach, particularly for larger groups of guards. I favoured the forward-backward approach, with more backwards than forwards, attacking constantly, moving forwards when the lead guard is at the appropriate point in his swing, and exploitig the inability of guards to move and attack at the same time. Circling round the guards is done only at a dead end, and then only to repeat the procedure in the opposite direction.

The circle approach tends to run into more difficulties as guard numbers increase. Forward-backward can deal with pretty much every sword guard on any level simultaneously. The number you can kill is more dependent on how soon you get tired or bored. I've done at least 40 before.

xAcerbusx
31st Mar 2011, 23:13
A good example: Splinter Cell: Chaos theory. You grab a guy and threaten him with a knife, so that he talks. The knife isn't a selectable weapon, but it's still there, handy if needed.


Actually, the Splinter Cell knife is even more useful than that. You can also use it to slice fabric material (like the walls of tents) to gain an additional point of entry, use it to break through thin layers of ice, (assuming you're on an arctic mission) and of course you can choose to backstab someone once you've nabbed them. (but that's no fun :P)

Hypevosa
1st Apr 2011, 00:00
A good example: Splinter Cell: Chaos theory. You grab a guy and threaten him with a knife, so that he talks. The knife isn't a selectable weapon, but it's still there, handy if needed.

That's exactly the kind of thing I meant when I was talking about it earlier. If it couldn't be given the proper time and effort to become a Thief worthy selectable tool, it should at least be given "cameos" where it makes an appearance as a tool. The examples I listed were small moments I thought would be appropriate to make this nod to TDS and the dagger.

Platinumoxicity
1st Apr 2011, 09:48
That's exactly the kind of thing I meant when I was talking about it earlier. If it couldn't be given the proper time and effort to become a Thief worthy selectable tool, it should at least be given "cameos" where it makes an appearance as a tool. The examples I listed were small moments I thought would be appropriate to make this nod to TDS and the dagger.

Exactly. It could be a tool that's always handy for Garrett to use for various tasks, but it's not something used for murdering unsuspecing innocents, or something pathetic you bring into a swordfight.

The sword could be used as a selectable weapon for:
-Self-defense
-Haunt backstabs
-"doing it wrong"
-Breaking wooden planks

The dagger could be used as an unselectable multipurpose tool for:
-Breaking simple locks that you need to get through quickly.
-Flipping open the latches of window covers from the outside.
-Interrogation.
-Cutting paintings off the frames.
-Cutting spiderwebs.
-Opening the lids of crawlspaces and airducts.
-Short-circuiting electrical boxes for temporary light shutdown.

Neither one would be used for:
-Cutting those banner thingies. You don't need to cut them, just lift it and see what's behind it. Breaking things is evidence of a break-in.
-Breaking down entire doors like in T1 and T2. The dagger would be used for breaking the lock quickly. And you couldn't break any locks more advanced than those you see on the old wooden doors.

GATX
16th Apr 2011, 13:32
I though TDS was brilliant, but not without it's flaws.

I liked:
...
- Garretts apartment


Actually I didn't like Gerretts apartment. IMO his Wayside-Apartment in Thief II The Metal Age was way cooler.

When I first saw his Southquarter-Apartment, I even thought Garrett was poor. :scratch:

Platinumoxicity
16th Apr 2011, 13:44
Actually I didn't like Gerretts apartment. IMO his Wayside-Apartment in Thief II The Metal Age was way cooler.

When I first saw his Southquarter-Apartment, I even thought Garrett was poor. :scratch:

Garrett isn't exactly the richest guy, but yeah, he's considerably wealthy. You can steal stacks of copper coins in Thief, and they're just 5g. The guards in TDS are mumbling to themselves... "All this for just a few coppers a week". So guards working legitimate jobs are getting about 300 times less money in a week than what Garrett gets in one night. If Garrett's flat is as crappy as it was in TDS, then the guards must be sleeping on the street if Garrett can barely afford living in his crappy apartment with all the money he makes.

GATX
16th Apr 2011, 15:59
I miss the machinery and steampunk devices in TDS. There were turbines, pipes, furnaces, elevators etc. in Thief The Dark Project and Thief The Metal Age.

Platinumoxicity
16th Apr 2011, 16:56
I miss all the 5- and 6-sided objects that we saw in Thief 1 and 2. As a kid I didn't understand polygon limitations, so I thought that some of the mines and vases and stuff were consciously modeled to have 5 sides. If you'd really imagine the explosive mine or the sunburst device as high-poly, round objects, they would look incredibly boring. I think EM should look back at the low-poly objects in the Dark Engine and try to come up with cool redesigns of them in all their jagged glory, without changing the general shape.

Nephthys
16th Apr 2011, 18:38
Fallout 3 mine (http://images.wikia.com/fallout/images/c/c4/FragMine.png)

those looked pretty boring. That's for sure.

Also, keep the hissing and ticking, if they bring back the mines, because that was a really nice sound to go with them.

DarkDagger
16th Apr 2011, 21:36
Garrett isn't exactly the richest guy, but yeah, he's considerably wealthy. You can steal stacks of copper coins in Thief, and they're just 5g. The guards in TDS are mumbling to themselves... "All this for just a few coppers a week". So guards working legitimate jobs are getting about 300 times less money in a week than what Garrett gets in one night. If Garrett's flat is as crappy as it was in TDS, then the guards must be sleeping on the street if Garrett can barely afford living in his crappy apartment with all the money he makes.

He has to pay a lot for the "crappy apartment" because it is his shelter in a city where he is most wanted. The landlord knows who he is ( we see it in the book in his room) so it's expected that he demands high price to keep his mouth shut.


Actually I didn't like Gerretts apartment. IMO his Wayside-Apartment in Thief II The Metal Age was way cooler.

When I first saw his Southquarter-Apartment, I even thought Garrett was poor. :scratch:

And what was cooler? It was empty, it had one secret some things to pick up and..? In TDS he had the practice stuff .

Platinumoxicity
16th Apr 2011, 22:10
He has to pay a lot for the "crappy apartment" because it is his shelter in a city where he is most wanted. The landlord knows who he is ( we see it in the book in his room) so it's expected that he demands high price to keep his mouth shut.

Really? Well I guess that one more thing to be added to the list of things TDS got wrong. Garrett is smart enough not to let anyone know about his occupation, especially his landlord. If Garrett would find out that his landlord suspects him, he would move immediately before he gets caught.

DarkDagger
17th Apr 2011, 09:25
Really? Well I guess that one more thing to be added to the list of things TDS got wrong. Garrett is smart enough not to let anyone know about his occupation, especially his landlord. If Garrett would find out that his landlord suspects him, he would move immediately before he gets caught.

And move on and on and on... we clearly see that his landlord knows who he is but he is someone that Garrett can "work" with. Garrett may be smart enough to know what to do but he also is smart enough to know that moving from one place to another is risk for a criminal like him. He has security in his home and the price comes with it.

GATX
17th Apr 2011, 10:57
It was empty, it had one secret some things to pick up and..? In TDS he had the practice stuff .

Empty? :hmm:
I can see: A fireplace, 3 carpets, a couch, 4 chairs, 2 cupboards with books, secretary desk (never saw something like this in TDS), two tables, a light switch, an electric lamp, two torches, a secret room behind a coat hook and a decorative sword (not a dagger)

DarkDagger
17th Apr 2011, 11:06
Empty? :hmm:
I can see: A fireplace, 3 carpets, a couch, 4 chairs, 2 cupboards with books, secretary desk (never saw something like this in TDS), two tables, a light switch, an electric lamp, two torches, a secret room behind a coat hook and a decorative sword (not a dagger)

Excuse me, are you playing SIMS? The house of the master thief is blending unseen used for sleep, hideout and training. If he lives like a nobleman then the mistake is mine. :naughty:


Garrett didn't need practice stuff. It was for the player. Garrett was already a master before TDS.

So if a martial artist is become a champion he doesn't need to practice? He is just like "loot I'm the best guess i should chill now."

GATX
17th Apr 2011, 11:32
Excuse me, are you playing SIMS?
:poke: Come on, you know that I'm not playing SIMS. Thats unobjective.

Have you seen the Mansion of Lord Bram Gervaisius? Or Castle VanVernon?
Garret has a two room apartment and a couch and you ask if he's a nobleman? :nut:

DarkDagger
17th Apr 2011, 11:35
No it just seems to me to like the carpets and the sofas and the plasma TV's and not the things that matter to the hero.

GATX
17th Apr 2011, 12:12
No it just seems to me to like the carpets and the sofas and the plasma TV's and not the things that matter to the hero.

I can remember a dialog in TDS where a man claims to be garret. He said something like (in a snobbish voice):
"No, my Job as a masterthief is too important. I have no time to wash myself, I have to do my job." :lmao:

So, if you earned 300g a night you didn't afford a room with a couch, a cuppboard and wallpaper? Sure practising is important, but what would the neighbours think, if there is some weird guy who never goes outside and practises swordfighting 2 hours a day. Don't you think Garrett goes somewhere else for practising?

DarkDagger
17th Apr 2011, 12:54
I can remember a dialog in TDS where a man claims to be garret. He said something like (in a snobbish voice):
"No, my Job as a masterthief is too important. I have no time to wash myself, I have to do my job." :lmao:

So, if you earned 300g a night you didn't afford a room with a couch, a cuppboard and wallpaper? Sure practising is important, but what would the neighbours think, if there is some weird guy who never goes outside and practises swordfighting 2 hours a day. Don't you think Garrett goes somewhere else for practising?

First of all of you look at my upper post i said he CAN afford it, but doesn't need it. And where did i say he is practicing "all day"? Can you show me? Also how do his neighbours learn about what he is doing in his house? Maybe they are thief masters and sneek into his home?
When criminals show off their riches people begin to ask :"Where did he get that?" and investigations begin. Garrett is just trying to keep it cool.

Platinumoxicity
17th Apr 2011, 12:54
And move on and on and on... we clearly see that his landlord knows who he is but he is someone that Garrett can "work" with. Garrett may be smart enough to know what to do but he also is smart enough to know that moving from one place to another is risk for a criminal like him. He has security in his home and the price comes with it.

Garrett has several safe houses that he frequents on monthly, even weekly basis. Every time he does a high profile job he lays low in a different part of the City. He had one next to Hightowne, the one in the market district, in Shalebridge, the one in South Quarter, even one tiny little attic in the Old Quarter. And those are just the ones we have seen in the games. There has to be more.

Moving from one place to another is something thousands of people are doing in the City every day. During the day all the district gates are open and only after curfew they're closed and closely guarded. And even during the night anyone can freely walk around within the districts themselves, as long as they won't try getting past the gates. During nighttime Garrett needs to resort to going via the rooftops or sewers if he wants to pass the gates. During the day he can just walk through like everyone else does.

GATX
17th Apr 2011, 13:31
Also how do his neighbours learn about what he is doing in his house? Maybe they are thief masters and sneek into his home?
When criminals show off their riches people begin to ask :"Where did he get that?" and investigations begin. Garrett is just trying to keep it cool.

:eek: Where did he get the sofa? Where did he get the lamp? :eek:
I don't think having a lamp is a way to show off your riches.

Also how do his neighbours learn about what he is doing in his house?
Well, swordfighting is noisy, you do not have to sneak into ones apartment to see that he's practcing swordfighting. You don't practice swordfighting by reading a book (usually). Have you ever hit a door with a sword in thief?:scratch: If so, the next servant was going to scream: "GUARDS! HELP! AN INTRUDER"

And as Platinumoxicity said, Garret can walk around in The City during daytime. He might go to a sparse populated part of the city - somewhere in Southquarter for example and practise there. Or can you pratice archery in your flat?

