PDA

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



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 02:19
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.

DarthEnder
15th May 2009, 03:08
I agree with most of that.

The few points I disagree on are:

City Hubs: I agree it was poorly implimented, but I don't even want them to try and do it better, I want them to drop the idea entirely.

Loot Percentage System: It's not that much different from the stats screen in T1 and T2 that told you exactly how much loot there was in a level, and how much of it you found.

The story/plot: I thought it was fine. Not as interesting as T2's, but it fit in well with the series I think.



That said, T3 had 3 things going for it that I liked. Better lockpicking. Holy Water and Oil Flasks. And wallhugging.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 03:11
Loot Percentage System: It's not that much different from the stats screen in T1 and T2 that told you exactly how much loot there was in a level, and how much of it you found.

Huh, I guess I never really noticed that stuff. I was too eager to skip that stuff and move on to the next mission.

I'd prefer that it go back to just "grab 1500 worth of loot" I know it still assumes that Garrett (you) knows the average market value of each and every piece of loot in the mission. But its still better.

AntiMatter_16
15th May 2009, 04:02
You forgot that First Person was available, though not on the xbox. Don't worry though, it was god awfully implemented. The camera liked to skip about slightly when you strafed, and it lurched about when you jumped.

The loot percentage popping up was annoying. They should have just gone back to the Thief I and II inventory system, so that loot appeared as one item, detailing the types and total loot. They could have placed the percentage down there.

Another problem I had with the loot was that it didn't look much like loot. You wouldn't have been able to tell it if it weren't for the loot glint. A lot of people seemed to dislike that for some reason. I don't really care either way. Luster wouldn't be so bad to have on loot. But the object hi-lighting system looked really bad. They should have gone with what the Thief I and II engine did, fully light the texture of the selected object...

vasanx
15th May 2009, 04:02
______________________
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.



Wow, reading your post really brought back all of those bitter memories.

I loved the blackjack and TDS totally fu*ked it up. I mean how the hell do they explain the blinded guards being able to see again when you hit them?

Is the blackjack enhanted or somethin?

And what's with the waiting for the blackjack to be raised? God that was moronic! Just let us hit em already.

And when they are searching, the blackjack doesn't work. How does that make sense? You know someone is around and you tell yourself you won't faint?

Arrrrggggghhhhhh! TDS was such a lame attempt and there are people here who are actually defending it.




______________________
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.


I really don't get the whole shiny loot *****. You're a thief! You need to look for the damn loot by yourself! Not be directed to it!

Remember looking for that ring behind that pot. I had to look everywhere until i finally realized i didn't look behind the damn pot. I cannot describe the sense of achievement i used to feel after searching for a loot for half an hour. That was totally lost in TDS because people are impatient.

You can see the bloody loot a mile away! Just enter a room, and oh, there it is, in the corner to your right. Was the loot sprayed with UV dye and Garrett mechanical eye acts as an UV lamp?

In the real Thief game, you'll only see the loot when you get really close to it. That's how it should be done! That's how it must be done in T4!

Good job GmanPro. Let them see the ridiculousness of TDS and lets see what they have to say.

And please don't give that lame, "Oh, it's not perfect but it was still not bad" bull*****.

The game was not perfect because it was BAD!!! Can, u, GET THAT?! :mad2:

Belboz
15th May 2009, 04:48
anyone noticed that the ceiling in the museam floats above the walls, and you can see the sky between the top of the walls and the ceiling, totally ruins the museum level for me.

xXFl4meXx
15th May 2009, 04:57
>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc


Dude... there were mines in TDS.... Did you not play it all the way?

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 05:44
I must have forgotten. Silly me

Lady_Of_The_Vine
15th May 2009, 06:46
This is a good thread for the devs to look at and hopefully it will remain on topic and address the points specifically made in first post. :thumb:

Subjective Effect
15th May 2009, 06:50
Mostly excellent points GmanPro.

I'd like to add one very important, err, modification.


Gameplay Mechanics


This is a fairly encompassing issue and covers:
General movement - which was lurchy and not as smooth as in T1 and 2.
Sidestepping/lean - lean was broken and made you a.visible and b.likely to fall of edges.
No swimming.
No rope arrows.

(Interaction with the AI via the blackjack was another issue that could be lumped into the same category but its more of an AI design issue.)

Everything else I've listed and many of the things GmanPro has listed are due to, or contributed to by, the engine choice.


In the TDS editor we can see that rope arrow implementation was attempted. Its actually been hacked in now, but its not properly functional (as I understand). Before anything else is decided on EM need to make sure that the engine is up to scratch. Having played TR: Underworld on PS3 it looks likely to me that the engine can be adapted to work very well for a Thief game. But the engine is the foundation and poor foundations = bad everything else.

As we see in the TDS case.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 06:58
^^ You know, I am convinced that the third person model of Garrett was to blame for the clunky first person movement in TDS. So I've edited the first post - included a note about it under third person.

ElizabethSterling
15th May 2009, 07:13
Don't forget the respawning guards. I ghosted my first playthrough for the 'full experience' but when you're bored and just want to bust some skulls the fact guards keep respawning if KO'd or killed was ridiculous.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 07:18
^^ You are referring to the guards in the city hub areas respawning yes? That's really more of another problem associated with the engine. And that Ion Storm released the game too soon.

What I mean is that if they had more time to make bunches more models of guards (the engine might not have been able to support more models), get more voice actors for them and make up some new patrol routes etc, then it wouldn't have felt like it was the same exact guards come back from the dead. Because really, there should be guards back there patrolling again. A day was supposed to have past in between major missions and all that. It was just another example of sloppy work and no attention to detail at Ion Storm imo.

ElizabethSterling
15th May 2009, 07:23
No, guards actually respawned in missions after being put to sleep or even killed. You could empty a mission map of all life and ten minutes later it'd be crawling with guards again.

dda
15th May 2009, 07:59
I though TDS was brilliant, but not without it's flaws.

I liked:
- The story - grabbed me by the short and curlies till the end
- Art direction
- Seeing Garretts body in first person and the feel and mechanics of his movement
- The fact that Ion Storm managed to increase the size of levels compared to DXIW
- Dynamic shadows!
- Mission design (omfg the Cradle!!!)
- Garretts apartment
- City hubs were cool in concept
- Faction system
- Merchant system
- Sound design and soundtrack
- AI reactions to snuffed lights, open doors etc (although AI was pretty flakey at times)

I didn't like:
- XBOX!
- Textures before installing John Ps texture mod
- Level size was a couple of percent below awesome, but far from being horrible. As I said above I do admire what Ion Storm managed to do re this
- CIty hubs could have been better - more rooftop areas
- NPC animations
- Generic appearance of NPCs
- Climbing gloves not usable in enough areas
- Lack of briefing videos
- Inconsistent appearance/features of Garrett in cutscenes
- The music during the intro!

That's all I can remember atm

ElizabethSterling
15th May 2009, 08:06
Climbing gloves not usable in enough areas? Personally I thought they were too effective as it was. They were a solve-all tool for hiding when you messed up and should at least have made some kind of noise when using them. The faction system felt like a corny RPG tack-on too.

More... Ion storm increased the size of levels? Maybe compared to another non-Thief game but compared to Thief 2 they were tiny so that really doesn't fly in my mind. The art direction was questionable too as everything was a noticeable shade of blue, the thrown together 3D cutscenes were awful and generally it was a big step down from the gritty, colourful, immersive visual quality of Thief 2. Even the Cradle, a brilliant exercise in level design was pretty flat and ugly.

Oh, and lest we forget Thief 3 was noticeably easier than the other Thief titles to its detriment even on maximum difficulty post patch. I got my most satisfactory result using a difficulty level trainer on my first playthrough, (prior to the patch) and cranking AI awareness up well above what it was supposed to be in even the hardest mode on Thief 3 and ghosting.

Tiptoe
15th May 2009, 08:38
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:

I'm so glad you made this thread Gman. I've been wondering why you guys didn't like Thief: Deadly Shadows, because I loved it and I couldn't understand why you all hated it so much, so this thread answers some of my questions.

Now, I know we tend to butt heads over this subject, but it seems to me that your biggest beef with TDS is the 3rd person view.

So before I get into it too much, let me just say this, I suffer motion sickness, so 3rd person mode is the ONLY way I can play.

With that said, I really can't understand why all of you are so vehemently opposed to the very idea of having a 3rd person view available.

But this statement throws some light on it:


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.

I didn't know that. If this is so, then I can now understand why you all hate the 3rd person view so much. If something like that had messed up my gaming experience, then yes, I'd hate it too.

But, let me ask you this, if the 3rd person view didn't impact or effect the first person view in any way, would you all still passionately oppose it?

I know some of you are a bit like religious zealots "There is no way to play but my way, and anybody who thinks otherwise will be burned at the stake!".

But truly, if the 3rd person view didn't effect your gameplay in any way, would you all really care if it was available?

I'm thinking about the game Oblivion here, because I don't think anybody had any complaints that it offered players a choice of both views. So I'm guessing Oblivion got it right.

So if they used the Oblivion engine to make Thief4, or even if they just used the Oblivion engine's game mechanics, would you guys be ok with that?

As for all the other issues you mentioned, I agree with you. Very well said! Your suggestions make a lot of sense.

I just can't agree with you about the first person camera, because if they scrap the 3rd person view, then I won't be able to play the game at all :(.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 08:53
Ok well, motion sickness is a very valid reason for not using first person. As for making third person in such a way as to not interfere with the first person ... it would technically speaking be an impossibility, but I know what you mean. I suppose its not all bad, but it has to be done better than TDS.

The whole Oblivion thing is iffy. I used that feature to check out how my character looked in his fancy new armor on occasion. But its different because I didn't feel like I was in the game world. It was like "Look what my character just did!" As opposed to "Look what I just did!" I feel like I go through about a dozen RPG characters a year, so I never really get attached to any of them.

I think that some games will let you turn off head-bobbing and that helps some people with motion sickness issues. But there's only really a handful of first person games worth playing anyway so you aren't missing out on much.

On a side note, I only ever got motion sickness from one game. Prince of Persia: Warrior Within. I dunno why. Something about the way it looked and felt. I couldn't even watch somebody else play it. It was third person btw. Go figure... :scratch:

vowdy
15th May 2009, 08:53
One thing that really broke the mood for me was as mentioned before;

The bright blue item highlighting.

It was too harsh, just highlighting the item brightness wouldve been enough.

theBlackman
15th May 2009, 08:54
For me third person is like watching a movie. I'm outside looking in instead of BEING Garrett. I can understand the necessity for you and others with a similar condition. And there are those who are epilyptic, in fact, some of the FMs warn persons with petite mal or Gran mal problems to not play them.

But Garrett is not standing looking at someone else in action (in fact the auto change to third when climbing ladders, just pissed me off), he has a single pair of eyes that see ahead and slightly to the side (peripheral vision). He isn't superman to see around corners, nor do his eyes have a "fisheye" lens like a camera, or some aquatic creatures who can actually see behind, to the side, and ahead at the same time.

So, third is not my bag. If it was selectable for such as you self, and was not an auto execute I could live with it. In TDS it was selectable, except for the "climbing ladders" etc. But as a full feature, on all the time. No thank you.

One of the great features of THIEF is that you MUST look, and SEE what you look at. You needed to use caution when rounding a corner, or passing an obstacle, because, you could not see around the corner. Nor did you get a "birdseye" view of an area. The "Scouting" orb made sense, but I never needed it nor used it. But within the context it fit (loosely).