DarkDagger
17th Apr 2011, 15:15
To Platinumoxicity
First off I'd like to point out something safe house is one thing home is another.It can serve as a safe house but it's not. Secondly the thousands people that are moving all over the city are where?Nobles live in their own mansions that never changes, common folk lives in their own homes. Making an assumption is never a fact. On the other part I agree with you.
To GATX
Ok I get where are you going. You my men just got into the forum and are new just like me. You have written in most of the topics agreeing with everyone and having a good time dissing what people who think different then most do. Yes i love seeing it because it's so obvious. I mean c'mon he even wrote to the thanks giving topic on VIKTORIA and said thanks ( I don't know why maybe they are best friends ) But the fact of the matter is this. You don't rely on facts and the facts are that all the games (dp ma ds) , and as part of them the cinamatics, create the characters the city and everything about the city. The third game introduces us to Garrett's home. He says it "It's not much but it's home." and I understand this and accept it like it or not. Just saying stuff like "we want metal age and dark project all anew" saddens me. Denying the story and the new things that DS provides us with is silly. The main games are 3 like it or not. It's just people like saying Garrett is not a killer. Yes he is we see it in the cinametics (example- the beginning of MA) Garrett is doing it. It's not what the player decides-Garrett is doing it.He does it only when necessary but he does it. Then again you start with the sofa and lamp stuff witch have no real impact on the game. They are just there so that there won't be empty space. Noticing their absence just show off how much you hate the third game and would add anything just to prove that it is unworthy.It has nothing to do with the story it has nothing to do with the persona of Garrett- nothing. I understand that DP is in the childhood or early gaming experience and you like it a lot. I also like it a lot but a I'd like to see it improved. MA follows DP in most of the aspects (not all most and mostly gameplay) and is improvement over it. DS is the most different over the other two, and that earns it the biggest dislike of all. But I'll say it again DS is part of the Thief universe and that no one can deny. Everything that happens there is fact. I understand that is has really a lot of holes in it and I don't like them also, but i see the holes in all 3 games not only the 3rd. And i know that I'll get my a** raped for saying this but here goes: My favorite game is Dark Project because it is the birth of my favorite fantasy world, but Deadly Shadows is the best game to play.

sirota554
17th Apr 2011, 16:09
So can yall enjoy TDS as a game at all? I ask because I found i enjoyed it im not the hardcore fan of the games but i enjoyed all three for what they were... For you guys was the jump from t2 to tds as jarring as fallout 1 and 2 to fallout 3 was for me? I dont know it seems like most people here would burn any copies they find of TDS and i thoroughly enjoyed it as a game found all the loot even spent a random hour dragging guards into fires and that elevator... I dont know but if you look at it as a game purely do yall loath it?

GATX
17th Apr 2011, 16:17
NO! I do not hate Deadly Shadows!


Noticing their absence just show off how much you hate the third game and would add anything just to prove that it is unworthy.

Why do you think, that I hate the third game?
I never said that. I played all three games and there where things I liked and things I disliked, but I never said I hated any of the games in the series. Each games has its flaws and I know that. TDP was too Tombraider/Indiana Jones like and had bad graphics (but I have to admit I liked the 5 and 6 sided mines and streetlamps), TMA was to technical/modern/steampunkish (though that was part of the story), maybe bit too thievery oriented and hat bad graphics too. TDS on the other hand had quite good graphics (still old compared to now but ok) but also alot of things looked weird compared to the first two games: Where did all the mechanist stuff go to(you can't remove all evidences that the machanists existed in 4 or 5 years)? I would have accepted his Southquarter house in TDP but after what I have seen in TMA Its hard to believe that he is living in such a cheap flat now. The elevators look totally different in TDS. Why? How did they change all elevators in the city in half a decade? I could go on with my list of unconsistent things.

Nevertheless, TDS is a good or very good game. Not as fun if you have played T1 and T2 before, but it is Thief and it is cool there is Garrett and you have a blackjack. Though there were the flaws I wrote about, there are a lot of things I like. I like the idea that you can explore the city (although the individual maps are too small). I like the references to TDP and I like the Keepers Kompound. I like the Auldale district and most important the big city map. The big city map (the one with the river in the middle) looked weird to me on first seight, but then I realised that it really made sense and is not contrary to the story of TDP and TMA. Everything in TDP, TMA and TDS fit into this map.


But I'll say it again DS is part of the Thief universe and that no one can deny. Everything that happens there is fact. And I will not deny your sentence, as its true. T3 is an important part of the thief university and I respect that.

I liked T3 even with its flaws, I just would not say that it was as great as the first ones.

sirota554
17th Apr 2011, 16:33
I dont know maybe its because i started with TDS then went back and played T1 and T2 but it was nowhere near as different as playing Fallout 1 and 2 and then playing 3 like i did that was jarring. i think if they still are making t4 they should look at all the games and there flaws and work from there taking the best of all of them granted i have this overwhelming fear that t4 would turn out a generic "Older Garrett has to come out of retirement for one last big heist" story with generic design. I was just wondering if you guys could still enjoy the game with the flaws you pointed out.

DarkDagger
17th Apr 2011, 16:46
Seriously? Elevators, Garrett's home and the Mechanists gone? Yes I'd like you to go on with the things you don't like because I hope it helps the developers. But let me tell you something: the Mechanists aren't gone they are mentioned by the Hammers (referring to Karras as heretic) in Caduca's book and there was recording of Karras's last words in the museum. It is normal for them to be quite gone because their whole cause was killing all living nature in the end. Exposed in front of the world they are doomed and the Hammers take their rightful place.
About the hate part. Why is there a topic about "What's wrong with TDS you may ask" and things like "disappointment, elitism, hate is a strong word, retarded cousin, tds is third best" are the tags about the game? And furthermore why isn't a combined topic "What's wrong with Thief you may ask?" addressing all problems. You can smell the hate about DS in here a kilometer away.

GATX
17th Apr 2011, 17:03
I do not mean the mechanists are forgotten. But all the things they placed everywhere, e.g. the pinions or the gas lamps. There was no reason to take away the gas lamps.
Oh and there IS a topic called "What's wrong with TMA you may ask", where some people say there are fanboys everywhere in TMA. Isn't that hate too? Really, I have never seen any fanboys running around in any TMA mission.
And yes maybe someone should close this topic and start a "What's wrong with Thief you may ask?" thread and, to make it easier for the devs, a "What's right with Thief you may ask?" thread too. That should be a better approach. Really.

And now I'm going to play some TDS :)

Platinumoxicity
17th Apr 2011, 17:28
I do not mean the mechanists are forgotten. But all the things they placed everywhere, e.g. the pinions or the gas lamps. There was no reason to take away the gas lamps.

They didn't take the gas lamps and stuff away. They never put them in. They apparently had so much trouble just adding in the TDS exclusive stuff to the broken game that they didn't have time to tie the game together with the past. They had to resort to indirect hints about the past that were inserted to dialogue and readables, just to get the game barely follow the previous ones.

There were lots of hammerite tech in the cathedral factory and the clocktower though.


To Platinumoxicity
First off I'd like to point out something safe house is one thing home is another.It can serve as a safe house but it's not. Secondly the thousands people that are moving all over the city are where?Nobles live in their own mansions that never changes, common folk lives in their own homes. Making an assumption is never a fact. On the other part I agree with you.

What I meant by "moving around all the time" is physically relocating their bodies by utilizing the limbs called "feet". Garrett has safehouses all over the City, and he can relocate to a different safehouse any day he wants, the same way as commuters are walking to and from work every day all the time. Just knock on the landlord's door, pay the month's rent in advance and walk to your other safehouse. I didn't imply that thousands of people are "moving" as in getting a new apartment. That's crazy. :D

theBlackman
17th Apr 2011, 17:43
To me, and frankly that's the only opinion that matters, TDS as a Game is not bad. But the radical changes in player/character movement and freedom a major disappointment.

The "body" physics are unreal, the action of a BJd person are ludicrous, the inability of Garrett to perform some formerly simple activities is cumbersome.

There are other disappointments, but TDS feels confining compared to the freedom and flexibility of TDP/GOLD?TMA.

The designed inconsistencies are extremely annoying and are immersion breakers. EXAMPLE: The gloves let you climb at point A, but three yards to one side at point B you cannot climb the EXACT SAME TEXTURE.

In area X you can jump over, or mantle to the top of a 3 foot wall, in area Y you can't do the same, even if you use a crate as a stepping stone, and so on.

As a stand-alone game TDS is not bad. As a continuation of THIEF the series it takes too radical a departure from the players freedom of choice and ability to choose their own routes, actions and use of in game items than the previous games, (I refer you to the crate staircase to the top of the lighthouse in Markham's Island in TMA)

LINK: http://coldsweir.nov.ru/azal/

Yes the graphics are an improvement, although I have no problem with the cruder graphics in the first games, but Eyecandy and dumbing the game down because of the limitations of Console controllers didn't improve the series, nor -other than using a loose history from the first games- have the immersion or feeling (emotional sense) of being the next chapter in the life of The Keepers, or Garrett.

A playable game, but not, in my never humble opinion, a worthy successor to THIEF as we have come to know it. Frankly, T2X was a much better production in terms of THIEF than TDS will ever be, even with the introduction of a completely new set of characters. T2X is THIEF without Garrett. TDS is Garrett without THIEF.

Platinumoxicity
17th Apr 2011, 17:55
T2X is THIEF without Garrett. TDS is Garrett without THIEF.

Haha. Exactly. :D Well not exactly... Garrett lost his ability to swim, his cape and sword, his rope arrows, his facelessness, and was made famous. So...

T2X was THIEF without Garrett, and TDS was Stephen Russell without THIEF.

theBlackman
17th Apr 2011, 18:02
[...] TDS was Stephen Russell without THIEF.

Picky. Picky. Picky. :rasp:

GATX
18th Apr 2011, 13:21
T2X is THIEF without Garrett. TDS is Garrett without THIEF.

And the Dark Mod? Has any of you played the dark mod?

Keeper_Riff
18th Apr 2011, 13:25
And the Dark Mod? Has any of you played the dark mod?It's Thief without the City.

Platinumoxicity
18th Apr 2011, 16:15
The thunder sound effects and the graphical water splashing effects are horrible in what you see in that video. There are better splashes in T2X. Just my opinion. :)

Platinumoxicity
19th Apr 2011, 07:12
Yeah I understand. But the thunder sounds really don't sound at all like thunder. Or maybe thunder is different in my part of the world.

Nephthys
19th Apr 2011, 07:24
The thunder is alright, but the crazy geyser splash when a body falls in an inch deep puddle is a little weird.
But the more I see TDM, the more I really need to get my hands on a Doom 3 copy so I can get it.

Platinumoxicity
19th Apr 2011, 08:45
I started playing Deadly Shadows last night. I didn't remember how frustrating it was, because it's probably been years... I got caught at least 20 times because of the clunky movement of the 1st person mode. In the Pagan Sanctuary there are so many times you need to navigate on top of narrow rafters, while there are people downstairs. I have to conclude that it's impossible to crouch and move on the rafters.

If you see a 5cm gap, you need to run and jump over it so that Garrett doesn't slither down the tiny hole and fall into a room full of guards.

When you need to turn 90 right, you actually need to first turn 135°, and then turn back those 45°, because when turning, Garrett actually first turns his head 45° and after that threshold starts turning the body. So if you'd only turn 90°, your body would still only have turned 45°, and when you take a step, you take the first step 45° to the left, off the rafters, land in a campfire and get killed by angry pagans while your arse is on fire.

And thank goodness for campfire npc death bug. You need to sacrifice a corpse to the root holding the paw, and I don't get seen, kill or knock out anyone. There was a dead body conveniently nearby. :D

And now I remember the real reason for the existence of the loot glint. I have it disabled, and first I couldn't understand why it was so hard to find loot without it, when it's so easy in the earlier games. But then I realized... the object handling system. You can't set things down where you took them. You can only set them down a certain distance away, on a certain height in front of you. So it's impossible to check whether things are valuable or not by picking them up, without risking getting caught, because you need to make a lot of racket, always droppin' them wine bottles 20cm over the table because you can't just place them back onto the table. The loot glint is a necessity, not because it helps you cheat finding hidden things in the darkness, but because you couldn't otherwise check the value of an object, because the game is broken. So it's a bug fix, not a gameplay feature.

After that the game gets less frustrating though. It's a shame that the pagan mission is so early in the game. Because the part with the rafters is enough to stop any 1st person player from playing ahead.

Keeper_Riff
19th Apr 2011, 09:22
When you need to turn 90 right, you actually need to first turn 135°, and then turn back those 45°, because when turning, Garrett actually first turns his head 45° and after that threshold starts turning the body. So if you'd only turn 90°, your body would still only have turned 45°, and when you take a step, you take the first step 45° to the left, off the rafters, land in a campfire and get killed by angry pagans while your arse is on fire.Switch to 3rd person briefly while looking in the direction you plan to move and Garrett's legs will adjust immediately. You don't even have to wait until the camera goes all the way from the player model to switch back to 1st person AFAIR.


And thank goodness for campfire npc death bug. You need to sacrifice a corpse to the root holding the paw, and I don't get seen, kill or knock out anyone. There was a dead body conveniently nearby. :DThere's another corpse even closer to the cave. But maybe it's just another buggy AI which fell from rafters. :scratch:


So it's a bug fix, not a gameplay feature.Why didn't they just change, say, the highlight color for valuable items? :mad2: I know that overlay highlighting which hides all model and texture details is another issue in itself, but still...

Platinumoxicity
19th Apr 2011, 10:29
Switch to 3rd person briefly while looking in the direction you plan to move and Garrett's legs will adjust immediately. You don't even have to wait until the camera goes all the way from the player model to switch back to 1st person AFAIR

There's no reason a player should have to do that. In fact I have unbound the "switch perspective" -key and I pretend the 3rd person mode doesn't exist. :)



There's another corpse even closer to the cave. But maybe it's just another buggy AI which fell from rafters. :scratch:

Yeah, it's a bug. There are no dead bodies already present in the mission by default. The player either has to kill someone or wait for the bugs of the game to drop someone to their death or burn someone alive. :D



Why didn't they just change, say, the highlight color for valuable items? :mad2: I know that overlay highlighting which hides all model and texture details is another issue in itself, but still...