Seeing every thing from the perspective of a camera with a global view is not conducive to "being IN the scene". You are a bystander. Just like the lookie loos at an accident.

1N54N3
15th May 2009, 10:30
I agree with nearly all of that. I still really like TDS, just because it's a Thief game, but so much could be way better. I hope above all that EM keeps the Faction system, and perhaps even adds more factions or heavily expands upon what TDS did have. Letting you shape the way the city responds to your actions is something that can't be described with words, and it is a must have :)

Bukary
15th May 2009, 10:44
Its hard to complain about this because the only real suggestion I can make is ... make it better.
TDS story (history of Gamall, Lauryl, Inspector Drept; stopping time, fall of the Keepers) was great! It was probably the only aspect of the game that felt... right. ;)

I would be very surprised if EM sketches something as interesting as TDS story.

tender19
15th May 2009, 10:48
Plot was ok, but I agree with everything. Also didn't like the swirling purple fog-effects.

Necros
15th May 2009, 10:56
Third Person Camera
I say if EM can do it right, leave it in for those who might enjoy it better than the FPS view. If it takes too much time or whatever, drop it.


No Rope arrows? WTF!?!?
Yes, bring them back, but maybe leave the climbing gloves (or at least the wall climbing) too, just design the levels in a way to make both useful.


No more Sword?
No long swords for me, thank you, but I could agree on a short sword. Or a short sword and a dagger, like you said. :)

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.
:thumb:

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

Garrett forgot how to swim?
>Come on Garrett. Get it together...
:D :thumb:

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.
Hey, the oil flask was cool and very useful, EM should keep it.

>Where are the Mines? Frogbeast eggs (lol) ? Slowfall potions? etc etc
I think too many items is a bad thing too. Perhaps some should be avalaible only at certain times?

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...
I don't think it was that bad but I'd like to see it return in Thief 4 but you are right, it should be improved.

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.
I think the story was just as good as in the earlier games.

>The world was believable in Metal Age.
Yeah, sure, the big talking metal robots made it believable. :)

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.
But I can agree with this. Give us more stuff to do.


Yes, Thief 3 had it's problems and faults but I still loved it. :) Go ahead, start flaming. :whistle:

tender19
15th May 2009, 11:02
Yeah, sure, the big talking metal robots made it believable. :)


What is the main difference between big talking metal robots and big talking metal robots?

Thief 2: Believable, because of the industrial revolution, the big, steam-like structure, the pre-recorded speeches (they weren't computing-thinking machines, just advanced turrets), and the fanatism that lead to technical improvements in the city.

Transformers: well... I am Megatron.

See what the point of realism is?

(Te is magyar? :D Csak nem GSF-ről?)

Blue Sky
15th May 2009, 17:26
No, guards actually respawned in missions after being put to sleep or even killed. You could empty a mission map of all life and ten minutes later it'd be crawling with guards again.

I don't think that ever happened in a mission, did it? Just in the city areas.

I agree with most of the points in the OP, though not always the wording...(I wouldn't have described the oil flasks as being against the "delicate precision instrument" Garrett would use, and then in the next sentence bemoan the loss of mines!)

But things which reminded you you were playing a computer game, like the loading zones, loot glint, arrow trails, everything frobbable glowing a hideous luminous blue colour, the per centage tally whenever you picked up some loot, the way that if you died the camera went into third person and rotated around your body... Not to mention the lousy framerate and clunky controls (due to the body awareness) just took away from you BEING THERE and continually reminded you that you were playing a game.

Which was most definitely a step BACKWARDS from Thief 1 and 2.

As for a City Hub and the factions and all that...obviously that was all really badly implemented in Deadly Shadows and I just ignored those segments really. If they were tried again, they'd have to be done REALLY WELL, but ultimately I'd much MUCH rather see ALL the development time put into twelve REALLY REALLY GOOD missions with beautifully created briefings and arty and non-clunky buying loot screens / stats between those missions.

If in doubt, keep it simple. Deadly Shadows tried to come up with a whole new way to experience Thief, and forgot to concentrate on recreating that original gameplay in the first place.

Neb
15th May 2009, 17:59
For me third person is like watching a movie.

When we consider that Thief is practically voyeuristic in its play-style, it seems absurd that the entire game should be spent watching Garrett watching enemies.

Alex50
15th May 2009, 18:55
I wonder how much is people do not love TDS. The Play was released in 2004 And playing possibilities then were others. The A few play live more 2-3 years. I played in all three parts of the Thief. And their own value and defect were in each.
- a small cards - a mistake of the creators chosen multy platform. But they were executed with love and pervaded glamour and different secret. Their size they were not mansion Ramires less and lord Bafford and other small cards from T1 and T2.
- blackjack - in T1 he was fit only for deafenning, and was of no use if guard was vstrevozhen. in T2 him possible was deafen mildly alarmed guard, also bat and pair(vapour)s flash bombs possible to deafen the groups of ten chasing after for you strazhey. in T3 were deafened only not alarmed guards, but blinded enemy began to attack, blackjack acted as weak weapon and him possible was kill.
-Third Person Camera me ïðèÿò*åå to play from the first person, but there is much people loving this. Why they must not play. Will Let be a choice. Additionally, there was pleasantly see body Garrett, feel his motion, rather then be "flying sight"
- a dagger? what difference between very short sword and long dagger ;)
- a factions - add the intrigue in play and give the choice a player.
- Burricks - their was not and in T2. I shall pleased if they appear
- a communicating city - a good system of the approximation to realism. The System bathed-sale allowed to collect necessary equipment, without restriction by initial choice subject. The Pocket thefts allowed to correct the finance. The Den Garretta this remarkable decision.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 19:07
Yeah, sure, the big talking metal robots made it believable. :)


I thought it was more believable than big talking rocks :rasp:

sasarmauk
15th May 2009, 19:13
Excellent post. Im a massive Thief fan and even though I really liked DS i do share some of your views.

'The levels were too small

This is correct. The levels should be much bigger. They were too easy to complete since this meant that you only had to follow one route to complete the mission.

Third Person Camera

Yeah they could really do that getting rid of this.

City hubs

I really liked this idea, I thought it was a nice touch. Like you say though they need to be bigger. I found that the town people and the city watch were very entertaining. I would often stand in the shadows for a good while watching the city watch fight the hammers or the pagens - it would be funnier knowing I instigated it.
I think it was nice to take time out from doing serious missions to go to a place where you can relax more and just cause some mischief.

Nerfed blackjack

I totally agree, that was appalling!

Immersion breaking loot percentage system

I agree that they can be done a different way. Your right, it takes the realism away because in the real world you wouldnt have a clue how much loot they had and what kind of loot they had.
I think they should structure it better with the city hubs. So garrett rents a room out, why not have the mission brief say you need to steal so much to pay for the rent and other essentials and then any loot you take after that is your pocket money for weapons etc. So technically you could just steal enough to pay for rent but it will hinder you if you need more weapons (forcing you to steal more). So thiefing actually does pay for his living.




I didnt particularly like the physics on the characters much. When guards etc fell to the floor their bodies would do some wierd folding thingy which was unrealistic. Their back bones would bend the wrong way. Wierd. Did anyone notice this? :rolleyes:

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 19:31
Their ragdoll's did do some funny things I remember. :lol:


I would often stand in the shadows for a good while watching the city watch fight the hammers or the pagens

I always thought that was a bug. By the end of the game the streets were a damn war zone every time I played the game.

sasarmauk
15th May 2009, 19:32
Yeah i think it was a bug to be honest but a very entertaining one at that LoL.

Aceyalone7777
15th May 2009, 19:38
Totally agree with the blackjack part

Nate
15th May 2009, 22:43
1) Thief DS City Hubs were WAY too small....I would like them to try again and make them much bigger.

2) Loot Glint...get rid of it. Make valuables simply look more valuable instead.

3) Get rid of 3rd person view...making maps will be easier for the devs and the game will be more immersive.

4) No load zones while In-Mission. I understand that this was due to the original Xbox limitations, but the Xbox 360 is more capable....of course, I am a PC gamer.

5) Swimming is always cool, but not critical.

6) Rope Arrows AND Gloves would be cool....in fact, I would love to see Garrett have a larger choice of equipment to choose from.

7) ....Which leads me to my next selection, I'd like to see a weight/encumbrance system introduced to the game where each piece of armor/weapon/equipment is given a value. The more Garrett brings with him, the slower/noiser/more visible he becomes.

8) Get rid of the magic light gem. Instead make the player have to actually watch where they are going in order to remain in the shadows.

That's about it for now......I am so looking forward to this!

Blue Sky
15th May 2009, 23:46
8) Get rid of the magic light gem. Instead make the player have to actually watch where they are going in order to remain in the shadows.

Boo! Hiss! Off, off, off, off...

Prince_VLAD
15th May 2009, 23:56
I agree with some of your points but not entirely...
The third view for a THIEF game it's benefic I'd say.It can save you from some difficult situation in a mission. It did for me...
A sword it's some big guns for a ..thief who is supposed to walk in the shadows..don't you think ? I doubt that a good thief (in reality) would be a good sword master in its time, as well.You can't have both here...so I'd stick with the knives and the blackjack.

Thieffanman
16th May 2009, 00:22
>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.


No arguments there, but then, I found the load screens to be only a minor inconvenience.


>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.


Agreed also. I've played the "Thief" games in first-person mode; I like them that way. That's the way it should be.


>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.


Disagree. I found the climbing gloves to be much better than the rope arrows, not to mention a little more believeable: I'd rather have the protaganist scaling walls with climbing gear rather than scaling a rope attached to a stick with a metal point on the end :). I know I'm in the minority here, but I found the rope arrow physics to be pretty poor, in my opinion. I say keep the climbing gloves . . .

or have the player opt to buy either climbing gloves or rope arrows in T4.


> 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.

Agreed. Bigger city portions --or bigger cities-- would be pretty cool :).

>>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.


Disagree. I say leave the costs as they are; I've always found myself running out of potions, arrows, etc. when missions sometimes went wrong. I'm for leaving costs as they are, and the amount of stealable loot to fence to buy said gear, the same.


> 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?


Agreed. Garrett should have been able to blackjack a stunned/blinded person as easily as an unsuspecting target who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time :).


>Immersion breaking loot percentage system[/COLOR][/B][/FONT]
>>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?


Disagree. I like the idea of knowing --or at least, having an idea-- of how much loot there is to steal in a mission's target zone, and I like the idea of knowing that there is special loot to be found. I assumed this was info automatically given by your source; it helped motivate me to grab as much as I could while I was on a mission :).


>>And why was the loot shining/glinting? That was >also unnecessary.


Disagree. Shining loot gave a good indication about what Garrett knew what to steal, versus what was junk. I say keep the shiny loot :).


>[FONT="Lucida Console"][B] Garrett forgot how to >swim?>]Come on Garrett. Get it together...


Agreed. What was up with that?!?



>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.


Agreed, but I liked the pretty graphics. TDS's graphics in the TDS story was *good*, but TDS graphics with a "Metal Age" storyline would have rocked :).


>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.


Agree, big time. There's nothing I can add to this.

Well written :).

--Thieffanman

TeoRocker
16th May 2009, 06:10
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:

Great thread! If no one else had started this, I would.


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.

Agreed. With modern hardware, it's perfectly possible to have massive environments and pretty graphics. Thief will be perfectly capable for pulling that out, since the areas aren't meant to be very open anyway, and most of the game takes place indoors.