Yeah, the highlighting is another issue. Instead of properly lighting up the object, the game only projects an multiply color overlay over the object, which in fact makes it harder to distinguish loot. But the truth is that the devs didn't even try to make the object handling properly. It can't be impossible to program a system where you aim at a point on a surface and when you release an object, it appears in that point without making any sound. To see if objects on a shelf are valuable, you need to quicksave, check out all the objects and make a ton of noise, and then quickload so that you can pretend that checking out the objects didn't make any racket.

And it doesn't help that regarless of the power of your PC, be it a 800Mhz or 4.3GHz, it always takes 25 seconds to load a save. It has nothing to do with the game actually loading anything, but the progress bar of the loading screen has been programmed to advance at a specific speed. :mad:

DarkDagger
19th Apr 2011, 15:35
I played the Pagan mission especially because of you and i got 97% loot and two times caught: in the ritual place and one mistake of mine when i was leaving.

Platinumoxicity
19th Apr 2011, 16:16
In the last 2 weeks I've ghosted through T1, T2 and T2X. I was probably too much influenced by the controls of the old games, because I just couldn't control Garrett in TDS. In the old games if there's a low obstacle in front of you, for example a 20cm wall, you can press against it and quietly get on top of it. I assumed that you can do that in TDS, and it's not possible. You need to waste a moss arrow and actually jump on top of the tiny obstacle. In the old games if there's a somewhat narrow gap, you can get quietly across it by walking off the platform and grabbing the other side. It's not possible in TDS, and you slip through the gap. If there's a really, really narrow gap, like something you can fit your fist in between, in the old games you can basically stand on top of the gap, and it's easy to get across it. In TDS if you don't literally run or jump across the tiny gap, you fall through! In the old games you can perfectly estimate the size of a gap, and the amount of jumping speed you need in order to just make it over the gap and grab the other side so that you make 0 noise. In TDS, the forward momentum when you're airborne after jumping is lowered from what it was when you were runnign for the jump. And it doesn't help that the field of view is more narrow in TDS, so your vision loses some amount of the perception of depth. And the final problem with climbing and stuff is the fact that you can accidentally mantle into different directions than where you're aiming at. Garrett doesn't just try to get over the wall in front of him, but just because a fence is too close to the point that you're mantling, you can accidentally mantle the fence on the right instead and sometimes fall to your death. That's not what i commanded Garrett to do.

So most of the problems I have are based on the way I move while staying silent in the old games. It's easier to maneuver stealthily in those games because you don't get stuck or slip off if you move more slowly. So TDS is slippery and unpredictable compared to the older games.

Thugo
19th Apr 2011, 16:21
One little thing that just now came to mind about TDS....remember the Jacknal Paw mission, where you are sneaking around in the upstairs of the old factory? Garrett sees an old giant Cog lying on its side, and muses out loud something about how 'unfortunate it would be if an accident were to occure'...... So Garrett is actively encouraging/hinting to the player to push the Cog down onto the Pagans below = bloodshed and mayhem.

Bloodthirst and making a racket = the 'real' Garrett would frown on that kind of sloppiness!

Nephthys
19th Apr 2011, 17:54
The Pagan Sanctuary was where I got stuck when I first rented the game, and I didn't pick it back up for another three years. It was a hard level to navigate, I remember that much.

Platinumoxicity
20th Apr 2011, 17:06
I just finished TDS with 1 knockout (training) and 0 detections. I found an infuriating bug in "Still Life with the Blackjack". When you're preparing for the museum job, if you go buy the artifact replicas from Carmen before you read the note she has left you in the museum tunnel, it resets the replicas back to the store as if you never bought them in the first place, as soon as you read the note. I had played SLwtB all the way to the point when there was nothing else in Porter Hall left to steal but the heart, when I realized that the replica I had bought was nonexistant. It's the only time in the playthrough that someone in the mission actually knew there was an intruder.

By the way, is there a mod for TDS that makes the Enforcers silent? Those "super assassins" are the loudest enemies in the game. They're worse assassins than Altaïr!

keeperr
10th Nov 2011, 23:42
I agree with everything in the first post here, very well put and explained.

I would be happy to never see the Burriks again (and with that zombies, walking stones, walking trees, and finally those crazy fish things kurshoks. They had no place in TDS in my opinion. Why not just burriks and zombies if anything!)

I was never a fan of 3rd person. It was a constant reminder i was playing a game, controlling Garrett rather than being him. The movement i agree was chunky but if just a little smoother would have been suffice, but was very difficult to get used to. Took me over half the game just to get over and used to it.

I only played in 1st person, but even when in 3rd person no matter how dark corner Garrett was in you could clearly see his face, and facial features. What a let down. The outfit wasn't quite what i expected but not bad at all, belt buckles, straps and boots- yea ok i give you that one.

The use of the blackjack was appauling, and just made the game constantly annoying. As with that measly dagger. wtf. I did put effort into getting that goddam sword which hid better in the dark than the original sword.

The blackjack should be able to knock out anyone, from any angle. I remember leaning out in T2, smacking people from all but the face.

Flashbombs should allow people to perform knockouts from any angle. (since they dont see it coming)

The factions did do my head in a bit, especially the whole magic casting. If they kept the magic to Gamorah then would have been much more immersible. I really hated those magic wands.

Also what was with those damn beetles and stones, what a lame idea to gain a factions trust. And to what end was that really useful for. Really.

The loot glint only helped me in one instance in the entire game (cant remember exactly which level) but it was a painting on the wall, i would have never thought that as loot without the glint, but we managed it with T1+T2 just fine, even when it was hidden well out of sight.

Arrow trails didn't bother me but i agree maybe they were a bit looooooooong.
The 3d cutscenes were crap. Ruined the story. in my opinion. That was almost like it was a last minute idea to have a cutscene there with no time to do nice animations that all the thiefs do have.

The inventory selection felt too... "console" style contolling, i disliked this, the rotating wheel things.. like I had a dashboard or something. A laggy one at that.

The ragdolls were laughable, it was not as if they had just fallen to the floor, more like fallen 100 feet then i just caught the animation from when they hit the ground, was literally falling like a sack of potatos.

The levels being split didn't bother me in the sense of loading times, however during missions were very very confusing. I got lost repeatedly. And in times of panic or escape it was basically a *dont run there* rule.

Could have done with more clues during missions for secrets, scraps of paper, books, and indeed people! Even though there was some element of all the above, i feel not quite enough.


TDS was a good game i enjoyed it, but it was hard work for me I did get into it, very immersive, good story line, good mission design, even in the stupid fish infested caverns, the zombie infested insaign assilum (that was the best fear inducing level part i have ever played GOOD JOB)
I was happy with my windows 98, and FX5200 but upgraded purely for thief 3.
Thief games are my relished favorite, Garrett is my god. Please keep him. Shrouded in mystery.

Chilliwack
31st Dec 2012, 00:12
Thief: DS wasn't a BAD game. But it did lose a lot of what made the first two games great. I've been playing the first two games for the last couple months now (I got them on GOG), and I can't help but feel sort of hesitant to play DS, because I feel like it might sour me on the "Thief" experience.

So I give to you, the things that Thief: Deadly Shadows did wrong. Hopefully Eidos will take note.



- Everything was blue. Blue distance fog, blue buildings, blue lighting, blue item highlights.... Too much blue all around. Thief is about LIGHTING. A single color should never dominate the game.

- Too much distance fog. I can see distance fog happening in a polluted area like a Hammerite factory, but not throughout the whole city.

- The "looting" sound was rather loud and jarring, compared to the first two games. In the first two games, the soft "br-ring" gave a feeling of silent approval, rather than the loud loot-clang of Thief 3. Also, the blue item highlights prevented us from seeing whether the item was valuable or not. A better solution would be to make the item "glow" with a slight radiance, without changing the color.

- It was difficult to tell one faction from another. In Thief 1 and 2, guards had distinctive outfits. You could easily tell a Hammer apart from a Mechanist. And the distinctive blue/silver of the City Watch could not be mistaken for the purple/silver of Lord Bafford's guard. Thief 3 was starting to fall into the trap of "brown and grey" that shooters were beginning to use. As such, we didn't know who to avoid, and who to ignore. Pagans were pretty much indistinguishable from peasants. If factions are used, we should be able to more easily tell them apart.

- 3rd person perspective may appeal to some gamers, but the whole point of Thief is immersion and tension. And that feeling is far more intense in first person than it is in third. It's not as scary when it's not happening to "us."

- If 3rd person is unavoidable, Garrett really should have a cloak. It's pretty iconic. Without it, he just looks like your typical assassin.

- The climbing gloves gave too many easy ways out. Guard coming? Just crawl up the wall. Don't bother to find a little cubby to hide in, or plan out your escape. Even BATMAN can't climb walls without his grapnel gun.

- The clinking gears of the user interface were extremely invasive, and the clattering of the metal broke the immersion. In fact, it almost feels like the NPCs should hear it. Thief 1 and 2 simply showed the item rotating silently on the screen. We were aware that it was there, that was all we needed. We don't need a "caddy."

- Allowing the player to keep their money and/or inventory from mission to mission leads to hoarding. And by the time the final mission rolls around, the player is so used to being effective without their arrows, that all the hoarding becomes pointless. Thief 1 and 2 gave us incentive to use our tools, since they couldn't carry over.

- No spiders. Some of us need to be scared.

- There were no "knockout" animations for guards. When we hit them with a blackjack, they'd crumple straight down, with their torsos bent backwards, like they were doing the limbo. Awkward. Ragdoll physics don't work for everything.

- LOADING SCREENS...... Killed immersion DEAD.

- Who the hell uses PAPYRUS for their in-game font? Honestly.

(Edit: I just realized there is already a thread about the flaws of DS. Feel free to move this post there. :P)

Tryst
31st Dec 2012, 06:54
I fully agree with the factions problem from the OP. It was badly designed and could have been a whole lot better, even to the point of including thieving missions for faction rep. You should also have a balance between the two. Instead of being able to get friendly with both sides, you should have to forsake one for the other, higher standing with Pagans means lower with Hammerites and vice versa. A balance of Neutral with both is the best you should expect where you will be attacked if you intrude on their property but not if they see you in the town. And higher than neitral with one should result in teh corresponding negative with the other.

It's up to you to decide who will offer the best alliance to complete your mission and whether the resulting negative standing with the other faction will hinder it. Additional thieving rep missions allow you to change the standing to the other side again.

Thieving missions can always be done because one side will always have something the other side wants. Messages at certain known locations offer a chance to re-balance the standing again with the other side by offering a thieving mission for Garrett to do. You could even end up stealing back the item for the Hammerites that you stole for the Pagans last time around.

Now you have to see saw the standings to enable you to complete all the main missions.

Oon Kuka Oon
31st Dec 2012, 12:47
Thieving missions can always be done because one side will always have something the other side wants. Messages at certain known locations offer a chance to re-balance the standing again with the other side by offering a thieving mission for Garrett to do. You could even end up stealing back the item for the Hammerites that you stole for the Pagans last time around.

Now you have to see saw the standings to enable you to complete all the main missions.
But such side missions would require an open city, and we've seen its problems in TDS.

Keeper_Riff
31st Dec 2012, 13:09
Instead of being able to get friendly with both sides, you should have to forsake one for the other, higher standing with Pagans means lower with Hammerites and vice versa.The faction system in its essence is lame and looks out of place in Thief. Like everyone in the City including Garrett is a part of the hive mind and everyone immediately knows who did what or every crime is blamed on Garrett. Garrett is a thief and a former Keeper. He could have a spy or two in every faction, giving them favors and receiving information from them. Side missions for gaining personal contacts would fit much better and have more variety in implementation and consequences.

Tryst
1st Jan 2013, 00:42
But such side missions would require an open city, and we've seen its problems in TDS.
I'm all for the open city if it is done properly. TDS zones were far too small and really, the whole city of TDS could have been one single zone if it hadn't been for the fact that it was written for consoles then ported to PC. But as Skyrim has shown and GTA before that, even consoles don't have as much limitation as TDS led us to believe.

Oon Kuka Oon
1st Jan 2013, 02:14
I'm all for the open city if it is done properly. TDS zones were far too small and really, the whole city of TDS could have been one single zone if it hadn't been for the fact that it was written for consoles then ported to PC. But as Skyrim has shown and GTA before that, even consoles don't have as much limitation as TDS led us to believe.
Could be that they were made for a newer generation, however, as it has been many times pointed out, the City has to be way larger and more detailed than in Skyrim or GTA. And this isn't the only problem of open city. It would be a huge work, and wandering the streets is pretty off-topic in Thief anyway - so that would be mostly a time-waster. And there are people who don't want the City to be exposed in full, even if that was possible. Mystery is considered one of the factors that make the Thief experience.

birdistheword
20th Jan 2013, 01:02
I don't see what was wrong with the OPTIONAL 3rd person camera... It was optional. I like the city hub aspect of it. The only thing I didn't like about DS was the linear levels, removal of rope arrows and swimming. The game has one of the best levels I've ever seen in a game ever (the shale bridge cradle)

Nightwynd
20th Jan 2013, 10:32
I don't see what was wrong with the OPTIONAL 3rd person camera... It was optional. I like the city hub aspect of it. The only thing I didn't like about DS was the linear levels, removal of rope arrows and swimming. The game has one of the best levels I've ever seen in a game ever (the shale bridge cradle)

Hi, welcome to the forum!

Actually, there is nothing wrong with the optional 3rd person view. The problem is with the 1st person body awareness and its imprecise controls and too long response times which are confused with the inclusion of the 3rd person view. (I'm pretty sure that the animations between the two views are independent of each other, though I'm not 100% sure.)

Body awareness is a cool idea, but I've yet to see it implemented properly - provided that it is even possible. This is a case example of realism hindering the game experience:

Every game I've tried that has body awareness has the exact same problem - TDS, Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, ARMA II et cetera. When you try to move (forward, backward, sideways...) the response time is too long. It might be realistic (IRL, that is) that once the brain gives out the order to move forward it takes some (infinitesimal) amount of time. In games, though, it results as "sticky" or "clunky" feel to the movement - which is bad, as it possibly causes frustration and thus hinders the overall flow of the game. Though over time, it might be adapted away.

This is simple User Experience study application. The quicker the response time, the better the system is perceived. That applies to the accuracy issue, too. So, when the player pushes a button to move forward, it should be instant. The movement must also be precise so that the player can determine the exact arc of the movement. If it's determined by some animation of the player characters legs instead of the player, it instantly becomes much more imprecise and harder to predict.

Oon Kuka Oon
20th Jan 2013, 14:42
And level design also has to take to account the 3rd person camera - which means less detail and no cramped areas.

Nightwynd
20th Jan 2013, 14:56
That might just be a persistent myth; I recently tried out Dark Souls (a 3rd p exclusive), and there were some really tight spaces. There are also pretty tight corridors in Skyrim, too.

Epifire
20th Jan 2013, 19:58
In my opinion the 1st person view in TDS was not game breaking but it was nothing like the originals in terms of quality and play-ability. My idea to conquer the 1st/3rd person battle is to separate the two into non-dynamic options you would access in your game options menu. That is the only true way to properly define the two as they should, be and allow both at the same time to retain their quality. See the TDS fashion was to just move the player view camera back and forth where this would completely develop separate code for both view perspectives as well as different a view model assets for each. The 1st person view would be like the old version we all love, but you would have high detail view models for your weapons and arms and so on. The 3rd person view would have it's slightly lower detail, full body model that would be appropriate for that perspective. Most importantly they would have correct movement code for both so that the 1st person would be free of clunky left overs from it's 3rd person counterpart.

So the difference I see in collision issues from old to new is the difference of a BSP engine to a detail model based one. Unreal has never really been credited for great physics but this is probably Unreal at it's worst with bad physics, namely player collision. BSP (binary.space.partitioning) is a very stable design that remains the backbone of many engines to this day. One of the biggest things it has going for it is extremely accurate physics and collision. Because the big blocks and shapes used in the old games are all compiled together and can literally be said to be like a huge model. The blocky system while not altogether graphically pleasing these days, remains simple and when used by experienced hands is just about error free. Model based level design, while being much prettier and graphically pleasing, lacks the simple physics friendly system such as the BSP construction method. Detail model based engines have all these separate models (with complex collision models) that is much more computations for the physics part of the engine to handle. With more computations this also leaves more room for error when mistakes are made in the physics models. While I am pretty sure TDS's horrible physics were due to the player being quickly coded and not tested well, Unreal 2 was never anything fancy for physics either.

So once again that leaves us wondering if the Devs on T4 are really taking a step back to have a thorough look into the history of the Thief series? Are these devs crazy about building it a faithful follower as much as humanly can be possible, or are they just out to build what ever design yields the most profit? Are they looking to adopt original fan loved, hardcore traits into the sequal, or are they going to cater to the crowd and make it less hardcore and less stealthy so that more people will find it more in their playable zone of skill? I do really have the best of hopes for T4 but being that I know not where this current team wants to take it, then all I can do is hope... maybe even pray. :worship:

Nightwynd
20th Jan 2013, 21:04
See the TDS fashion was to just move the player view camera back and forth

Are you sure about that? The animations are almost certainly separate; the logic could differ, too.

What you are proposing seems unnecessarily complex, I don't see that happening. Skyrim, for one, managed both perspectives on the fly.

And again, I don't believe the 1st person view in TDS suffered because of the 3rd person view, but because of the body awareness.

Epifire
21st Jan 2013, 01:09
Are you sure about that? The animations are almost certainly separate; the logic could differ, too.

What you are proposing seems unnecessarily complex, I don't see that happening. Skyrim, for one, managed both perspectives on the fly.

And again, I don't believe the 1st person view in TDS suffered because of the 3rd person view, but because of the body awareness.

I never played Skyrim so I guess I can't understand that comparison. I guess in other terms both view perspectives are not completely needing to run different code/script. It is just kinda easier to sit down and explain it with things separated I guess. I am no expert here but I try and make points to what makes the most sense.

Not sure where you see different animations though, hand/player eye aligned aiming would likely be included for more animations. I think some of the core issues is not as much animations but less responsive movements (or so it would seem). See you pretty much are controlling a invisible node/point with the player model attached to it and when different actions are performed like moving left or right we get animations to go with that to make it look natural. When we have to control a full body with that in mind you are still performing those same twist left or right animations but they are actually programmed to hinder the player's movements in TDS until the simple action of turning has been preformed. In 3rd person we don't notice it but that waiting time (which is still relatively low) in 1st person just makes things clunky. I found it did two things for me when I play TDS in that view. First it feels like my virtual body feels rather weighty and more real then my hovering legs in Half-Life or most shooters I play. Or I just get the feeling I am too tired in the game and I want to move quicker but can't.

Other games I think over come that in two ways. They make it so that the legs respond to player movement rather then the opposite of movement waiting on the legs. Other games just don't have legs and just make you believe you just stick your chest out enough so that your feet are never in view. :rasp:

See the camera will let you twist over about to your shoulder then you gotta have the player model spin in that direction again so that you are not staring out the back of your head. There are some obvious complications when you break it down. I guess in ending on my explanation is that they need some sort of optimized movement system maybe just across the board for both 1st and 3rd person. Then for the sake of seeing all of your self that wont get in the way of some taffin good fun. So we hope anyway.

Nightwynd
21st Jan 2013, 08:52
Well I make no claims to be an expert, either.

But I know for sure that every game I've tried that has had body awaraness has had similar clunkiness to the movement like in TDS. That's why I suspect the culprit to actually be body awareness more than the 3rd person. I could be wrong, though. Anyhoo, whether it's the inclusion of 3rd person or the implementation of body awareness, it actually matters little since the proper problem persists. However, it can be fixed with little effort.

In Skyrim for instance, it seems that the 1st and 3rd person models and animations are seperate - the 1st person model is your typical "arms floating in the air". Much what you suggested, to my understanding. The movement, as far as I've perceived, doesn't differ much between the two: If I push the button to move forward, the character moves forward with minimal response time - with no dragging or clunkiness. That is desirable.

zombie32
21st Jan 2013, 09:19
I really dislike the third person view because it seems that watching yourself is more of an out of body experience than playing Garrett. I mean, who watches themselves as they live their life? And, it's too easy that way, when you can see around corners and watch for the enemy. It's cheating. Anyway, I bought an xbox360 a few months ago as a result of experiencing a fit of insanity, and was thinking about trying the latest Hitman game but discovered that the only view available was third person! Well, no Hitman for me. I don't know exactly what I would do if Thief 4 is released with third person view only (but getting a war-surplus drone with an air to surface missile and flying it over Montreal searching for a target seems tempting). This also might violate the TOU, but I'm unsure. Anything's possible, and I do remember having to tweek TDS because no mouse sensitivity adjustment was provided!!?! Stupid idiots.

And you said that you liked the Cradle mission in TDS. For me that level is about as much fun as going in for a root canal. And I don't understand all the complaints about not being able to swim, because there's nothing to gain even if you could swim. No swimming allowed, but you can shoot Pagan cornerstones with moss arrows 'til your hearts content to maintain your faction. Ain't that fun?

contrarian
21st Jan 2013, 12:18
Let me bust a myth. This is one of those esoteric myths that have no information on the internet, so I can't substantiate what I say...you'll just have to trust me, or talk to a level designer that doesn't have an agenda. See, it does take more work, effort, time, etc. to create both views because you now have to animate the character's actions as well as write the code for the camera movement. But, and it's a big but, there are zero changes to the level design and zero considerations to consider when designing said level.

Myth: 3rd person view development differs from 1st person view development and there are many factors that the developers must consider (cramped spaces, camera angles, etc) when designing a level.

Fact: There is not one single factor that needs to be considered. Development for 1st or 3rd person views are 100% identical. Any game that was ever created is capable of running either or both perspectives without a single modification to the original graphics.

Find any game out there with a 1st and 3rd person toggle (Let's take Thief Deadly Shadows) and play it. Toggle it between views in different areas of the game (wide space, halls, tunnels, etc) and you'll see absolutely nothing changes--other than you get to see Garrett.

Myth: BUSTED

Nightwynd
21st Jan 2013, 12:25
Great. :D:thumb:

Now that this is settled, we can concentrate on hoping that EM implements both views so that the player is 100% control over them 100% of the time (no contextual take-downs, no contextual cover-system, no contextual anything).

Gabriel
21st Jan 2013, 13:58
Toggle it between views in different areas of the game (wide space, halls, tunnels, etc) and you'll see absolutely nothing changes--other than you get to see Garrett.

I don't think you understood what most people advocating 1st person are saying. They are saying that the architecture of the levels themselves has to be thought out in such a way that it takes into consideration the 3rd person camera (thus meaning higher ceilings, wider spaces to navigate through etc.). NOT that the levels change when switching from 3rd to 1st - that would be silly.

That being said, I think it's mostly up to the way the camera rigging is done. Meaning that depending on how well the camera is programmed, 3rd person could be added to a first person game without changing the level design at all and only with some extra coding (such as perhaps moving into "ghost 1st person view" when the space is too tight, for example).

I personally agree with whoever said that the T1 and T2 movement was perfectly implemented with regards to going over small holes or gauging how much noise you'd make when jumping up on a staircase for example). These small but important tweaks add to the immersion and take away frustration from failing due to badly rigged movement. If EM pulls off that smooth, seamless control, it will be a big plus.

Edit: by the way, what's going on here? Wasn't there supposed to be news before the (last) year's end? :scratch:

Nightwynd
21st Jan 2013, 15:34
Agreed.

What's happening, tho? Same old, same old. No news. Surprising, yes?

Oon Kuka Oon
21st Jan 2013, 17:15
Though Viktoria promised that there will be news this year.

tarvis79
21st Jan 2013, 17:37
No she didn't; she says she thinks there will be some. She doesn't know anything we don't, however.

Epifire
22nd Jan 2013, 02:35
You know I think a lot of the quality loss in level size and altogether the content amount is more prominent when you have to have the game run on the lesser counterpart being the console. I hope they go in the order of making it really good for the PC, and then adding in capacity limits and filters to downgrade it to fit and run well on consoles. Battlefield 3 did that and that is really the only game I can say that went from PC version to console and did it well.

Otherwise when you get this console developed game moved up to the PC, you can't just add in resolution to textures that were not there, you can't simply add more polys to a model with a filter and just have it all done automatically. I believe TDS was made in order from PC to console but with PC and console so far apart for that day (console being the original Xbox) you get this awful constraint that really does show in the version that could support much, much more then it was handling at that time.

tarvis79
22nd Jan 2013, 03:34
I've said this over and over again, and I'll repeat it again. The biggest problems with TDS (small levels and load zones) were functions of the ridiculous limitations of the original Xbox. This is no longer a problem. Even if it were concurrently developed for the 360, you can have a game the size of Skyrim.

Epifire
22nd Jan 2013, 04:12
I've said this over and over again, and I'll repeat it again. The biggest problems with TDS (small levels and load zones) were functions of the ridiculous limitations of the original Xbox. This is no longer a problem. Even if it were concurrently developed for the 360, you can have a game the size of Skyrim.