The loading screens were one of the major drawbacks.


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.

I hated those clunky controls. Thief I and II had a great solid feel about them. They were perfectly operational and rarely buggy (I say rarely, because I don't remember getting stuck... ever). I believe the ragdoll physics are mostly to blame, however. A modern game shouldn't lack physics, so I urge the developers to spend a lot of time balancing good controls with physics. Also, KEEP THE LEDGE GRABBING.


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.

Rope/vine arrows were of the most innovative tools I've seen in a game. They have been very useful, given endless possibilities, and fitted the game perfectly. I disliked the climbing gloves.


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.

Short sword all the way! But I disagree with having both.


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.

I didn't like the city parts at all. Maybe if there had been a better implementation, I would. The parts that had different factions that were hostile too each other were horrible, unrealistic, ridiculous, and ruined the feel of the game. The AI suffered the most. One discovers a dead body (even one that wasn't your doing, even if they SAW who killed him), and everyone suspects of Garrett. It doesn't matter if you were at the opposite side of the area, the next time that civilian sees you he'll just know it was you.

Also, the City Guards shouldn't be THAT suspicious of Garrett. Sure, they know him, but they way they reacted was always as if Garrett was the only person around. They'd never jump on a civilian walking on a metal surface. Do Garrett's boots make a special sound the guards don't like? I don't think so.


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.

I didn't mind that at all, to be honest.


No Burricks!?!?!?
>Where'd they go?
I didn't really miss Burricks, but I liked it how there still were other beasts in the game. However, the beasts have always been too human-like in their behavior.


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[/INDENT]
Someone else mentioned that too many items is just as bad as a few items. I'd have to agree with that. That being said, I also didn't like the oil flask. The items items I'd use were the blackjack, normal arrows (whenever I got lazy :P), water arrows, rope arrows, moss arrows, gas arrows, flashbombs. I'd hate to see any of those disappear, but mostly all the rest of the items would come in handy sooner or later.


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...
I have already mentioned that when commenting on the city areas. Pagans should never be visible in the City so easily. Sure, they probably have their hideouts, but only in very isolated areas. Actual missions for the factions is a good idea.


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.
I still liked the story, even though it was indeed not as powerful as the two first Thief games. I think it has more to do with how it was told, rather than the story itself.


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.

It will be nice if this is done well, but I'm still very skeptical. I really, really don't want this to be Grand THIEF Auto. Focusing on this openness might distract the developers from focusing on the actual missions. However, truth be told, they also have to sell. Openness is what will attract new players. The story and actual gameplay is going to determine whether they'll like the game eventually.

Keep it open, but not TOO open. The actual mission design is more important and should follow the same footsteps as the previous games.


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.
This is a great thread, thanks for starting it!

vasanx
16th May 2009, 07:25
Grand THIEF Auto

Why didn't I think of that? :lol:

comy
16th May 2009, 13:38
I though TDS was brilliant, but not without it's flaws.

I liked:
- The story - grabbed me by the short and curlies till the end
- Art direction
- Seeing Garretts body in first person and the feel and mechanics of his movement
- The fact that Ion Storm managed to increase the size of levels compared to DXIW
- Dynamic shadows!
- Mission design (omfg the Cradle!!!)
- Garretts apartment
- City hubs were cool in concept
- Faction system
- Merchant system
- Sound design and soundtrack
- AI reactions to snuffed lights, open doors etc (although AI was pretty flakey at times)

I didn't like:
- XBOX!
- Textures before installing John Ps texture mod
- Level size was a couple of percent below awesome, but far from being horrible. As I said above I do admire what Ion Storm managed to do re this
- CIty hubs could have been better - more rooftop areas
- NPC animations
- Generic appearance of NPCs
- Climbing gloves not usable in enough areas
- Lack of briefing videos
- Inconsistent appearance/features of Garrett in cutscenes
- The music during the intro!

That's all I can remember atm

I agree completely.
TDS was, to be honest, quite a brilliant game, defenitely a worthy sequel.
I agree it had certain flaws, but mind you so does any game out there. I find it funny how people put the first two games up there on a mighty throne, and nothing else can reach them. Its like a totem that everyone idolises. :whistle:
If I was a game developer I wouldn't want to make the same thing the same way EVERY time. So IMHO TDS was a successful attempt at modernising the series (with minor failures of course). I hope T4 continues this trend and improves the new aspects of TDS (open city, fraction/merchant system, etc.) and keeps the good old feeling of the series.

Im I the only one who kinda learned to appreciate that certain maps in TDS weren't humongous? Sometimes you need it short&sweet. Im not saying big maps are bad. Of course there must be some quite large maps, but within certain limits. I'm all for balanced design, not too open, not too closed.

Maybe my attitude towards TDS is influenced by the fact that I was majorly dissapointed with Deus Ex:IW, and was very pessimistic about TDS, but in the end I was really suprised (positively) at the outcome...... nah :D

Matuzzz
16th May 2009, 14:15
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.
I really dont understand WHY everybody complain about third person mode...when I first played TDS I didnt even realize that there is 3rd person mode. When you dont like it, then just dont use it. Another thing about blackjack:you dont knock somebody out when you hit him into his face and I dont know what version of TDS you played, because I used flashbomb + blackjack many many times. All in all TDS had some bad changes(small maps,absence of rope arrow,cutscenes...), but it was still great game.

esme
16th May 2009, 14:27
I agree with the first post but I'd like to add a few things


the dagger as an automatic choice of weapon
Garrett is a thief not a killer, hit the fire button when Garrett isn't carrying a weapon and he should have got a blackjack
respawning AI in the city hubs
this is pretty much the same as having the AI wake up and while I think that might be worth trying on ko'd AI (which is a completely different debate and I'm not going to go into it here) just having the body vanish and reappear somewhere on patrol isn't the way to do it, especially if you've killed the AI, if they are dead they are dead and should stay that way
mugging AI
this just felt wrong, the worlds best thief, a master of misdirection and stealth, stands fully visible waving a cocked bow in the face of an AI to get them to hand over their valuables, puhlease
ladders
when climbing a ladder garrett is somehow welded to the taffing thing, he can't turn round, he can't go halfway up, turn and jump to another surface easily it's more a jump to let go the ladder and then while in the air turn to the right direction and run like hell while in the air (shades of wile e coyote) to try and land on the target, even I with my massive gut can climb halfway up a ladder and turn round and jump (I have the scars to prove it :o) but there's no way I can change direction and speed mid air, it was a clumsy system and an immersion breaker for me at least

vasanx
16th May 2009, 15:00
I really dont understand WHY everybody complain about third person mode...when I first played TDS I didnt even realize that there is 3rd person mode. When you dont like it, then just dont use it.


Allow me.

It's really simple. Ion Storm focused more on the Third Person View when they did TDS and this in turn hurt the First Person View.

The movement in first person was weird. Did you not experience that?

We really don't care bout the Third Person View if the First Person View was not tempered with. That's all there is to it.

We are not saying TDS suck just for including Third Person View. Heck, they could have had isometric view ala Diablo for all we care. Just don't mess up the First Person View because Thief is a First Person Sneaker first and foremost.



I dont know what version of TDS you played, because I used flashbomb + blackjack many many times.


Ok, now I'm really confused. Which version of TDS did you play because in my version the blackjack was completely useless.

You flash em and when you knock em, you're actually helping them! The guards are no longer blinded and they start killing you. Didn't that happen to you?

TDS made it such a way that flashbombs can only be used to make an escape. That's not what we did in TDP and TMA. You blind em and go for the knock, so to speak.

That was one of the fun things to do and when you change that for no reason, how do you expect people to respond?

Please try to understand that we are not unreasonable. Our frustration is totally justified.



All in all TDS had some bad changes(small maps,absence of rope arrow,cutscenes...), but it was still great game.

I'm sorry but 'great game' is really pushing it. A 'Not so terrible game despite pissing all over the legacy of its predecessors' is more fitting IMHO.

vasanx
16th May 2009, 15:04
Its like a totem that everyone idolises. :whistle:


Crap! Now he knows bout our weekly prayers.

Who's gonna do it? I'll get the map and supplies ready.

ToMegaTherion
16th May 2009, 15:08
The flashbomb/blackjack combo was, let's be honest, overpowered in the first two games, so it wasn't a bad idea to remove it and turn flashbombs into their (presumably) intended use as a distraction rather than an efficient offensive weapon.

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom
16th May 2009, 16:02
I think I agree with most of this thread. I think for the most part, my BIGGEST problem with TDS was the awkward, clunky movement. It was something you always had to put up with. ugh the leaning was terrible. There was quite a bit wrong with TDS, but that movement ruined it much more for me.

I miss the forward lean button from TDP.

vasanx
16th May 2009, 16:32
The flashbomb/blackjack combo was, let's be honest, overpowered in the first two games, so it wasn't a bad idea to remove it and turn flashbombs into their (presumably) intended use as a distraction rather than an efficient offensive weapon.

Maybe you're right but what they did was still asinine.

I mean, knocking them actually clears their vision? Cmon!

If you wanna "fix" it then come up with somethin logical.

I don't really remember much but wasn't it hard to get flashbombs in the game?

But then again you get so much loot and you don't know where to throw all that gold. You could buy a lot of flashbombs from the store, rite? But you can't carry a lot or somethin. I don't really remember.

If you wanted to make it more fair, make the flashbombs really expensive or somethin.

Or improve the AI in such a way that they'd scream for their comrades when they are blinded and more guards appear.

Or the guards take out their weapons and start swinging like mad so it would be impossible for Garrett to get close and blackjack them.

He'll be forced to either kill them with his arrows, you can't do that if you're on Expert, and so he has to flee.

Wouldn't that have made more sense?

ZylonBane
16th May 2009, 16:48
I found the load screens to be only a minor inconvenience.
I say keep the climbing gloves . . .
I've always found myself running out of potions, arrows, etc. when missions sometimes went wrong.
I like the idea of knowing that there is special loot to be found.
I say keep the shiny loot.
I liked the pretty graphics.
People like you are exactly why we can't have nice things.

vasanx
16th May 2009, 16:54
I miss the forward lean button from TDP.

Totally! Remember how you can lean forward and see what's inside the barrel or somethin.

That is what so aggravating bout TDS. You don't remove stuff that was not broken when you make a sequel!

If anything, you improve on it. I think a lot of the people who defends TDS didn't play TDP and TMA. Or even if they did, they didn't take it all in like the rest of us because it's impossible to not feel ripped off when you're playing TDS.

Again, Ion Storm is to be blamed here. TDS was such a departure and for all its failings managed to create a following that simply do not think like us.

I can't think of a franchise to compare this sticky situation to at the moment but you get the picture.

Looks like we gonna be arguing about this for the next 3 yrs since people from both sides refuse to acknowledge this.

TDP and TMA fans should exercise more restraint I guess and TDS fans should be a little less defensive and be a bit more respectful IMHO. TDP and TMA did come out first after all.

It's only decent to not attack us with this whole zealot bull***** thing.

DarthEnder
16th May 2009, 16:59
One of the things you guys have to realize about how the third person view messed up the gameplay of T1 and T2 is how the 3rd person view altered the way the 1st person view played.

The situation is very much like the different between plays Super Mario Bros. and playing Prince of Persia(the original 2d one). In Mario, the controls are very smooth and very precise because the animation is very clipped. In Prince of Persia, there is a lot of animation to the character that causes him to move more realistically, but much less precisely, constantly being a slave to foot positioning and his own momentum, just taking into account the huge about of time it takes him to go from running on one direction to running in another.