I hadn't seen you post that so sorry for coming in on this a bit later then everyone else. I mainly was just stating that building up to the PC and then downgrading a version to fit the console is the best form of having the grass green on both sides of the fence. Okay just look at content quality for instance. From my knowledge since it is generally seen across the board that console GPUs can only handle a more limited quality scale, building to a console and just porting assets to the PC is being quite cheap about it in terms of what PC's can handle.

PC's now support better and faster processing units that far outweigh what the console models have to offer at this time. The method of PC assets to console, is a must for the developers if they want the PC gamers to get as much as they can out of this. I could be wrong but that is the only logical way I see that working. From the looks of it I would say that is how they are going about it since the development time seems to be quite lengthy in time for T4. Let's just hope the same mistake is not made in rushing this one out the door like what Ion Storm did to TDS.

Keeper_Riff
22nd Jan 2013, 05:26
I mainly was just stating that building up to the PC and then downgrading a version to fit the console is the best form of having the grass green on both sides of the fence.Making the PC version better than console one will hamper the console version sales. If Microsoft / Sony have the veto right (they probably have), this ain't gonna happen.

Tryst
22nd Jan 2013, 13:18
Making the PC version better than console one will hamper the console version sales. If Microsoft / Sony have the veto right (they probably have), this ain't gonna happen.
Just because you have to insert load points for the console version, doesn't mean the PC version is going to be better. Smoother, since there are no levels to load every few minutes but otherwise it's exactly the same game. The graphics may be reduced for the consoles due to current graphics cards on PC being much more powerful but cutting down the PC graphics to the same level of console graphics would be stupidity. Farcry2 runs perfectly well on PC and Xbox360 with superb graphics on PC and good graphics on Xbox.

contrarian
22nd Jan 2013, 18:51
Let's just hope the same mistake is not made in rushing this one out the door like what Ion Storm did to TDS.

I almost laughed..something I rarely--if ever--do.

Thief 4 has been in development longer than some of the most ambitious games that ever ever been created.

The specs have already been detailed (rumored but with alot of certainty) and the next gen Xbox will have more processing power and RAM than every single stock computer that will be on the market. If you want more power, you'll have to build a custom rig.

My PC gaming days are over because of the racket is has become.

Oon Kuka Oon
22nd Jan 2013, 20:26
the next gen Xbox will have more processing power and RAM than every single stock computer that will be on the market. If you want more power, you'll have to build a custom rig.
I wouldn't swear that. I have 8GB DDR3 and a decent Dual Core CPU on my budget laptop, and I bought it almost a year ago.

Epifire
22nd Jan 2013, 20:30
Just because you have to insert load points for the console version, doesn't mean the PC version is going to be better. Smoother, since there are no levels to load every few minutes but otherwise it's exactly the same game. The graphics may be reduced for the consoles due to current graphics cards on PC being much more powerful but cutting down the PC graphics to the same level of console graphics would be stupidity. Farcry2 runs perfectly well on PC and Xbox360 with superb graphics on PC and good graphics on Xbox.

Console versions to PC will always make the PC version the one that looses out. If consoles can handle the same high grade content with the exception of more load points then all the better. I really do love playing on consoles but my PC is just way better in the parts it uses over my Xbox. It's just nice when developers give more of a game to throw at the PC crowd instead of a having the same thing across the board. Cause otherwise it just makes you wonder why you spent a big chunk of money on a system that never get's pushed any further then it's counterpart. :scratch:

Lady_Of_The_Vine
22nd Jan 2013, 21:55
Though Viktoria promised that there will be news this year.

You've confused me with Adam who said, I quote:


But - rest assured, wheels are in motion, there is a schedule and we are on track. We will be releasing some exciting updates soon, and we are most definitely aware of the huge community sentiment surrounding the need for more developments. All will be revealed in good time, I promise... But that's all I can say right now


I said I personally believe that there will be news this year (based on Adam's statement).

Hope that explains.

HardlyAstounding
24th Jan 2013, 00:39
The next gen Xbox will have more processing power and RAM than every single stock computer that will be on the market.

The new Xbox is going to have a Radeon HD 6670. That's an entry-level GPU from like four years ago. The Xbox 360 already had a triple-core 3GHz processor. The PS3 right now has 256MB of dedicated RAM. I highly doubt that the new console is going to set any records in terms of processing power. And keep in mind, if Microsoft wants this thing to launch better than the PS3 did, they can't be charging 600 dollars on release day.

Epifire
24th Jan 2013, 06:24
The new Xbox is going to have a Radeon HD 6670. That's an entry-level GPU from like four years ago. The Xbox 360 already had a triple-core 3GHz processor. The PS3 right now has 256MB of dedicated RAM. I highly doubt that the new console is going to set any records in terms of processing power. And keep in mind, if Microsoft wants this thing to launch better than the PS3 did, they can't be charging 600 dollars on release day.

Yeah consoles are greatly constrained from a lot of things. Consoles are marketed for people willing to only spend so much, so with that in mind companies can really only pack so much into them unless they want it to fail. If in some case some sort of elite console could be marketed to thrive well, PCs will always have the performance and horse power more readily available for those who want it. :cool:

contrarian
24th Jan 2013, 12:25
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-orbis-unmasked-what-to-expect-from-next-gen-console

This is the best article I have found so far. It's full of techno-babble, but it supports (almost) everything I said. Also, it coincides with nearly every other speculative article out there, which lends to its credibility.

I was wrong to say that you'd have to build a custom rig if you want a PC to outperform the next gen console. See, I admit my errors when they happen. You can surely go out and buy a PC that would outperform a next gen console, but you'd be spending around 1500 American dollars. The average price for a PC here is about 600 dollars...and the average PC does not stack up to the next gen specs.

Consoles are expected to be around the 400 dollar mark. Poking around Best Buy, the cheapest price for just the desktop pc (the monitor was NOT included) the cheapest price I could find was 1200 dollars.

I have nothing against PCs I grew up on them and still play games on them. But the market is dead.....deader than a doornail.....unless you love WoW or the Sims.

Consoles are where it's at, baby.

HardlyAstounding
24th Jan 2013, 22:39
I don't have anything against consoles either, but I wouldn't say the PC gaming market is dead, considering most AAA titles get ported to PC anyway and there are more and more people playing games in Steam everyday, and that's not even counting the people who don't use it. It's just preferred to develop for the 360 and PS3 because everybody owns one and you're more likely to make a profit. And as illustrated by many things, "popular" does not necessarily mean "the best".

And even then, Sony systems are the hardest to code for. Sony systems have always had the most difficult architecture to understand, which is why PS1 and PS2 emulation still isn't 100% compatible with every game. Hopefully Sony doesn't go under with this console, I've heard that the Vita was a total flop in terms of sales, and they've been making a lot of dumb decisions to deter piracy. If they can make this thing affordable and have a great lineup of games, I'd probably love to have one of these.

Taffer17
6th Mar 2013, 16:20
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/394491/new-thief-4-info-details-gameplay-mechanics/

Based on this article, it sounds a lot like Eidos Montreal did not pay attention to any of our complaints about TDS. The new Focus ability seems terrible.

Chilliwack
6th Mar 2013, 20:36
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/394491/new-thief-4-info-details-gameplay-mechanics/

Based on this article, it sounds a lot like Eidos Montreal did not pay attention to any of our complaints about TDS. The new Focus ability seems terrible.

No light gem... too much blue... waypoint markers to hold our hand through the game... All guards look exactly the same... Garrett has become Corvo...

Chilliwack
6th Mar 2013, 20:42
I have nothing against PCs I grew up on them and still play games on them. But the market is dead.....deader than a doornail.....unless you love WoW or the Sims.

Or if you're a professional who works digitally. Like say, a concept artist, or movie editor, or writer, or architect, or 3D modeller, or programmer, or scientist, or like, dozens of other things.

Also remember that PC parts get CHEAPER with time, and very quickly too. A $1200 pc would probably cost $900 after a month. I upgraded my whole computer for less than $500 because I was able to salvage old parts, like the DVD drive, the tower case, the fans, the PSU, and the sound card. Not to mention the fact that headphones, monitors, keyboards and mice are about as compatible as you can get. I've had my keyboard for 8 years now, and it works just as well as it did out of the box. My headphones are high quality, and i've replaced them twice for free because I kept the receipt and used the warranty.

PCs are not bank-breakers if you're reasonably smart about them.

Besides, Consoles stifle your game library, with exclusive content. If a game you want is on another console, you have to buy that other console. So it will end up costing you just as much for a high-end PC anyway. So why not get a PC, which generally has titles from all sides? Not to mention 3rd party content, like the stuff they've been making on Kickstarter. You will *NEVER* see a Kickstarter or 3rd party game for the Xbox. On consoles, corporations have absolute power.

"EA games: RUIN EVERYTHING."

MasterTaffer
6th Mar 2013, 20:52
Besides, Consoles stifle your game library, with exclusive content. If a game you want is on another console, you have to buy that other console. So it will end up costing you just as much for a high-end PC anyway. So why not get a PC, which generally has titles from all sides? Not to mention 3rd party content, like the stuff they've been making on Kickstarter. You will *NEVER* see a Kickstarter or 3rd party game for the Xbox. On consoles, corporations have absolute power.

"EA games: RUIN EVERYTHING."

I find it funny that you have a rant about how console manufactureers are evil then punctuate it with a pot shot at third party publisher.

Besides, if a console didn't offer unique content over their competitors then there would be no reason to buy it over another. It would just be Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony saying, "Please buy our console. Pretty please?"

Jerion
6th Mar 2013, 20:58
Or if you're a professional who works digitally. Like say, a concept artist, or movie editor, or writer, or architect, or 3D modeller, or programmer, or scientist, or like, dozens of other things.

Also remember that PC parts get CHEAPER with time, and very quickly too. A $1200 pc would probably cost $900 after a month. I upgraded my whole computer for less than $500 because I was able to salvage old parts, like the DVD drive, the tower case, the fans, the PSU, and the sound card. Not to mention the fact that headphones, monitors, keyboards and mice are about as compatible as you can get. I've had my keyboard for 8 years now, and it works just as well as it did out of the box. My headphones are high quality, and i've replaced them twice for free because I kept the receipt and used the warranty.

PCs are not bank-breakers if you're reasonably smart about them.

Besides, Consoles stifle your game library, with exclusive content. If a game you want is on another console, you have to buy that other console. So it will end up costing you just as much for a high-end PC anyway. So why not get a PC, which generally has titles from all sides? Not to mention 3rd party content, like the stuff they've been making on Kickstarter. You will *NEVER* see a Kickstarter or 3rd party game for the Xbox. On consoles, corporations have absolute power.

"EA games: RUIN EVERYTHING."

PC is the way to go...consoles suck...EA ruins everything...wait, what? I feel like this should be a copy/pasted rant on pretty much every PC gaming news article that involves either a console or a AAA game. I think it would cover all the major argumentative points.

pwyll
10th Mar 2013, 21:46
Swords and burricks are stupid. Burricks seriously?! What are you - like four?

Add naked girls and completely remove weapons.

MasterTaffer
13th Mar 2013, 08:16
I’m unsure if I have ever posted my thoughts on Thief: Deadly Shadows around here. If I did, it was probably back in 2009 so I don’t want to dig through the thread again. I thought I’d touch on a few of the things I thought Deadly Shadows got wrong as well as what it did right.

Out of the three Thief games, Deadly Shadows is the one everyone seems to hate on the most. I actually place it in the second place spot in my personal lest, behind The Dark Project and in front of The Metal Age. Yes, I liked Deadly Shadows more than Thief 2. So here are my thoughts on the matter:


Things it did wrong

Sound Mechanics: DS has some outstanding audio design; probably the best to date in the series. But that’s in terms of atmosphere; on the gameplay mechanical level there was a huge misstep. The idea that crouching is always silent invalidated quite a bit of the sound mechanics of the game. It made moss arrows redundant in their primary capacity, turning them into a plentiful, broken, and bizarre stun arrow to use on guards. I’m not opposed to change, but I don’t think Ion Storm thought out how this silent crouch mechanic would affect other systems in the game.

Climbing Gloves: Let me clarify this one from the start; I did not mind the climbing gloves in theory, nor was I upset about the absence of rope arrows. While I enjoyed them in previous games, if the level design was not built around them their absence would not be missed. My problem with the climbing gloves was how spotty they were in practice. They were tied directly to specific material maps, and should Garrett crawl over and area that the gloves found disagreeable he would disconnect. Combine this with how temperamental they were with jumping into a wall and they were not what I considered well executed. They could be, however.

Magic Wands: Tying every priest/shaman/elder’s magical ranged abilities to a wand they kept at their hip was a strange choice. While I understand that it provides a bit of a challenge for a thorough player to disarm them through pickpocketing, it invalidates their threat pretty quickly early on. Again, I understand the reasoning but it was broken in practice.

Keeper Assassins: This was a mess in practice from a tonal lore perspective. For such a secretive organization, having these gents wandering the streets and slaughtering anyone within sight was baffling. I don’t know if it was trouble with AI programming or what, but it was borderline laughable regardless of my preconceptions on them from the marketing and concept art. I had always pictured them as swift, agile, and almost ninja like in many respects. If they should appear again in the series, I would hope that they are a little more reflective of the organization they represent.

The End Run: The final section of the game where Garrett is tasked with placing the Sentients in the receptacles around town was a cluster-****. With the Pagans and Hammer in open war, gargoyles meandering all over, and Gamall essentially doing the Thief equivalent of camping at a flag spawn, I found nothing enjoyable about the final end run.


Things it did right

Story and Narrative: I’m going to come out with it; Deadly Shadows has the best story in the franchise. It’s well told, has some great themes and twists, and is chocked full of great characterization not only from Garrett, but side characters as well. It ended the original trilogy on a high note. Comparatively, The Dark Project has a very simple though satisfying story; one of a heist gone badly. It’s an appropriate story for a thief, but it doesn’t have some the depth of DS. Thief 2 is a narrative mess; in the third act of the game it just turns into a series of fetch missions at seemingly random locations tied together loosely by a plot thread. It’s fairly obvious they spent more time thinking of fun environments and tried to cram some plot into them afterward.

Level Design: BOOGITAH BOOGITAH-WAAAAAAAH?! But…But loading zones! Yes, in spite of loading zones, Deadly Shadows has some very well-designed levels. There was plentiful variety mission to mission that gave a distinctly different experience every heist. The environments were well thought out, themed, and had a life to them. Is it unfortunate that the mission were cut in half by a loading zone? Sure, but it really did not bug me all that much while playing as the levels themselves were so good. About the only level that really didn’t gel with me was the Sunken Citadel, but that was my personal tastes and not a reflection of how the level was built.

City Hub: Yes, it was small; I’m well aware. Instead of a sprawling city-state it felt like a small fishing village. But if anything it was a proof of concept that a City-hub could work. I enjoyed picking pockets between missions as well as visiting a fence and stores to properly prepare for each mission. With more spit polish, the City hub could be amazing rather than simply enjoyable.

Aesthetic: The game looked great. It was a return to a drearier look at the City that I felt Thief 2 sorely lacked. Thief one felt like a filthy, dark, and dangerous place; it added a lot of atmosphere to the series. By contrast, Thief 2 lacked a lot of this personality. Sure, there’s story context in that Truart’s cleaning up the town, but with said cleaning went out some of the City’s identity. Deadly Shadows embraced said aesthetic that a bit more than its direct predecessor.


Things I was neutral/apathetic on

No Rope Arrows: Sure, they were fun. But given that Deadly Shadows built its levels without them being a gameplay mechanic I did not miss them in the game once.

Loot Glint: I really didn’t care. Everyone was so up in arms about this and I really thought they were nuts. It was borderline necessary given DS’ lighting engine as differentiating things in the dark was very difficult. In the end, I really didn’t give a crap about the loot glint. I didn’t feel it made things easier, broke my personal immersion in the game, or any of the other things people complain about with said artifact.

Garrett Forgot How To Swim: I’ll admit, from a game to game stand point it’s odd that Garrett could swim one moment then forgot how to the next. But in terms of actual gameplay this falls into the same boat as rope arrows. The levels were not designed with swimming as a factor, so its absence did not hurt the game beyond the initial “Zuh?” moment.

Loading Zones: They were a mild annoyance at their worst and I was and still am largely indifferent to them.

Pagan/Hammer Alliance Mechanic: I didn’t care because I never tried to play favorites in the City hub. I think I got on neutral ground with the Pagans and remained hostile for the Hammers for the majority of the game, and the Pagans were that way simply because I swiped the sapling and planted it. I didn’t go around killing rust mites and shooting corner stones.

3rd Person Camera: Cripes, Son of Gosh, I did not care. I played in first person and I barely noticed the camera eccentricities. Even when I did notice them, I wasn’t annoyed by them. I was happy it was there for people who prefer it, I just didn’t use it. I’m well aware it was an afterthought that was born from a camera hack during development; I know the whole freaking history. If there's one complaint I'm sick of hearing about when it comes to Deadly Shadows, it's the third person camera. It's been discussed, debated, and bashed to death, back and forth endlessly. I just don’t CARE. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z36Xadupn5c)

No Sword: I never got into sword fights in the original games. I’m aware you could break down doors, but I never did. I didn’t understand the reasoning behind crashing down a wooden door when one is trying to keep a low profile. If I can’t pick the door I’ll go find a key. Using it to bash off wooden planks from a passage falls into the rope arrow and swimming thing of “I didn’t miss it because the levels were designed without it being necessary.”

Lady_Of_The_Vine
13th Mar 2013, 08:26
Things I was neutral/apathetic on

No Rope Arrows:


I missed the rope arrows a LOT. So much so, I never felt inspired to play T3 a second time.

MasterTaffer
13th Mar 2013, 08:28
I missed the rope arrows a LOT. So much so, I never felt inspired to play T3 a second time.

That's your prerogative, Vik. I'm just saying that during actual gameplay I didn't miss them once.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
13th Mar 2013, 08:34
That's your prerogative, Vik. I'm just saying that during actual gameplay I didn't miss them once.

Yes, I know. I was just sharing my thoughts too. :flowers:

fbdbh
13th Mar 2013, 09:45
Most of what MT describes as neutral, they fell to negative to me.

I'm really sensitive of first person camera: it should be steady, no body awareness, anything on that line breaks immersion for me. You could argue that it's more realistic, etc. but it isn't for me.

I hated that they didn't keep some of the mechanist elements - sure, it was a darker episode, but Thief 2 was at least original.

As for the story, it's great, except that it removes the surreal and the mystery, and replaces it with a system. A system of three sides. Pagans, Hammers, Keepers. It was there since the beginning, but not that categorically, if that makes sense. I hated that I could explore everything about the Keepers. I hated that every Pagan thing was there for a reason, like a neat D&D class system. I felt absolutely no dread and I never wondered about what's behind it all. TDS just filled the gaps with "satisfying answers", but that was never the point of Thief.

I missed Rope Arrows, but that was the last on my hate-list.

YsaNoire
13th Mar 2013, 12:32
Things it did wrong

Keeper Assassins: This was a mess in practice from a tonal lore perspective. For such a secretive organization, having these gents wandering the streets and slaughtering anyone within sight was baffling.



Lol, it was, wasn't it? They weren't very subtle, as far as ninjas go. In their defence, though, they were really scary. I was really stressed when I was followed by them, so that's a plus. I liked the concept and design, it was just the behaviour that was off.



The End Run: The final section of the game where Garrett is tasked with placing the Sentients in the receptacles around town was a cluster-****. With the Pagans and Hammer in open war, gargoyles meandering all over, and Gamall essentially doing the Thief equivalent of camping at a flag spawn, I found nothing enjoyable about the final end run.

I don't know, the cluster**** just seemed to fit the situation. Gamall was exposed, monsters in the streets... I dont' know if I "enjoyed it" but it gave me a feeling of urgency ("I have to fix this or the whole city is going to hell").

Lol, I must be either a really optimistic or a really apathetic person because not too many things fall into the "wrong" category for me. The only thing I was somewhat disappointed in was the city hub. It was a great idea, but I suppose it just wasn't the time for a real, living city yet. It had very few targets to rob, and in my eyes, what's the point of having a city hub if you have to play all the missions in a set order anyway? The optional side missions were quite disappointing. When I learned about the sapling in the docks, I totally thought that doing this mission one way or another chose some path that determined something later on in the game. And it turned out that it was... totally irrelevant, really.
So in the end, for me the city was just something that prolonged my way to the next fence or store.



Things it did right

Story and Narrative: I’m going to come out with it; Deadly Shadows has the best story in the franchise. It’s well told, has some great themes and twists, and is chocked full of great characterization not only from Garrett, but side characters as well.

I agree. Well, I've never really been able to tell which story is the "best", but I know I enjoyed Deadly Shadows story immensely. It felt complex, unpredictable, I liked that it fleshed out a few characters (Artemus, Orland) without taking away too much of the mystery. I need interesting characters in a story, I hope the new Thief has some.

As for the neutral stuff: I never cared about all these things either. I wouldn't know there was anything wrong with glinting loot or the first person perspective if I never checked out this forum, I really wouldn't.

Slither
13th Mar 2013, 14:16
TDS was a little dumb. The thing about creating a successful environment for Thief is to make it smart -- maybe not genius-level, but dumb things like roaming Keeper assassins, wandering pagans, and gigantic red hand prints marking the location of fences was just insultingly stupid. In the world of TDS, do all thieves and fences wear special hats, too? It just lacked the subtlety to make it anywhere near believable.

Platinumoxicity
13th Mar 2013, 14:35
I don't know, the cluster**** just seemed to fit the situation. Gamall was exposed, monsters in the streets... I dont' know if I "enjoyed it" but it gave me a feeling of urgency ("I have to fix this or the whole city is going to hell").

I know this is just a case of "Boo, the game wans't good enough for me" but I can't help but to feel like TDS should have had that unique epic final mission that the previous games had. Not just a to-do list in the open world mission hub. For example, instead of the final glyph being the size of the whole downtown, it could have been the size of the keeper compound. The final mission could have taken place in the sprawling rooftops and dark courtyards of the keeper compound itself. It would have been a perfect location for the conclusion of Garrett's duties as a keeper too. And also, we could have seen the good old training areas where each of us experienced the Thief world for the first time. Dedicated explorers could even have found *clears throat* ...a basketball and a quote scroll. :D And a really scared fencing instructor cowering in a corner.

YsaNoire
13th Mar 2013, 16:20
Yeah, it would be cool to have a full final level there and I can imagine that sneaking through the Keeper Compound would be a very atmospheric mission.

Sneaking human
13th Mar 2013, 17:26
TDS had only two problem- small level size and often loading.
But loading it's problem of consoles, not game engine and developers.
Anyway the game is absolutely brilliant.

tarvis79
14th Mar 2013, 02:24
SUGGESTION: My least favorite glitch in all 3 games was that violence done by other characters was attributed to me, even if I had been completely undetected so far. I hope this is fixed in Thief 4!

fbdbh
14th Mar 2013, 14:25
SUGGESTION: My least favorite glitch in all 3 games was that violence done by other characters was attributed to me, even if I had been completely undetected so far. I hope this is fixed in Thief 4!

Yeah... in Thief 2, the Angelwatch mission with the rivalizing archers. They shoot each other, the survivors immediately start to look for an intruder... facepalmissimo.

janiashvili
14th Mar 2013, 15:45
Well, the best thing in T3 was a narrative design.

And, fortunately, its narrative designer will have a speech at PAX East
http://east.paxsite.com/schedule/panel/narrative-design-telling-stories-without-words

SnakeZ
15th Mar 2013, 13:06
It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:


The levels were too small
>Missions in Thief 1 and 2 were enormous. There were no load screens splitting the levels up causing havok to the AI whenever you left one area and came back to it to find nothing had changed since you left.
>Missions like The Lfie of the Party, where you could explore a huge portion of the city and the entire interior of an epic castle all in one level and without load screens splitting it up were great. We want more of that.

______________________
Third Person Camera
>This is not what Thief is about. You as the player are supposed to assume the role of Garrett. Put on his boots and become him. You are supposed to feel like YOU the player are inside the mansion trying not to get caught
as opposed to sitting in your comfortable chair sipping Dr Pepper and chomping down on Twinkies enjoying a casual gaming session. If you don't like playing games that way, stop shouting that we are selfish for wanting Thief to be the way we like it and go play games that you like. Go play any number of other games that are stumbling over themselves trying to accommodate your needs.
>I now also think that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky and generally uncoordinated feel of the first person mode in TDS. Whatever the case may be, the movement in this game is not a fluid or precise as in the first two games. Some call it "body awareness", but I don't think that's it. Technically, Thief 1 and 2 had a sort of body awareness as well, but it was done so much better.

______________________
No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
>Rope arrows were one of the coolest features of The Dark Project when it first came out. It was exiting being able to go to places which in previous first person shooter games would have been blocked off and inaccesible. Not only that
but it felt right. Its something a master Thief would have in his arsenal. The TDS engine couldn't handle them for whatever reason and so they were replaced with climbing gloves which were practically useless because they were
only usable on a tiny fraction of the surfaces in the game. And usually there was nothing to be gained from climbing any of the walls anyway. Not a bad idea, but poorly implemented.

______________________
No more Sword?
>Some people think the dagger was more suitable for a Thief. I can see where this view comes from, but I for one would like to have my trusty sword back. At least a short sword in any case. Its a good tool for breaking wooden boards
and repelling the undead.
>Not much to be said for this one, just meet us in the middle here EM and give us a short sword. Or a dagger AND a short sword.

______________________
City hubs
>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.
>The Thieving equipment was probably too cheap. I always could afford to load up my arsenal to the max for each mission (later in the game) and still have some gold left over.