This is very applicable to the situation in T1 and T2, where your character is nothing more than a camera with an arm sticking out of it. Garret moves very precisely in those games, he jumps exactly when you want him to, he turns on a dime if you so choose, he strafe's easily.

But once T3 came out and added third person view, all of a sudden, everything Garrett does has complicated animations attached to it. Turning around actually involves him shifting his weight around, jumping isn't as precise. And 1st person view in T3 moves in the exact same way as 3rd, the camera is simply moved to the character's face.

So I would say that the way Garrett moves in T3 is more realistic that in previous Thief games, but it's not as precise, or responsive. For people who played the original games, it's like going from a game that plays like Halo, to a game that plays like Gears of War.


I can't think of a franchise to compare this sticky situation to at the moment but you get the picture.That's easy. Fallout.

Fallout 3 is a great game, but its very different from the first two games. And now there's the rabid fanbase of the first two games that despises FO3. And then there's the legion of new fans that never played FO1 and 2, and wouldn't like those games if they did because FO3 is what they know and love.

Then there's the reasonable people who actually realize that both games are great, they're just very different.

vasanx
16th May 2009, 16:59
People like you are exactly why we can't have nice things.

:lol:

kaekaelyn
16th May 2009, 18:20
I love TDP and TMA. I wish TDS had been more like them, but I still enjoyed the game because I just relaxed and played it. There were definitely a lot of things I missed, but if I didn't think about them, I still found it a fun experience, and didn't whine.

Now that T4 is in the works, it's time to bring out the nitpicky things. Still, TDS wasn't a bad game at all, if you just let go and took it for what it was. I think some of you guys just need to relax--no offense.

Gorephazer
16th May 2009, 19:18
I liked the "clunky" movement. It made the game more immersive rather than making me feel like some floating disembodied awareness.

I thought the blackjack was fine too. You complain about it being unrealistic that you can't knock anyone out when they are in search mode but it is just as unrealistic that you can't knock them out when they are fighting you. It has nothing to do with realism, but is more about gameplay decisions, and I think it was a good idea because it emphasized the fact that the blackjack is purely a stealth weapon. I think it should be you can only blackjack when the enemy is completely unaware but you can backstab when they are in search mode--this would solve the issue of backstabbing being completely useless (which I always thought was odd)

Thieffanman
16th May 2009, 19:30
People like you are exactly why we can't have nice things.

. . . so take someone else's. You've had experience playing this game, after all :D.

--Thieffanman

P.S. Note to self: Must get that electrical field in TDS for my apartment. :D

vasanx
16th May 2009, 19:36
Well written DarthEnder. :thumb:

That was exactly the kind of analogy I was looking for.


I think some of you guys just need to relax--no offense.

I'm actually offended. Here we are explaining why we feel they way we do and it's disregarded simply because we can't relax?

First of all, we are very, very relaxed since we present our arguments backed up by logical reasonings without goin all ape***** on the naysayers.

We do go ape***** or at least I do when there are personal attacks. Self-defense. Plain and simple.

We feel betrayed. You must understand that. If you don't feel it, then congratulations. You are the lucky ones.

I'm actually sick of this sometimes. Here we are, fighting for a game 9 yrs on, wanting to relive the moment, when we know deep in our hearts that T4 more than probably gonna be along the lines of TDS.

Do you know how frustrating that is?

Just look at all the efforts that have been made by the community. There's T2X. An unofficial and very professional expansion pack that was 5 yrs in the making.

There's The Dark Mod being built on the Doom3 engine for years now.

And lets not even talk bout the hundreds of fan made mission on ttlg.com.

Don't you people see what the fans want? We want continuation. A true continuation.

Just as how HL2 felt so natural to play.

Please don't take this the wrong way but when you and every other TDS fan out there tries to "talk sense" into us, it just comes off as offensive.

It's not like we can't talk bout it. Just don't brush it off as something trivial. That's adding insult to injury.

kaekaelyn
17th May 2009, 01:10
I want you to talk about it. I'm talking about it too. There were definitely a lot of things I didn't like from TDS. I just don't like the "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude I see from some people. I love looking at things with a critical eye, and I do expect that some people will disagree with me. I am sorry for offending you. I stated my opinion in a closed-minded and condescending way--I didn't mean to say exactly what I said.

kaekaelyn
17th May 2009, 01:12
By the way, I'm not trying to "talk sense" into you. I want T4 to be miles better than TDS and more of a throwback to TDP and TMA. I like TDS, but it got a lot of things wrong that TDP and TMA got absolutely spot-on. The thing is, I just wonder why you're so hostile toward it instead of just merely pointing out its flaws.

BlooferLady
17th May 2009, 02:01
Hi all, LOOOOONG post alert!

I can't seem to find it in me to agree completely with either side, so I guess I'll just straddle the gap here. (I might encourage a bit less hostility in both camps, after all, we're both trying to get a great game out of this company, yes?) As I said in my intro post, I've been a fan since I played TMA and couldn't for the life of me make it through the Ambush mission. It took me a while to get used to the mindset these games need, but I never left stealth gaming after playing TMA. :)

When I heard about T4 I pulled out my games for another play-through. I have to say, Thief 1 and 2 were practically perfect. THAT being said, I feel that most of my complaints with TDS are continuity/common sense issues. So here's the two bits from someone who has a foot in both camps.

Problems with DS:
1. Why can't Garrett swim? He swims in an upside-down river in TDP! Seriously.
2. Blackjacking guards used to be swift, silent, and effective, as long as they weren't looking right at you. Although I liked the fact that in DS you couldn't blackjack servants any time, any place. That always kind of bugged me about the old games. Were their skulls thinner? Why would they drop like a sack of potatoes at the suggestion of being hit over the head?
3. Inconsistency of Garrett's appearance. That's bothered me throughout the series, though. Pick a concept and keep it. I've downloaded all of the wallpapers for these games, and there are 3 different master thieves there.

Changes I liked:
1. The dagger. Oh dearie me, I'm going to defend the lack of sword. I really never used it in the first games. EVER. Today I played through RTC, and backstabbed my first Hammer Haunt. Amazing. I'm more of a fan of ghosting missions, I guess. But truly, it makes little logical sense to have a great big sword hanging from your belt when you're trying to be stealthy. That thing would be banging into walls and knocking stuff off of tables... I could go on, but I know that the combat aspect is near and dear to many people's hearts. I agree with one of the earlier posts, give the player an option. Short sword and dagger, or something like that. Thief may seem like a straightforward game, but there are many, MANY ways to play it. Letting players choose their weapons would help to accommodate personal playing preferences.

2. Climbing gloves
They were ok. I'm a terrible platformer, though, so I didn't miss having to jump from rope to rope. I did like the freedom that the rope arrows gave you, so my vote would be to have both in the next game.

3. City hubs
Good idea! I personally like the ability to go and fence my own goods, and buy what I need. Going back to RTC, you realize that holy water is not available to buy in the pre-mission supply menu? WHAT? You've been there once before, Garrett! Why would you waltz in without that VERY essential item? If you had been able to access the city hubs, you could get whatever you needed. I thought it was nice. I would have liked to see more side-quests, though. Like the golden dagger and the guy who tries to stiff those thugs with the diamonds. I love listening to the guards and servants talk about what's going on in their lives, and I feel like the city hubs make you feel more like a part of the world.

4. Third Person: I never noticed that it affected first person play. But then again, I get very distinct Thief-induced nausea if I play TDP or TMA on an empty stomach, so probably it felt smoother to me. The third-person option does bring in new fans, though. My roommate loves it, and it got her to try the Thief games, since she wasn't willing to put up with the nausea-inducing head bobbing of the first two long enough to get to love the games themselves. Now she's a fan. :P Though, if it is noticeably affecting gameplay for some people, find a way to have both.

Stuff I'm iffy about:

1. Sparkly loot. I personally play games for the story, so loot requirements are merely an annoyance to me. In that way, I appreciated the sparkly loot. Especially in the Cradle. I didn't want to have to go into every dark corner on that level. On the other hand, I miss the feeling you get when you pick up a silver/pewter plate and realize "crap, this isn't worth anything, now I have to go find something soft and squishy to drop it on." It keeps you on your toes, and, really, it's not that hard to find the loot in the first couple of games.

2. Arsenal/Tools:
To me, the more the merrier! I liked oil flasks and the extra tidbits you get in TDS. I personally enjoy setting up traps to snare those pesky guards, and watching them slip and slide down stairs makes me giddy with glee. Yes, I'm a bit of a sadist. And? Conversely, I also liked those frogbeast eggs. Although it's not really reasonable for them to be sold at your corner grocery store, so perhaps they should only have been available for purchase from the pagans? Say, there's an idea for a use for your faction function.

3. Factions:
I didn't have any problem with having faction status in this game, but I was pretty confused as to why anyone wouldn't befriend both. Or, considering our protagonist's personality, why you would befriend either. It just didn't make a whole lot of sense, nice as it was to be allowed into areas where the city watch wasn't present. Plus, I felt that the Hammers should have gotten irritated if you started doing the pagans favors, or vice versa. There should have been a give and take. Very keeper-esque, now that I think of it.


Anyways, it appears that my two bits went and had children and multiplied into 12 bits, but with so much emotion surrounding this topic, I felt the need to elaborate on my opinions. Really, I didn't feel that TDS was a blight on the franchise. There were things that could have been improved, yes, but I thought it was a strong game, and I thoroughly enjoy it, personally. The only aspect that I can really protest with the vehemence I've seen here is: For the love of Mike, LET THE TAFFER SWIM! For my final say in this very long post: Let's try and play nice kids. If you have a complaint, also bring a suggestion to the table. Come up with a compromise. It's the only way any of our ideas/suggestions will be truly heard by the developers, who will otherwise merely see a big hissy fit.

BlooferLady
17th May 2009, 02:11
Oops, double post. The site lied to me. ;) Sorry!

kaekaelyn
17th May 2009, 03:53
I just want everyone to know once again that I'm sorry for being so snarky. I just want everyone to enjoy themselves the best they can! We ARE talking about games after all :)

vasanx
17th May 2009, 06:26
I want you to talk about it. I'm talking about it too. There were definitely a lot of things I didn't like from TDS. I just don't like the "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude I see from some people. I love looking at things with a critical eye, and I do expect that some people will disagree with me. I am sorry for offending you. I stated my opinion in a closed-minded and condescending way--I didn't mean to say exactly what I said.

Any reasonable TDP and TMA fan will not have your aforementioned "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude.

That would be simply wrong. I'm all for T4 using whatever that did work from TDS so long as T4's design is strictly based on TDP and TMA.

This is why people are butting heads here. People who like TDS wants to see that style continue but the TDP and TMA fans want the game they never got.

Like I said before, we are gonna be arguing over this for a very long time.

The debt to us TDP and TMA fans is long overdue. Which is why we're doin all we could to get the devs attention here.

9 years. We have waited that long. Surely, you can symphatize?

Apology accepted by the way. We're cool.


By the way, I'm not trying to "talk sense" into you. I want T4 to be miles better than TDS and more of a throwback to TDP and TMA. I like TDS, but it got a lot of things wrong that TDP and TMA got absolutely spot-on. The thing is, I just wonder why you're so hostile toward it instead of just merely pointing out its flaws.

Hostile? Haha.

I guess passion can be misconstrued as hostility. Trust me when I say I don't blindly hate TDS. I believe I have written quite extensively on why TDS was a poor successor to TDP and TMA in a very, civilized manner.

If you really must know, TDS ripped me off twice. I actually upgraded my graphics card for TDS.

I just bought a PC with a GeForce MX 4000 and when I tried to install TDS it spits out an error saying that my GPU doesn't support Shader Model 2.0.

I didn't even blink when I saw that message. I bought the FX5200 and what did I get in return?

A parody of my beloved TDP and TMA. :mad2:

There you go. Now you know why TDS holds a special place in my heart.

Hypevosa
17th May 2009, 06:53
Any reasonable TDP and TMA fan will not have your aforementioned "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude.

That would be simply wrong. I'm all for T4 using whatever that did work from TDS so long as T4's design is strictly based on TDP and TMA.

This is why people are butting heads here. People who like TDS wants to see that style continue but the TDP and TMA fans want the game they never got.

Like I said before, we are gonna be arguing over this for a very long time.

The debt to us TDP and TMA fans is long overdue. Which is why we're doin all we could to get the devs attention here.

9 years. We have waited that long. Surely, you can symphatize?

Apology accepted by the way. We're cool.



Hostile? Haha.

I guess passion can be misconstrued as hostility. Trust me when I say I don't blindly hate TDS. I believe I have written quite extensively on why TDS was a poor successor to TDP and TMA in a very, civilized manner.

If you really must know, TDS ripped me off twice. I actually upgraded my graphics card for TDS.

I just bought a PC with a GeForce MX 4000 and when I tried to install TDS it spits out an error saying that my GPU doesn't support Shader Model 2.0.

I didn't even blink when I saw that message. I bought the FX5200 and what did I get in return?

A parody of my beloved TDP and TMA. :mad2:

There you go. Now you know why TDS holds a special place in my heart.

I did the same thing... I bought a new graphics card to play TDS... It did it's job it was entertaining - but really nothing to TDP and TMA - it was just pretty to look at.

vasanx
17th May 2009, 07:24
I didnt particularly like the physics on the characters much. When guards etc fell to the floor their bodies would do some wierd folding thingy which was unrealistic. Their back bones would bend the wrong way. Wierd. Did anyone notice this? :rolleyes:

You can make balloon animals of them guards.

DarthEnder
17th May 2009, 07:34
Yeah, T3's ragdolls were ridiculously loose.

Fortunately, we have Euphoria and whatnot these days to take care of things like that.

Platinumoxicity
17th May 2009, 07:38
They tried to choose an engine for TDS that was pretty, but the limits in level size caused not only the problem that levels had to be divided, but it also prevented the use of large structures, 3d skyboxes and it made the levels feel like they were only levels, not actual areas in a real world.
-For example, the clocktower was just a set of rooms piled on top of eachother, with no windows or outside climbing/exploration, and no amazing view of the city from outside the tower. And the tower itself seemed to be smaller than St. Edgar's towers or Angelwatch, so it couldn't have been the tallest building in the city.
-The Kurshok citadel didn't look at all like it used to be a city on land but rather a complex of rooms dug in the soil, because they didn't have these "vistas" showing the structure of the buildings collapsed underground. (The streets and plazas and general city structure of Karath Din is a good example)
-The levels also didn't have those numerous side rooms and maintenance areas that were out of the way and might have had some loot or secret passages. Everything was in plain sight or just en route. "No, we don't have toilets or cleaning closets here."
-The areas in the city hub were supposed to represent different classes of the society, but they all looked the same. The Old Quarter didn't really look so old and Auldale looked just as crappy as the Docks. It would be reasonable if everything in the rich district would be bigger and brighter but it looked exactly the same. There wasn't room in Stonemarket to actually have a marketplace convention there, so it looked like a regular set of streets.The New Market's -marketplace in T2's "Ambush" was probably bigger than Stonemarket plaza and Stonemarket proper combined.

Platinumoxicity
17th May 2009, 07:39
DBL pst

vasanx
17th May 2009, 08:20
I don't think that ever happened in a mission, did it? Just in the city areas.

I agree with most of the points in the OP, though not always the wording...(I wouldn't have described the oil flasks as being against the "delicate precision instrument" Garrett would use, and then in the next sentence bemoan the loss of mines!)

But things which reminded you you were playing a computer game, like the loading zones, loot glint, arrow trails, everything frobbable glowing a hideous luminous blue colour, the per centage tally whenever you picked up some loot, the way that if you died the camera went into third person and rotated around your body... Not to mention the lousy framerate and clunky controls (due to the body awareness) just took away from you BEING THERE and continually reminded you that you were playing a game.

Which was most definitely a step BACKWARDS from Thief 1 and 2.

As for a City Hub and the factions and all that...obviously that was all really badly implemented in Deadly Shadows and I just ignored those segments really. If they were tried again, they'd have to be done REALLY WELL, but ultimately I'd much MUCH rather see ALL the development time put into twelve REALLY REALLY GOOD missions with beautifully created briefings and arty and non-clunky buying loot screens / stats between those missions.

If in doubt, keep it simple. Deadly Shadows tried to come up with a whole new way to experience Thief, and forgot to concentrate on recreating that original gameplay in the first place.

:friends:

vasanx
17th May 2009, 08:32
You complain about it being unrealistic that you can't knock anyone out when they are in search mode but it is just as unrealistic that you can't knock them out when they are fighting you.

Really?

Cmon. How can that not be realistic? You knock a fellow's head a few times, he's bound to drop.

When the guards are aware of you, the only disadvantage in knocking them out is that they can swing their sword at you. You lose your health or possibly die if you don't knock them fast enough.

Or worse, knocking on the guy's head too many times actually kills them and you gotta restart your Expert level again.

I kinda remember that happenin in TDP and TMA.

ToMegaTherion
17th May 2009, 08:36
I think a big problem with Deadly Shadows was that it tried to fiddle around with too many different things a little bit. I don't think that's the right approach for Thief. We have, in Metal Age, a good base of how to do things well. I think it would be much better to take that base, not play around with too much of it, but choose a few elements (for me it would be AI and a well-developed system for the world responding to your body count/KO count/times spotted) and really make massive improvements on them.

Still, there are things in Deadly Shadows that we could include in the base, so there's no need to throw everything out, but the designers should avoid tinkering with little things because it's not likely to make big improvements and they're probably no more likely to make things better as they are make things worse.

vasanx
17th May 2009, 10:09
Changes I liked:
1. The dagger. Oh dearie me, I'm going to defend the lack of sword. I really never used it in the first games. EVER. Today I played through RTC, and backstabbed my first Hammer Haunt. Amazing. I'm more of a fan of ghosting missions, I guess. But truly, it makes little logical sense to have a great big sword hanging from your belt when you're trying to be stealthy. That thing would be banging into walls and knocking stuff off of tables... I could go on, but I know that the combat aspect is near and dear to many people's hearts. I agree with one of the earlier posts, give the player an option. Short sword and dagger, or something like that. Thief may seem like a straightforward game, but there are many, MANY ways to play it. Letting players choose their weapons would help to accommodate personal playing preferences.

Seriously? No love for the longsword?

Of all the arguments I've heard so far for not having a longsword, I gotta say, yours opened my eyes.

It was only for a second or so. I closed my eyes back soon after. :D

Here's what I have to say. What do you do when you're caught and the guards come at ya like you're a pinyata?

How do you parry a swing from a longsword? With a dagger? I know you can do that in Assassin's Snore. But Altair is one crazy mofo and he's also short of one middle finger, if you catch my drift.

The reason why Garrett carries a longsword is to block those kind of attacks.

That's a very reasonable argument right?

And what's with this shortsword business? A real man doesn't carry a shortsword and Garrett is a man's man! It's either the longsword or a battle axe. No sissy shortswords for my man Garrett! :D

I was kidding in the above paragraph by the way. Not bout the longsword though.

I almost fell for the "banging into walls and knocking off stuff" argument but this is Garrett we're talking about. A Master Thief. I'm of the opinion that he can carry a longsword without making much noise considering all those years of training behind him.

I dunno how he does it. He holds onto the sheath when he's moving around?

Anyways, I guess in the end, it shouldn't matter if we are given the choice to choose our weapons. But the longsword gotta be there though. They can have the shortsword, tinysword, retractablesword, lightsaber for all I care. Just give me my trusty longsword back.

The guy did spend an entire mission looking for one so, you know he's into longswords.

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/4443/longsword.th.jpg (http://img198.imageshack.us/my.php?image=longsword.jpg)

ToMegaTherion
17th May 2009, 10:34
As long as it isn't possible to beat 50 guards simultaneously any more, it doesn't matter that much what stabby weapon the player has.

Platinumoxicity
17th May 2009, 10:59
Garrett's sword is a short sword, just like every guard's sword in TDS. The Kurshok's large one-sided sword is a two handed longsword. A short sword can be used to parry attacks, but it's quite ineffective in a fight with an opponent that's wielding a longsword. Garrett's short sword is so small that it doesn't make sneaking any harder but it can still be used for protection.
http://filesmelt.com/Imagehosting/pics/8edbb4f10543d58ba417d53f2acc7285.PNG

Matuzzz
17th May 2009, 11:45
All three Thief games were great games. All have their pros and cons. But I see that large number of people here want to see remake of the old ones rather than sequel.

ToMegaTherion
17th May 2009, 12:35
Something from Deadly Shadows that I haven't yet noticed anyone comment on directly is the result of the City Hub concept on mission equipment compared with previous versions. It is true that money is too plentiful in Deadly Shadows, but even reducing that wouldn't solve what I feel is a big problem here: the departure from the clever design feature from Dark Project and Metal Age, where your equipment was for the current mission only. That really leaves you more free to use your tools without worrying about conserving them for some potentially difficult times 20 play hours in the future, and also frees the designers from worrying about balancing loot and equipment over the whole game.

I have been trying to think about some way to merge both the City Hub concept with the equipment philosophy from the first two games, but have yet to come up with anything particularly impressive. Any ideas? It should be kept fairly simple, I think. Overcomplication of abstract game mechanics doesn't seem very fitting for Thief.

OnionKnight
17th May 2009, 16:52
While can get behind most of the critique for TDS, I cannot understand why the story was so bad. I think that the story was excellent and up to par with the rest of the games, and this is the reason I enjoyed TDS and acknowledge it as a Thief game. The story was a bit different, this time it was more mysterious and symbolical rather than being more of a thriller. I see no problem with this, and would probably have been put off it had followed the same formula again.
The Thief feeling remained intact with this game through the story and the aesthetics, but it was a shame that the Thief mechanics were nowhere near the quality of the previous games. I would also like to point out that while graphics usually are of less importance in games, with Thief I think it's very important since it's a very atmospheric game. Details would really improve the Thief experience.

I've seen criticism towards the demystifying of the Keepers. This strikes me as a bit unobservant, as Thief is pretty much a trilogy about the three factions.
Thief 1 = Pagans
Thief 2 = Hammers
Thief 3 = Keepers
With this in mind, the idea of a fourth Thief game is also a bit unsettling.

BlooferLady
17th May 2009, 16:53
Here's what I have to say. What do you do when you're caught and the guards come at ya like you're a pinyata

I drop a flashbomb and run like hell. ;) No, I understand people's attachment to the sword. I think some customization would be the best road for Eidos to go down in this case. Really, Garrett would most likely have both, yes?


The guy did spend an entire mission looking for one so, you know he's into longswords.