______________________
Nerfed blackjack
>This is the most annoying aspect of the entire game for me. It feels broken. Why should I have to get right behind somebody and wait for the blackjack to be raised signaling that my strike will incapacitate my victim? Why can't
I smack said victim in the face?
>Why is it that when I flashbomb somebody, and they cover their eyes and stumble blindly about etc, I am not allowed to knock them out? They are blinded, they don't know where I am, so why can't I blackjack them? Why does their vision
magically come back to them instantly when I smack them with the blackjack? Then they spit some snarly comment about how weak I am with my soft blows. ITS COMPLETELY RETARDED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTICED BY THE QA TEAM!
>Also, why are guards impervious to the blackjack when they have their weapon out? They enter search mode and begin slowly scanning the premises for me (OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM) and yet a knock to the head from my
blackjack does nothing to them. Even from behind. I cannot get over how bad the blackjack feels in this game.

______________________
No more cutscene briefings
>Why take these out? They were awesome. Bring them back EM.

______________________
Immersion breaking loot percentage system
>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average value? Or
that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?
>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was also unnecessary.

______________________
No Burricks!?!?!?
>Where'd they go?

______________________
Garrett forgot how to swim?
>Come on Garrett. Get it together...

______________________
Less items for the arsenal
>I already mentioned rope arrows/vine arrows, but there were other items as well. TDS introduced the oil flask, which came across as clumsy to me. Hardly the delicate precision instrument that a master Thief would use.
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc

______________________
Factions
>Another good idea but poorly implemented.
>Shooting dust mites? Buying pagan respect by pouring my resources into their shrines? W. T. F.
>Why didn't you just hold on to the game for another year and make actual missions for us to do for these factions Ion Storm? Your faction system was sloppy and lazy and unprofessional. It felt like it wanted to actually be something
but was instead just thrown in there half finished just because...

______________________
Poor choice of engine
>Thief was never about being the next prettiest game. It didn't try to dethrone the king-of-the-hill of graphics because it knew that in another six months a new title would come along and nab the spotlight. Take away the pretty
graphics of TDS and what are you left with? Ion Storm should have picked an engine that can handle large environments. Besides that, the engine was too hardware intensive for what it provided.

______________________
The story/plot
>Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.
>The world was believable in Metal Age. There was more to do in the game world. More to interact with. Like that tip you could get about searching through people's trash because you might find some interesting info.


________________________________

All of this being said. I still found TDS to be an enjoyable game in its own right. For all its faults, at least it didn't feature regenerating health, an alternate protagonist and multiplayer.

One of the things I really enjoyed about it was that it added just a hint of RPG flavor to the mix. Exploring the city at your leisure, visiting fences to sell loot and black market shoppes to purchase your gear. Doing side missions like that blacksmith job, where you gotta nab the golden dagger. It was a good idea, but poorly implemented. All of this could have been fixed and polished and made perfect if only Ion Storm had held on to the game for another year.

I would say that I'm sorry for the long post, but I'm not. This needed to be said. If anyone else had some problem with TDS that I didn't. Feel free to add it here.

Agree, agree, agree!

janiashvili
15th Mar 2013, 17:59
I agree for everything, except engine, it looked really great for 2004 game as it meant to be with first two games too.

And, for city hubs, I really like how Arkane managed to make city hub-ish thing in their latest stealthy game

MasterTaffer
15th Mar 2013, 18:05
I agree for everything, except engine, it looked really great for 2004 game as it meant to be with first two games too.

The graphics are only one section of the game engine.

fbdbh
15th Mar 2013, 18:17
The graphics are only one section of the game engine.

And sometimes the engine can't be blamed how the game looks.

DrunkenGuard
30th Mar 2013, 20:02
I am just getting to the end of another play through of TDS and I have to say I just don't get a few of the specific criticisms of it.... (feel free to unleash the rage lol) ... but...

1) I really liked the slight bluish tone of the colours and the darkness in TDS. It felt like beautiful deep velvet to me and I really liked that.

Would much rather that deep midnight blue tone than the grey ' Dishonored' colours we are seeing in the current new art etc...

2) You could play almost the entire game in 1st person. So I never get the 3rd person thing people are always on about. Dont like 3rd person option? So ok..... press V and go to 1st.

3) I loved the story and plot about the sinister 'betrayer'.

Am I nuts? lol ( I know some people will say yes.....) But I don't think I am

CaptainObvious
30th Mar 2013, 20:05
You aren't nuts. While it has some serious flaws and a terrible engine, most of the things people like to harp about are non-issues.

Xyloth
30th Mar 2013, 20:23
I loved the 3rd game, dunno why some are saying its not as good as the first two. It had some problems but I think in the end it had the best immersion , even if as gameplay it wasnt the best.
I also like the blue-ish filter type color, just like OP, it gave a majestic sombre atmosphere, instead of just plain depressing one. True the 3rd one might have been the most fantasy out of the thief games, so it might not work with the new , more realistic, direction that they try to go for new Thief, but I still hope it wont be too far from the 3rd game.

Psychomorph
30th Mar 2013, 21:27
I am just getting to the end of another play through of TDS and I have to say I just don't get a few of the specific criticisms of it.... (feel free to unleash the rage lol) ... but...

1) I really liked the slight bluish tone of the colours and the darkness in TDS. It felt like beautiful deep velvet to me and I really liked that.

Would much rather that deep midnight blue tone than the grey ' Dishonored' colours we are seeing in the current new art etc...

I didn't mind it, but I prefer photo-realism above all and any, forever and ever. The reason I was okay with the blue is because otherwise the lightning system in TDS was awesome.



2) You could play almost the entire game in 1st person. So I never get the 3rd person thing people are always on about. Dont like 3rd person option? So ok..... press V and go to 1st.

Almost the entire game? *laughs out loud* I played the entire game in 1st person. I tried 3rd early in the game, I just couldn't bear it, it removed 50% immersion.



3) I loved the story and plot about the sinister 'betrayer'.

Am I nuts? lol ( I know some people will say yes.....) But I don't think I am

The story is absolutely fantastic. I don't remember I was ever that immersed in a story, or a world in general. I would play TDS, go to bed and dream about sneaking through catacombs stealing gold. It was like I was high on a trip for several weeks. One of the most memorable gaming experiences to date for me. I wasn't working or anything at that time, so I could play deep into the night. I would wake up in the morning day just to await the night so I could get back to "The City". This was beyond just playing a game, it was as if like I existed in another world.

This was before I played the original Thief games mind you. Once I played them, I realized the flaws of TDS compared to Thief 1, hence I'm so hardcore about the original now, because it is as good as TDS... just better.
The best thing about that is, this has little to do with nostalgia (something hardcore fans are accused of). My point of view is entirely objective. I value Thief 1 for it's value alone. At that time I played Thief 1, there were games that looked almost like real life compared to Thief, yet, Thief won.

Chilliwack
30th Mar 2013, 21:29
What happened to the girl at the end?

C'MOOON EM, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GHURRRRL!!!

D:>

Hamadriyad
30th Mar 2013, 21:33
We may see her in brothel maybe?

olshool
5th Apr 2013, 12:23
It would seem that some of the posters on this forum are having trouble understanding us "hardcore elitists" when we complain about Thief: Deadly Shadows, so let me break it down for you guys:


The levels were too small
>Missions in Thief 1 and 2 were enormous. There were no load screens splitting the levels up causing havok to the AI whenever you left one area and came back to it to find nothing had changed since you left.
>Missions like The Lfie of the Party, where you could explore a huge portion of the city and the entire interior of an epic castle all in one level and without load screens splitting it up were great. We want more of that.

______________________
Third Person Camera
>This is not what Thief is about. You as the player are supposed to assume the role of Garrett. Put on his boots and become him. You are supposed to feel like YOU the player are inside the mansion trying not to get caught
as opposed to sitting in your comfortable chair sipping Dr Pepper and chomping down on Twinkies enjoying a casual gaming session. If you don't like playing games that way, stop shouting that we are selfish for wanting Thief to be the way we like it and go play games that you like. Go play any number of other games that are stumbling over themselves trying to accommodate your needs.
>I now also think that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky and generally uncoordinated feel of the first person mode in TDS. Whatever the case may be, the movement in this game is not a fluid or precise as in the first two games. Some call it "body awareness", but I don't think that's it. Technically, Thief 1 and 2 had a sort of body awareness as well, but it was done so much better.

______________________
No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
>Rope arrows were one of the coolest features of The Dark Project when it first came out. It was exiting being able to go to places which in previous first person shooter games would have been blocked off and inaccesible. Not only that
but it felt right. Its something a master Thief would have in his arsenal. The TDS engine couldn't handle them for whatever reason and so they were replaced with climbing gloves which were practically useless because they were
only usable on a tiny fraction of the surfaces in the game. And usually there was nothing to be gained from climbing any of the walls anyway. Not a bad idea, but poorly implemented.

______________________
No more Sword?
>Some people think the dagger was more suitable for a Thief. I can see where this view comes from, but I for one would like to have my trusty sword back. At least a short sword in any case. Its a good tool for breaking wooden boards
and repelling the undead.
>Not much to be said for this one, just meet us in the middle here EM and give us a short sword. Or a dagger AND a short sword.

______________________
City hubs
>A cool idea, no doubt. But just as many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. The zones were way too small. Expand on this idea EM. Give us more city to explore and all will be well.
>The Thieving equipment was probably too cheap. I always could afford to load up my arsenal to the max for each mission (later in the game) and still have some gold left over.

______________________
Nerfed blackjack
>This is the most annoying aspect of the entire game for me. It feels broken. Why should I have to get right behind somebody and wait for the blackjack to be raised signaling that my strike will incapacitate my victim? Why can't
I smack said victim in the face?
>Why is it that when I flashbomb somebody, and they cover their eyes and stumble blindly about etc, I am not allowed to knock them out? They are blinded, they don't know where I am, so why can't I blackjack them? Why does their vision
magically come back to them instantly when I smack them with the blackjack? Then they spit some snarly comment about how weak I am with my soft blows. ITS COMPLETELY RETARDED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTICED BY THE QA TEAM!
>Also, why are guards impervious to the blackjack when they have their weapon out? They enter search mode and begin slowly scanning the premises for me (OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM) and yet a knock to the head from my
blackjack does nothing to them. Even from behind. I cannot get over how bad the blackjack feels in this game.

______________________
No more cutscene briefings
>Why take these out? They were awesome. Bring them back EM.

______________________
Immersion breaking loot percentage system
>Horrible idea. It would never have gotten past the suggestion room If I was in charge. How would I know exactly how much loot there is during a mission? And that the remaining loot represents 20% of the total average value? Or
that there is one final piece of "special loot" somewhere inside?
>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was also unnecessary.

______________________
No Burricks!?!?!?
>Where'd they go?

______________________
Garrett forgot how to swim?
>Come on Garrett. Get it together...

______________________
Less items for the arsenal
>I already mentioned rope arrows/vine arrows, but there were other items as well. TDS introduced the oil flask, which came across as clumsy to me. Hardly the delicate precision instrument that a master Thief would use.
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc

______________________
Factions
>Another good idea but poorly implemented.
>Shooting dust mites? Buying pagan respect by pouring my resources into their shrines? W. T. F.
>Why didn't you just hold on to the game for another year and make actual missions for us to do for these factions Ion Storm? Your faction system was sloppy and lazy and unprofessional. It felt like it wanted to actually be something
but was instead just thrown in there half finished just because...

______________________
Poor choice of engine
>Thief was never about being the next prettiest game. It didn't try to dethrone the king-of-the-hill of graphics because it knew that in another six months a new title would come along and nab the spotlight. Take away the pretty
graphics of TDS and what are you left with? Ion Storm should have picked an engine that can handle large environments. Besides that, the engine was too hardware intensive for what it provided.

______________________
The story/plot
>Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
>TDS wasn't as interesting or compelling as The Metal Age. I wouldn't know how to break it down in terms of zeroes and ones (though I'm sure there are some very real and solid story telling/map designing techniques Looking Glass understood). Whatever they did, it worked.
>The world was believable in Metal Age. There was more to do in the game world. More to interact with. Like that tip you could get about searching through people's trash because you might find some interesting info.


________________________________

All of this being said. I still found TDS to be an enjoyable game in its own right. For all its faults, at least it didn't feature regenerating health, an alternate protagonist and multiplayer.

One of the things I really enjoyed about it was that it added just a hint of RPG flavor to the mix. Exploring the city at your leisure, visiting fences to sell loot and black market shoppes to purchase your gear. Doing side missions like that blacksmith job, where you gotta nab the golden dagger. It was a good idea, but poorly implemented. All of this could have been fixed and polished and made perfect if only Ion Storm had held on to the game for another year.

I would say that I'm sorry for the long post, but I'm not. This needed to be said. If anyone else had some problem with TDS that I didn't. Feel free to add it here.