It's what he was hired for. I think we can safely say he's into money! As I said before, the sword vs. dagger thing probably is very dependent on your playing style. Some people have pointed out its use in breaking boxes and boards, and I have to admit, I didn't even think of that. And then I remember how stupid I felt in TDS when I broke boxes with a dagger. Perhaps Gordon Freeman will lend him a crowbar. (JOKE! No crowbars please!)

Gorephazer
17th May 2009, 19:57
Really?

Cmon. How can that not be realistic? You knock a fellow's head a few times, he's bound to drop.

When the guards are aware of you, the only disadvantage in knocking them out is that they can swing their sword at you. You lose your health or possibly die if you don't knock them fast enough.

Or worse, knocking on the guy's head too many times actually kills them and you gotta restart your Expert level again.

I kinda remember that happenin in TDP and TMA.

That was my point actually. I was under the impression that you couldn't knock guards out while they were fighting you in T1 and T2 (only when they were in search mode), but apparently I was mistaken! In that case, what was the point of having a sword anyway???

johny2211
17th May 2009, 20:41
thief 3 was made for the Xbox and we all know it :hmm: thief 3 had to many restrictions such as no swimming, i guess because they spent all there time on the wall climbing trick which was awful (its thief not spiderman) plus the feeling that thief 3 missions had you mainly on a set train rail all the way through the missions which gave you no freedom of choice on how you was going to navigate through a building, for example life of the party in thief 2 or the haunted cathedral in thief 1 where you had several routes to pick from and each route had its own goodies and suprises to offer.

kaekaelyn
17th May 2009, 21:26
Got it. Well TMA and TDP weren't exactly fresh in my mind when I played TDP, and I was just excited to hear Garrett's voice again, so I probably wasn't as picky as I should have been.

vasanx
19th May 2009, 07:29
The guy did spend an entire mission looking for one so, you know he's into longswords.



It's what he was hired for. I think we can safely say he's into money!


It was a joke by the way. :)

vasanx
19th May 2009, 07:44
That was my point actually. I was under the impression that you couldn't knock guards out while they were fighting you in T1 and T2 (only when they were in search mode), but apparently I was mistaken! In that case, what was the point of having a sword anyway???

I just fired up the Lord Bafford mission again.

You can knock the guards when they're fighting you but they won't lose conciousness. They die.

I actually thought you can put em to "sleep" when you're fighting them. Rusty memory again.

What's the point of having a sword? To deflect them sword swinging at ya.

What bout fighting all those zombies? When you run out Holy Water, a longsword is really effective in keeping them at bay.

I still don't get the dagger people though. I rather run than face a zombie with a tiny ass dagger.

But then again they were no zombies in TDS was there? No wonder they don't miss the longsword.

Nate
19th May 2009, 07:52
I've been thinking the City Hub over quite a bit.

I've come to the conclusion that I'd like to see a city hub, but NOT if it is at the expense of the mission maps.

I could easily do without the City Hub and simply have Garrett go from mission to mission with a stop at his fence to sell the prior missions loot, a stop at his supplier to replace his equipment, and then a stop at his apartment to change up any equipment (for example, he could leave his short sword behind = weaker but better stealth stats). From that point, he would proceed into the mission.

Hell, you could forgo the Fence and Store stop overs, and just have Garrett at his hideout with a screen that allows him to swap out his gear (depending on how Garrett wants to balance stealth versus combat) and purchase replacement gear.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like a City Hub...but just not at the expense of the mission maps.

vasanx
19th May 2009, 08:32
Got it. Well TMA and TDP weren't exactly fresh in my mind when I played TDP, and I was just excited to hear Garrett's voice again, so I probably wasn't as picky as I should have been.

I totally recommend you playing TDP and TMA again. I guarantee you that you won't see TDS the same way again.

I have to emphasize here though that I don't blindly hate TDS. I'm no TDPist or TMAist.

There are stuff from TDS I enjoyed. They are few and far between but I did nevertheless.

I have decided to be more objective in my TDS skewering and that's why I'm playtesting it now.

I have 3 full pages of comments already. Only a quarter of the first page holds the pros so go figure.

I'll be posting it soon.

ToMegaTherion
19th May 2009, 08:55
Is there a lot of value in adding up number of pros and adding up number of cons and then seeing which one is higher? I've never really trusted that very much. I really loved Dark Project but I can easily write down a load of bad things about it (maybe not too great example since I can't imagine playing Dark Project again).

My favourite game is Baldur's Gate 2. I could write you a long and detailed list about all the things that are wrong with it. The list of things that are good about it would most likely be much shorter. But it would contain more important things.

vasanx
19th May 2009, 09:21
Is there a lot of value in adding up number of pros and adding up number of cons and then seeing which one is higher?


I won't say a lot necessarily but I'd say there's an appreciable value. :)

I get what you mean by concentrating on what's important and all.

Just as you can say that's BG2 short list of pros is more important, I'm saying that TDS' long (or short depending on who you ask) list of cons is more important because it really did ruin the experience for me.

Again, this is my opinion. If you can convince me that I'm wrong, I'll take it like a man. But I have yet to see such an argument.

Besides, we are not saying that TDP and TMA are flawless games despite how our comments are made out to be.

Anyone who wants to dicuss TDP and TMA's flaws, please do. I have my own complaints too.

We are simply responding to people who think TDS flaws are not flaws. But then again, isn't that the point of an argument?

Matuzzz
19th May 2009, 09:29
of course there were zombies. but not as much as in TDP

ToMegaTherion
19th May 2009, 09:31
I guess I think that the reasons why we enjoy a certain game are usually very hard to really pin down, and by listing pros and cons we construct an illusion of understanding... but we don't really understand. And then we try to make decisions based on this illusionary understanding, and it doesn't really lead anywhere useful.

I'm not saying that it isn't worthwhile to consider what we like and what we don't like. But we should be fairly cautious about things we say, and be very cautious about thinking we can easily identify the mysterious quality that makes great games great,

Matuzzz
19th May 2009, 09:45
I won't say a lot necessarily but I'd say there's an appreciable value. :)

I get what you mean by concentrating on what's important and all.

Just as you can say that's BG2 short list of pros is more important, I'm saying that TDS' long (or short depending on who you ask) list of cons is more important because it really did ruin the experience for me.

Again, this is my opinion. If you can convince me that I'm wrong, I'll take it like a man. But I have yet to see such an argument.

Besides, we are not saying that TDP and TMA are flawless games despite how our comments are made out to be.

Anyone who wants to dicuss TDP and TMA's flaws, please do. I have my own complaints too.

We are simply responding to people who think TDS flaws are not flaws. But then again, isn't that the point of an argument?
Everybody here complain about a LOOOOT of cons about TDS. Okey, you couldnt swim,there were less items to obtain,different movement...but such great ideas in making levels and such nice architecture is more important to me. And of course shadows, which was thing that this game missed. I dont think TDS changes too much from his predecessors. It maintain its spirit. I played for example Settlers 5:heritage of kings and THAT is the game, that people should complain to beacuse it has nothing in common with his predecessors even though it had nice graphic etc...

I absolutly agree with you, that one thing may be more important than 10 another aspects.

Darkplay
19th May 2009, 10:12
Hi!

I'm fan since the release of Thief 1998, frist time poster on this forum ...

Best post in this forum so far GmanPro !!!
Make this post sticky!

I second most all of your thoughts GmanPro!!!

... and want to add:

TDS was okay and had it's moments (the Story, Cradle) but felt like a "game".
I want Thief IV feel like "being part" of a immersive world. This make Thief standout ...

So EM ...

please do NOT try to make Thief IV a compilation of aspects you like in other stealth games. These have their own right of existance and may be entertaining for what they are. But we do not want Thief be casual entertainment, another fast action assassin game or treated like unintelligent players. We love Thief for being a immersive, mature, slow and rich First Person Sneaker as it was invented from LGS...! :wave:

please make it unique, original, dark, witty, not breaking it's roots (T1/T2) in game mechanistics, lore and feel and always remember:

Treat Thief as Spearhead which other stealth games can "learn" from (not vice vera!).
Make THief IV silhouetted against all those other interchangeable stealth games.

... and oldschool-Taffers will be sold and new players interested for experiencing a different, rich pure stealth game.

Unfortunatly producers and decison-makers of Ion Storm did forget about that in TDS for most of GmanPro's listed aspects ...

Best wishes in that & Thanks.for reading ..

oceanclub
19th May 2009, 11:20
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:

Some of this appears to rationalising things simply because they were originally done that way. For example, the idea that a stealthy thief would be carrying around a large metal weapon that would make clanging sounds when brushed against objects and that would cause the victim to make loud ARGGGH sounds when used.

Nostalgia - heroin for old people.

P.

Dragonera
19th May 2009, 11:32
Well TDS was just differend than T1&2, but i did like it. Sure it was bad when u didnt have sword or etc etc but anyway i did like TDS, just because it was differend. If it did suck, why u even play it?

Necros
19th May 2009, 12:56
Well TDS was just differend than T1&2
Somewhat different but I still loved it.

It's really simple. Ion Storm focused more on the Third Person View when they did TDS and this in turn hurt the First Person View.
Could you show me a source to that? I've read in an interview that they were only doing the FPV at first and then later added the TPV after some devs hacked it in.

And I liked the loading screens (not the smaller levels!) and if there will be some kind of loading screens in T4, do it like in T3. I liked the art and the quotes.

Oh, and keep the light gem!

Lady_Of_The_Vine
19th May 2009, 13:18
Best post in this forum so far GmanPro !!!
Make this post sticky!
.

I agree, it is an excellent post/thread, so I've made it a sticky. :)
Please try and keep discussion on topic and contribute relevant points only so that the devs don't have to plough through off-topic conversation. This is very important, right? ;)

Jamesy
19th May 2009, 15:06
The main problem TDS had was the bad choice of an engine. I think they had re-used the Deus Ex Invisible War one, and it was kind of flawed. If any of you have played it, DXIW also had some major frame-rate issues. TDS was born with the same genetic defect, so to speak.

Bonus stuff like 'climbing gloves' that were badly implemented can easily be added at a later date via download content/expansions.

If EM uses a 'home-baked' engine it should turn out a lot better. Leave a lot of time for testing as well. TDS felt like it was a beta release they put on the market to keep in sync with the deadline. If you run out of time, push the release date back. Its done all the time in this industry, so I wouldn't mind it if the end product was better because of it.

Remember, if you can't see yourself sitting down and enjoying this game its not quite ready.

oceanclub
19th May 2009, 15:17
The main problem TDS had was the bad choice of an engine. I think they had re-used the Deus Ex Invisible War one, and it was kind of flawed. If any of you have played it, DXIW also had some major frame-rate issues

The Unreal Engine 2 - with, according to Wikipedia, an in-house "flesh renderer" - I don't know if the Unreal Engine 2 itself has frame-rate issues, maybe the in-house customisation was at fault?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_Engine#Unreal_Engine_2

According to this, Deus Ex 3 is using something called the Crystal engine, which was originally used for the new Tomb Raider games:

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50146

I'd be highly surprised if Thief 4 therefore doesn't use it.

P.

Jamesy
19th May 2009, 15:43
Ah, I see. UE2 didn't have issues like that when I was using it, but maybe I didn't notice it. In house changes could have been the problem, but they should have noticed and fixed it at least. Maybe it was also the jumbled level design? The city hub had a lot going on in it, so that could also be the source of frame rate death.

I played a demo of Tomb Raider Underworld, and it was alright. Not sure if that was the Crystal engine at work, but the water and everything looked nice. Movement felt a little weird, but I was never interested in Tomb Raider all that much and it seemed to handle the same as any others in that series.

Belboz
19th May 2009, 16:26
This is my taking on the problem with the blackjack as explained via a gun, you have a gun in a game, you can't fire it until you get in range of the monster you want to kill, you cant fire it just to shoot other things that arn't monsters. How frustrated would you feel if you had a gun in a game and you wern't allow to use it until the game decided you could. (hl2 friendly fire is another game that uses some type of restriction, how many times have you wanted to shoot alyx cause her scripted movements have shoved you off a platform in the citadel, and you've fallen to your death.)

Loot glint was added because the game testers at ionstorm couldn't find the loot, the solution there would have been to fire the testers and hire testers that could. Apparently the art department for t3 had gone overboard with the textures on loot and other frobbable stuff, you can't see that though as its spoilt with that horrible blue shimmer. The easest solution with a frobable object is to make it a bit brighter than the surounding objects so that you know its frobbable but still see the nice texture on it, and not completely spoil it with some horrible blue slimy slick of a surface. I thought this was a horrible idea when it was first mentioned on the ttlg forums by someone at ionstorm.

The other thing thats kind of bugging is the factions thing, Garrett in the first two games worked for himself, and was extremely reluctant to take sides with anyone, he shunned the keepers, avoided the thieves guild when ever possible, thought the Hammerite were a bunch religious fanatics, only worked for Viktoria because he didn't like the idea of the mechanist killing defenseless people, but didn't really want to side with viktoria, didn't like the mechanist because they were an even more fanatical than the Hammerites, and didn't like the pagans because they worshiped the trickster who he had killed in the first game. The faction thing in t3 felt like garrett had betrayed himself by siding with factions he didn't like. I mean you can have the faction thing in game but the game should not force you into siding with one faction or another faction just to finish the game, there should be an option to not side with any faction.

The loot percentage thing, in the first 2 games you were expected to loot a certain amount of loot in a mission depending on diff lvl, you didn't find out how much loot was in a mission until the status screen at the end of a mission, a screen you could not access during the mission level, so throughout that mission on a first time through it, you had absolutely no idea how much loot there actually was in the mission. The loot percentage thing in t3 is just stupid, there's no way you would know how much loot there was in the mission, or that there was a special loot object either, special loot objects are usually found by reading something in the mission that tells you of special loot, then that is added as an optional objective to get, it wouldn't be 'you've found 1 of 5 special loot objects' how do suddenly know its special loot if you haven't read about it, it would look like normal loot.

ToMegaTherion
19th May 2009, 16:33
I thought the JohnP loot glint was rather nice. I never played the game with any of the blue horror but I imagine it was brutally ugly. That's what often confuses me. It's not that someone thought "let's have a loot glint", but rather they thought "let's have a loot glint, and make it look absolutely horrific".

oceanclub
19th May 2009, 16:35
I thought the JohnP loot glint was rather nice. I never played the game with any of the blue horror but I imagine it was brutally ugly. That's what often confuses me. It's not that someone thought "let's have a loot glint", but rather they thought "let's have a loot glint, and make it look absolutely horrific".

I've only ever played Thief DS with JohnP's graphical update; that's probably why the loot glint never bothered me.

P.

Belboz
19th May 2009, 17:02
Yes but graphical updates usually mean that there was something glaringly wrong with the original.

Rostere
19th May 2009, 17:06
My main issue with Thief: DS was the whole faction thing. I also thought that the older Thief games usually allowed for more exploration - I thought there were more optional and hidden areas to be found, despite the "free- roaming" ambitions of Thief: DS.

So, to sum things up:

-Include meaningful exploration
-Don't have the protagonist ally up with anyone (or become too familiar with anyone). In Thief, the player takes on the role of an anonymous master thief, not some kind of hero.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
19th May 2009, 17:47
Thanks.
I hope GmanPro's very valid points will be noted during development and you won't have to ninja-unsticky this in order not to make EM look bad.

I understand but let's play fair and not assume or demand conditions, it abuses the purpose of making this thread a sticky. It now sits in a prominent position on the board so we can highlight our thoughts as to why the 3rd game of the series fell short of fans' expectations (some fans, not all...). It will never be a case of the devs 'looking bad' as they must make the final decisions in the end; all we can do is express our opinions as best we can, and hope that they take some (or all) of what we say on board.

So, good luck, Taffers! :)

Matuzzz
19th May 2009, 17:53
Hi!

I'm fan since the release of Thief 1998, frist time poster on this forum ...

Best post in this forum so far GmanPro !!!
Make this post sticky!

I second most all of your thoughts GmanPro!!!

... and want to add:

TDS was okay and had it's moments (the Story, Cradle) but felt like a "game".
I want Thief IV feel like "being part" of a immersive world. This make Thief standout ...

So EM ...

please do NOT try to make Thief IV a compilation of aspects you like in other stealth games. These have their own right of existance and may be entertaining for what they are. But we do not want Thief be casual entertainment, another fast action assassin game or treated like unintelligent players. We love Thief for being a immersive, mature, slow and rich First Person Sneaker as it was invented from LGS...! :wave:

please make it unique, original, dark, witty, not breaking it's roots (T1/T2) in game mechanistics, lore and feel and always remember:

Treat Thief as Spearhead which other stealth games can "learn" from (not vice vera!).
Make THief IV silhouetted against all those other interchangeable stealth games.

... and oldschool-Taffers will be sold and new players interested for experiencing a different, rich pure stealth game.

Unfortunatly producers and decison-makers of Ion Storm did forget about that in TDS for most of GmanPro's listed aspects ...

Best wishes in that & Thanks.for reading ..
FINALLY, somebody who wants interesting sequel, not a remake!

GmanPro
19th May 2009, 17:55
Yay, my thread is stickied! :D

My main issue with Thief: DS was the whole faction thing. I also thought that the older Thief games usually allowed for more exploration - I thought there were more optional and hidden areas to be found, despite the "free- roaming" ambitions of Thief: DS.

So, to sum things up:

-Include meaningful exploration


Probably the one area I really want EM to improve upon with Thief 4. And I think they will based on what they've said about Deus Ex 3.


-Don't have the protagonist ally up with anyone (or become too familiar with anyone). In Thief, the player takes on the role of an anonymous master thief, not some kind of hero. :hmm:

Well ... In Thief 2 Garrett reluctantly sided with Victoria and the Pagans, but by the end of the game he appeared to become quite attached to her and her cause from what I could tell. So, when she died at the end, he evolved further to become even more cynical, jaded, and/or world-weary. It was an important step in his character development.


We love Thief for being a immersive, mature, slow and rich First Person Sneaker as it was invented from LGS...!

^^ This. Its the number one reason why I love Thief so much. Because every other game out there tries to saturate your senses with nonstop fast-paced action. I love Thief BECAUSE it is slow.

WVI
19th May 2009, 18:20
I agree with everything in the opening post, believe it or not(well, I do kind of prefer the dagger).

That said, it's still my favorite Thief game.

Maethius
19th May 2009, 20:10
Thinking back on what I did and did not like in T3, I would say that I did enjoy Garrett's apartment. I like the idea that there might be a huge list of items you could find, but not carry all at once. Perhaps you can find potions and holy water, arrows of this kind and that, and keep them in your safehouse. If Garrett can find Keeper caches, why not place them in city streets (I do like the hub concept, if it were reworked a bit). Let the player use caches to stow extra gear. While I wouldn't be too wild about an encumbrance system, Perhaps he could have a limit to inventory items aside from treasure. Could you really lug around 100 arrows, 8 healing potions, 10 holy waters, 3 slow-falls, 4 extra eyes (yes, bring back the cool T2 eye gizmos!), 8 gas traps, 10 trip mines... etc. etc. etc.?

I think that there is room for both rope climbing and gloves, though a large part of their effectiveness depends on level designs. It was always frustrating in any Thief title to have way to climb up and see something interesting but the level designers (probably for the sake of simplicity) made no way to use these items. Roofwalking is a huge part of Thief, and I would love to see it come back in earnest.

Oh, how about Garrett being able to buy a diamond window cutter that allows him access to some areas through the glass? (too hard to implement? Just brain-storming!)

-edit

Oh, and just a note on art direction... I really felt that The City was gone in T3. This was some cramped medieval town, but it lacked the architecture, rises, steam/magical motor tech that really made The City what it was.

And don't flash my loot and doors like a flamin' neon sign!

huzi73
19th May 2009, 21:00
Agree with ya taffers!There couldnt be a better thread to sticky.While the bulk of the TDS story was good,and felt like a fusion between T1 & T2's stories,(politics between factions,retrieving valuable artifacts of untold power,betrayal,chaos,etc etc)However the 1 thing which totally ruined the game for me was the final part of the story involving Gamall.My main grudge against the game was because ION STORM tried so desperately to make the TDS story seem waaay more epic than the previous games.For me,making 4 more artifacts in the league of the Eye was plain B.S!Thats equivelent to making the One ring from LotR part of like an entire jewelry set belonging to many powerful kings who made Sauron seem like like a hobbit.Make an Epic story,no problem!But DONT MAKE AN EPIC STORY WHICH UNDERMINES PREVIOUS GAMES IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR VERSION OF THE GAME SEEM MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS ATTEMPTS.

OnionKnight
19th May 2009, 21:39
While the loot glint is dumb, it did serve as a fix for another problem; that you can't pick things up without making a noise when putting them down. With the glint you did not have to try picking things up to see if it was loot or not.
A silent way to drop items is required.

GmanPro
19th May 2009, 21:44
There has always been a silent way to drop items. Just hit the drop item key. Not the throw item key

WVI
19th May 2009, 22:57
There has always been a silent way to drop items. Just hit the drop item key. Not the throw item key

Still makes noise. I talk about this in another topic.

Rostere
20th May 2009, 01:08
Well ... In Thief 2 Garrett reluctantly sided with Victoria and the Pagans, but by the end of the game he appeared to become quite attached to her and her cause from what I could tell. So, when she died at the end, he evolved further to become even more cynical, jaded, and/or world-weary. It was an important step in his character development.


True. However, to clarify my point: the player should never have to do things in order to gain the respect of some "faction"; if the player does align with any group or person it's because they are forced to or because you use them for your own purposes. I also thought Garrett became a little... attached to Viktoria at the end of T2 but not necessarily to her cause. He's still a cynical loner, not the Pagan's errand boy.

Ice1019
20th May 2009, 01:08
Some solid points, Gman.

There are some things about TDS I liked, but I think you've illustrated pretty well the essence of the first two Thief games that you want to see included in Thief 4. I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of a slower-paced, open-ended game that keeps the complexity of the original games, but I also feel that we are setting ourselves up for some trouble if we are not open to the idea of adding to the Thief experience. TDS tried to introduce some new stuff, and didn't succeed. But, let's make sure we are offering some original ideas in addition to the stuff we want put back in from the originals.

MasterTaffer
20th May 2009, 01:31
True. However, to clarify my point: the player should never have to do things in order to gain the respect of some "faction"; if the player does align with any group or person it's because they are forced to or because you use them for your own purposes. I also thought Garrett became a little... attached to Viktoria at the end of T2 but not necessarily to her cause. He's still a cynical loner, not the Pagan's errand boy.

A point I agree whole heartedly with. It seemed very out fo charecter to me for Garrett to care at all what the faction's opinions of him were. Especially considering he's a criminal who preys on others, he is bound to royally piss off the Hammers and Pagans at some point. I'de think he'd just chalk it up to the hazards of his profession.