:thumb: You Sir ,said all wich io came here for ,thank you.

sneaksietaffer
7th Apr 2013, 08:18
In Thief DS the facial image of Garrett during the loading screen made him look different and evil and in 3rd person view Garrett did no look anything like...Garrett.

pwyll
13th Apr 2013, 20:58
The story of TDS was the best indeed. Very mysterious and I have to admit - on the scene where Garrett met with Inspector Drept I got chills through my spine. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JncKbSbmAT0

Kyle Hyde
14th Apr 2013, 07:59
The story of TDS was the best indeed. Very mysterious and I have to admit - on the scene where Garrett met with Inspector Drept I got chills through my spine. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JncKbSbmAT0

I agree, I loved the story in TDS and consider it the best of the trilogy too BUT this scene would have been so much better if it would have been in the same style of the cutscenes in the first two games.

Psychomorph
14th Apr 2013, 15:31
Thief 1 had this eerie Lovecraftian feel to it, which I love most. Thief 3 had a more spooky fairytale thing with a witch and mysteries, which is awesome, too. Thief 2 was not that exciting for me, I don't like the whole techno stuff.

janiashvili
14th Apr 2013, 15:38
Thief 1 had this eerie Lovecraftian feel to it, which I love most. Thief 3 had a more spooky fairytale thing with a witch and mysteries, which is awesome, too. Thief 2 was not that exciting for me, I don't like the whole techno stuff.

what do you think about T2D?

Slugo
15th Apr 2013, 05:02
Thief DS ended up being my favorite of the 3 Thief games....but only because its story was superior than its predecessors.

Arrakim1
18th Apr 2013, 15:15
TDS is my favorite game since its the only thief game I ever played:o

But its also my most favorite game ever:D

Psychomorph
22nd Apr 2013, 01:58
After playing some awesome Dark Mod missions I headed to Thief 3. Am in Moira's mansion now.

I remember praising the AI after playing Thief 3 in ancient times before I played the original Thief games, and I see now why, because it's great. Aside the bugs.


Stuff like:

You can't open doors when a person is nearby, because they'll notice. They either may remark on it, or go check it out. You can even use it as a tactic to lure them out/in, by letting them walk into the room to check who opened the door and you slip past their back. You can even close the door behind you when slipping past them and they'll piss their pants.

They will remark on doused candles and missing items and act somewhat natural when they think they saw something in the shadow.

There was a funny moment, probably due to a bug, but a guard opened a door, moved back, closed it and tried to walk in, didn't work. He tried it a couple of times, until he opened it and walked forward, on the doorway he halted and said "Aaalright, I'm coming in" and walked in. He didn't seem drunk, but would have been hilarious if he was.

Also I was careless once and run into something in the dark while sneaking behind a woman (had some distance though), the object made a sound and startled the woman, who instantly turned around in fear and gazed into the dark, than asked if someone was there while I froze still. She decided to move on. My thought was only "alright, be careful next time". That was very real experience also.
Generally, the way AI reacts to "something in the shadow" and suspicious sounds is much more authentic than in the older Thief games.

It started not so good, I hate the HUB and ignored doing the ridiculous faction favors, but the story that unfolds is awesome and the zombie ship was great, Moira's mansion is one of my favorite TDS missions. The sound of thunder outside while you sneak through the shadows is great.

Music is awesome. Silent and suspense, but has those shocking peaks to keep you on edge, so it's not boring. Great work really.

The engine is unoptimized, but the lighting engine is great. I really love the 3D body if you look down (the animation when you walk slow looks so super immersive because it looks so real, also when you stand still and look around without turning the body, that's feels so real) and I kinda got used to ignore the light gem by playing Dark Mod without it, and always look down to see how lit I am and if parts are not sticking out of the shadow.

I love the foot steps, sounds like proper sneak footwear. I never really use the crouch, only when I really need to have a low profile or when hiding, so I'm not abusing the dead silent crouch movement and AI reacts quite good to the (upright) foot steps. There is no absurd loud stone footsteps that AI can't hear and overclacky tile/metal steps that the AI is oversensitive toward. Feels very authentic in Thief 3, because you know you can trust your "feet", but you cannot be unhearable, so you still need to pay attention to the surface. A carpet allows you to run more silent than on wood. That's how I like that.

I use the fire arrow to light out the dark, which is cool. Charge it up and move around with it, than deselect the bow. It looks like the lantern in the Dark Mod, I wonder if they didn't took it from Thief 3?


I am really enjoying Thief 3 right now, what an awesome game. Of course it has it's flaws. I hate the color style, the sky is horrible, full of bugs, especially with movement (sliding off edges, can't step over tiny gaps without to sink in). Gameplay and secrets are way to short and simple, unlike The Dark Mod, which is enriched with thiefy gameplay awesomeness, but what I do enjoy much is how missions are linked by plot, how you go to look for something and only find intel about the whereabout of the desired object and you move on to the next mission. I love that putting puzzle parts together as you play and move on to the next mission, something The Dark Mod is quite missing. Also the reason why I hate open world/sandbox games, because it feels like you are just trapped in a larger than usual map, while missions move me to entirely different places and give me the illusion like I'm in a small part of an endless world.

I play modded Thief 3 though, less HUD and no loot glint and such. As much of the nonsense removed as possible. I wish I could also remove the light gem, gotta see if I can toggle it on and off, because I'd still like to use it as compass.
The lockpicking without the HUD indicator, just by sound and the movement of the pin is the best from all Thief games and Dark Mod, only a bit too easy I guess. I wish Dark Mod had a similar system. I love it to be able to look around when picking locks by using the sneak key (is it T3 feature or a mod?), really awesome!

Also I have to say that I modded the movement and the key setup to how it is in Dark Mod and old Thief games. I walk by default, hold space bar to sneak and Ctrl to run. That really pulls the best from the game. The unmodded Thief 3 design is weak and I thank to the modders who massively improved the experience. I couldn't enjoy vanilla Thief 3 without the mods.

Libertine
22nd Apr 2013, 02:38
I'll just mention this because i think a lot of people never realized this about the way you peek around a corner in the first two Thiefs vs. T3. In T3, they changed it so not only was it super slow and hard to predict how far you were about to step out, but they could detect you easily. The beauty of the leaning mechanical imo from the first two games was that it simulated edging your head around a corner just enough to catch a glimpse of what was happening. As opposed to what it could potentially look like if you weren't practiced at it, which was moving your whole torso out from a corner. The lean is very realistic in a way. I can't imagine any peeking mechanic being worse than T3, so hopefully they made something good for T4.


I very much liked Thief 3, but was saddened by the shortcummings too, like the corny voice acting which was in no way matched for the average gamer age of 36 IMO, or the lean mechanic, the laughably bad maps, underdeveloped levels and some other stuff.

janiashvili
22nd Apr 2013, 12:32
In T3 I loved when guards were sometimes screaming at dead bodies.

Maethius
22nd Apr 2013, 19:32
I love that putting puzzle parts together as you play and move on to the next mission, something The Dark Mod is quite missing.

While this is true, remember the The Dark Mod isn't a game... it's a construction set. There are a few modders that have made interrelated or continuing story arcs, but no one has launched a fully-fledged campaign using TDM yet. Think of it as a set of mechanics just waiting for a master builder to forge into a glorious new monument! All hail the Master Builder.... hm... who does make a campaign. ;)

TDS did have some great things gong for it; it just also compromised a lot. I only wish that the game could have added the good without the bad, that's all. I wish the same for T4, as well.

Psychomorph
22nd Apr 2013, 23:41
Oh man, gotta write this. So I was sneaking through the overlook mansion and was in the main hall, hid in shadows as a guard approached. I was firmly hidden and he looked straight at me, as soon as he turned around a thunder stroke and a lightning lit out the very area I was in and I was like PHEW!
Moment's like this are really making the game.
Edit: Had to move through that area again, and again a guard was approaching. Having learned from before I did not remain in that spot, but quickly moved behind a pillar at the left, as soon as I was behind it another lightning struck and the area was lit again, this time the guard facing it and I wasn't there. Awesome...

Another moment I was picking a well lit chest and there was a glass door beside it and a guard patrolled in the hallway there. I began picking the lock but turned the head toward the door. It is a bit more difficult to pick the lock by sound alone without the visual indicator (the moving pin, note, I got no HUD elements for lockpicking), but as soon as I saw a hint of a shadow in the hallway I stopped and run back into a shadowy area, the moment the guard walked past the door. Another awesome moment. I love it if a game gives me realistic means to realistically deal with realistic situations.

Another moment is the wall flattening. God, I love wall flattening. One of those features to stand out when I played Thief 3 the first time. There was this cupboard and a light near it on the other side, so the other flat side of the cupboard had total shadow. I was moving there when I heard a guard approaching, nowhere to go I moved into that shadow deadzone, put my back to the wall, looked down and saw my right shoulder and torso still being lit, so I moved more to the left as far as I could until I was fully covered by the darkness (I looked down again to be sure if even my right arm was hidden). The guard walked by and didn't spot me (I wouldn't have, too).
Mind blowing. Everybody being opposed to a visible 3D body, because the original games didn't have this, have no idea what they're talking about.



@Maethius:

Not complaining about TDM's absence of a continuing story, of course, but it's just a shame since this is one of those things that made Thief so interesting, to uncover a plot. Of course, as I always say, the gameplay is the core and hence I'm having a blast with The Dark Mod regardless.

Psychomorph
23rd Apr 2013, 00:43
Another excellent example of the awesome AI.

A guy saw something. Now, when I'm spotted the game ends, but he didn't really saw me as such, probably just a shadow figure, got scared and run out the room yelling for help. I run out the room and hid in a small storeroom in the hallway. Hiding there I heard hectic footsteps and saw two guys with drawn swords rushing by.

A housekeeper girl walked slowly after the men, looking where they run to, as if like she was curious rather than terrified. This is where I made a move and accidentally touched a stack of crates with my left shoulder and made a tiny noise, right where she was walking by the storeroom. She stopped and instantly looked inside the storeroom (at me, where the sound came from, was too dark inside though), saying with a scared voice: "What was that, someone there?". She made few steps inside the dark storeroom, than decided to move back and went to the opposite side. They actually open doors to check inside rooms when searching for intruders. So she looked into the room on the other side of the hallway and I heard the distant sounds of the guards searching the room where I was "seen" (they yelled and cursed). I took the chance and run out of the storage room into the atrium.

In the atrium two guards kept patrolling and the lightning strikes lit the area out, I was hiding behind the pillars (remained in shadow) while they were facing my direction, went by a painting which I took and hid behind an opening in the wall (with a table in it) while a guard walked by the very moment another lightning hit the sky and the entire area where I've been a second ago, and the guard walked by, was lit bright out.

Holy crap, Thief 3 may suck, but the AI is brilliant. Exceeds everything you have in the original games. The guys responsible for the AI deserve a medal.

Psychomorph
4th May 2013, 00:29
Most of the game is indeed trash, but some of the missions, such as the Overlook Mansion, Rutherford's and of course the Craddle (that one was really good) are really great. Although a bit too small and simplified at times, but the good things in Thief 3 (AI, wall flattening, etc) are adding to them. Just finished Gamall's lair and the T3 story is really awesome. This could have been the best game in the series, if only LGS did it, for PC.

Of course I am playing with everything HUD off, except the inventory/weapons icons, so that I know what I select. Am pumped with Thief right now, probably going to replay the first games after this. Also some TDM FM's are to be played, but I want a Thief story mode.

Psychomorph
4th May 2013, 14:59
The worst aspect is the "Thief" difficulty. Being spotted ends game on the spot and you are required to kill at least 4 opponents.

W, T, F, !

Not even the hardest facepalm can describe emotion.

CaptainObvious
4th May 2013, 17:00
What are you talking about?:scratch:

Psychomorph
5th May 2013, 00:48
That didn't make sense I guess. I think the mods changed objectives slightly and renamed them, I did not think that was made, so I checked unmodded version, too. Not sure now what difficulty I had set, but being spotted by guards the game ended and I always had this annoying "kill at least 4 opponents" objective all the time. Anyway, never mind.

Keeper_Riff
5th May 2013, 07:52
Minimalist Mod has some custom playstyle difficulties like "Ghost" (don't be spotted) or "Assassin" (kill someone), etc. But it seems weird that ghosting and killing requirements are present in the same setting.

Psychomorph
5th May 2013, 16:34
or "Assassin" (kill someone), etc..

Krap. I must have missed to change that (I believed I set it to "Thief" though). Now that was unfortunate.



But it seems weird that ghosting and killing requirements are present in the same setting.

I thought that was weird, too. Perhaps some sort of a glitch, bug. It wasn't always the case, but during the missions (not in the HUB).

Also, killing exactly 4 guys never made the objective complete. I think obj was done when I killed 5. Must have been really glitched.