Pest removal and corner stone gardener don't seem like activities or chores Garrett would engage in, no matter what faction was breathing down his neck.

MasterTaffer
20th May 2009, 02:15
Here's my list of gripes for Deadly Shadows:

Major Problems I had with DS:


Lack of sprawling levels.
Audio aspect of stealth was broken. When being crouched meant I was silent no matter what, it pretty much killed that dynamic of the game and made moss arrows pointless.
Garrett's horizontal leap was severely lacking.
Faction chores. I swear, i thought they would be asking me to mow their lawns by the end of the game.
Climbing gloves. They were a poorly implimented replacement for rope arrows. I wouldn't have been as annoyed about their absence if the climbing gloves weren't so poorly designed.


Minor problems I had. These were more annoyance than game breakers:


Lack of flavor based reading material.
Loot percentage statistic. How Garrett would know the exact amount of gold left in the level is strange as hell to me.
"Steal 3 unique loot items." Just give me the names of the other objectives like in Thief 1 & 2, rather than this ambiguous objective.
Getting blamed for the other people's dirty work in the City sections. It completely killed my stats screen for the game.
Clunky blackjack/backstab mechanics.
Poor transition from animation to rag dolls during blackjacks.
Garrett forgot how to swim.
The lack of briefing cutscenes.
The 3d cutscenes. They looked like trash and just felt out of place in the game.
Black Market Bertha
Kurshoks. *Shudder*
Why are the Haunts so short?


Things that didn't bug me at all that seems to send everyone else into a murderous psychosis:


Loot glint.
Arrow trails.
The different "E" in the title.
3rd person. Yes, I know it made the first person clunky. But I was indifferent to it.
The fact it was on the Xbox.


Things I liked:


The story.
I liked the City sections. They were poorly implimented and made the City feel like a tiny fishing village, but I think with some work they could be really fun.
I liked having to fence my loot from a mission.
I liked the lockpicking mechanic, but it still could use a lot of work.
The Cradle. One of the best and creepiest experiences I've had in a game for a long time.
The lighting engine was stellar. Being able to hide in a shadow of some boxes I stacked made me drool.


And one big head scratcher: Why were the locks in the center of all the doors? Made no sense to me. And it was made all the stranger on the first level in a Hammer cathedral, when the locks were on the side of the doors. That meant it was perfectly possible to put the locks in a rational position on the door, but they chose not to anyway. That had me scratching my head for days. Didn't hurt the game in any way, just was weird.

Thugo
20th May 2009, 03:32
Master Taffer did a great job with what was good/bad/neutral with Thief DS.

The only point i respectively disagree with is that I didn't like having 3rd person in the game.

Also, I didn't really like how much Garrett carried. Garrett really shouldn't be able to run/jump/climp/swim/hide/sneak while carrying so much equipment...at least not very well. I know some others have been over this already, but I would like to see Garrett's carry capacity seriously reduced.

Skaruts
20th May 2009, 05:14
I only read the 1st page of this thread yet, but here's my 2 cents anyway.

I loved TDS.
I loved the way the movement felt and being able to look around without actually turning my body there. Movement would be perfect, imo, if only it wasn't for garret making a circle when turning around and you would fall from a ledge for that.

Loved the level design (but I agree some of them could've been heavily improved)

But I missed the sword, found the gloves a clumsy tool (in both terms of usefulness and implementation, I'd wish that garret could be as good in clibing on his own as Altair), and I hated not having many doors or windows to barge into just for fun (had some, but so few... and so little to steal from there)
I didnt' miss rope arrowss that much, for some reason (maybe cuz no levels had much where to need some).

Can't remember anything more, don't play it for a long time now.

As for the 3rd person view, I can't understand why most games are just bound to one view, ffs. I indulge imersion and I use 1st person view whenever it's available, but I respect other tastes and so I wish games could have evolved in to something more than fancy top-notch graphics (which in most cases aren't top-notch (i.e. Oblivion ), and that having more that 1 choice would be a (one of the) standard(s) in everyone of them. But not as in TDS. I think 3rd person gamers did felt the same when shooting arrows (being swapped to 1sr p) as I felt while climbing ladders (vice-versa), big mistake there.

(just a thought kind of offtopic. I wish games had evolved into more on game mechanics too. For example, 99.9% of FPS main characters are too retarded as to jump over a 50 cm wall (about 25-30 inches), and in fairly the same percentage, you are just a flying camera with a stretched arm with a weapon, popping out from it. It makes me sick to see this after 10 (TEN) years from the release of a game where you could climb something almost twice as tall as you, and you could see yourself from your eyes pov (Thief 1). Among other things... Anyway, I just had to let this out.)

GmanPro
20th May 2009, 05:19
Lol, yeah. Not being able to climb atop a 2-foot ledge in Deus Ex was incredibly frustrating. And there is no excuse for not properly balancing that stuff in a modern day FPS

Skaruts
20th May 2009, 05:36
that's what I'm talking about.

Next Gen!!!!

bah

:hmm: :scratch: :mad2:

MasterTaffer
20th May 2009, 06:40
I've never understood how anyone could be satisfied or even like TDS...

It's simple. People have different standards and tastes than you.

Not to mention it was a good game, it just didn't live up to its predacessors. It's kind of like Alien3 in the Alien movie franchise. As a stand alone movie, it's actually a really good watch. But it's a very bad sequel when you compare it to the previous 2 movies in the series.

The game has a lot of merit, it just didn't live up to your high expectations. And because of that you view it as a piss poor game. Not all of us have as high expectations as you. Hell, if I put a game in any of my systems, the only factor I truly judge it on is, "Am I having fun?" And I had a hell of a good time playing Deadly Shadows. It has a lot of flaws, and doesn't live up to the previous games, but is still a good game on its own.

sapud83
20th May 2009, 06:53
It's simple. People have different standards and tastes than you.

Not to mention it was a good game, it just didn't live up to its predacessors. It's kind of like Alien3 in the Alien movie franchise. As a stand alone movie, it's actually a really good watch. But it's a very bad sequel when you compare it to the previous 2 movies in the series.

The game has a lot of merit, it just didn't live up to your high expectations. And because of that you view it as a piss poor game. Not all of us have as high expectations as you. Hell, if I put a game in any of my systems, the only factor I truly judge it on is, "Am I having fun?" And I had a hell of a good time playing Deadly Shadows. It has a lot of flaws, and doesn't live up to the previous games, but is still a good game on its own.

Finnaly somebody told what i supposed to yell soon:)
I see only many complains about TDS but you people forgot maybe that TDS is one of the best game ever!! ( i don't remember to play as good game as it is since last 2 years)!!.
I agree that TDS is is worse than previous Thief 1 and 2 but people these games were almost genious at least incredible damn good:)
So please stop complain "ohh TDS is not good and etc"
TDS is good as it should be!
The end.

GmanPro
20th May 2009, 07:06
TDS was bad for me mostly because I played Deus Ex before it. But then ... everything is bad after experiencing Deus Ex

Rahl
20th May 2009, 08:06
I have to agree with all points of the original post, except maybe for the one with the city hub.
I don't think it was a good idea. Just give us some missions where you have to stalk the streets, like in thief DP/MA.

Sorry for my bad english.

Skarsnik
20th May 2009, 08:54
Since this is just a matter of pure and simple taste my opinion will probably differ alot from others. I liked DS just becouse it was a breath of fresh air from the other two games. The storyline was intrigueing and really well plotted out and I liked the return of the eye.
Sure it had a few flaws but so had the two earlier games. How the hell could the blackjack be the most effective weeapon vs the apparitions for example? Yea that made sense, beat the living crap out of the ghosts of the hammers with a blunt object..

ToMegaTherion
20th May 2009, 10:40
Does anyone have an opinion about the Deadly Shadows maps not highlighting your current location? Or the fairly sketchy nature of these maps?

My favourite maps were in Metal Age, where you could easily tell where you were, where you wanted to get to, and the obvious options for getting there if you couldn't find secret routes. I can see though that some people might consider these maps too detailed.

esme
20th May 2009, 11:21
I do agree that Deadly Shadows was a pretty good game in it's own right, it was just a poor sequel, it left out too many things that weren't broken from it's predecessors and introduced too many new things to be a good sequel, the general story behind the game wasn't too bad as a sequel though it was mainly the implementation that was the problem

regarding the last point on maps, I do like maps but to have your protagonist go in with full map information is at times rather unrealistic, how about have him map the areas he's been to, or start with a rough sketch of a map and improve it as he explores, as for current location well I guess he could keep a thumb on the area he's in if he's not too busy dodging guards

Drackulis
20th May 2009, 12:59
Thief Deadly Shadows is actually the game that introduced me to Thief, so it is my favourite game. The only thing was that it was really boring to wait, if the guards were in search mode, to blackjack them. I would like good graphics with a good game. THANK YOU FOR THIEF 4 EIDOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lot9h
20th May 2009, 13:23
There are so many things to do to improve the franchise over TDS but I shall thoroughly read through these forums before I say more than the first one.

NO RESPAWNING GUARDS! My favourite moment in metal age was to take out all the guards in a mansion and then dump them on his lordships bed. He might only have been reacting to the one corpse but while watching from the shadows as he walks in, sees everyone else who should have been in the house with him piled up dead and subsequently runs out screaming is a very satisfying reward for some sneaking well done.
So... NO LOSS OF DECALS or whatever it is called. I want the people I kill to stay killed at least until i've left the area/finished a mission. I don't always want to go butchering, I love the ghosting too, but you shouldnt limit players in how they use the gift of stealth.

PS.. Had a bit of a look at the other posts now and glad to see im in good company. :) Part of my issue with TDS over the first two was also that I went out and bought a new computer just to play it. I didn't feel like I got decent value, but I wouldn't even have thought about it if it turned out more TMA.

Last comment for now.
MORE THE BETTER. Sword, Short Sword, Dagger models are still only three models. Basic ones. Give each a different reach value, damage, and effect on movement speed and let people choose for themselves. Maybe a nice enhanced version or two of each to be earned after lots of loot. (Dagger can be thrown? Short/long swords made faster or holy vs undead?)
Lots of kit. Tripwires and appropriate falling down stairs damage. Grappling hook to attach to top of stone (rather than underside of wood textures) but make it expensive. Mines/bombs/proximities, why not if they're rare? We have been through the Metal Age here people.

Drackulis
20th May 2009, 13:57
There are so many things to do to improve the franchise over TDS but I shall thoroughly read through these forums before I say more than the first one.

NO RESPAWNING GUARDS! My favourite moment in metal age was to take out all the guards in a mansion and then dump them on his lordships bed. He might only have been reacting to the one corpse but while watching from the shadows as he walks in, sees everyone else who should have been in the house with him piled up dead and subsequently runs out screaming is a very satisfying reward for some sneaking well done.
So... NO LOSS OF DECALS or whatever it is called. I want the people I kill to stay killed at least until i've left the area/finished a mission. I don't always want to go butchering, I love the ghosting too, but you shouldnt limit players in how they use the gift of stealth.
Actually it was in the city that they respawn guards. Not in missions. I think that a part of it makes sense because the guards or city wach were replaced by new men.:rolleyes::thumb:

clock12345
20th May 2009, 14:05
please if you gona create thief 4 then please make it 3th person and 1th person cuz some people like 1th person and some people like 3th person so make them both please or you can make your choise at the start menu when you only start the game you can chose 3th person or 1th person please just dont change the 3th person dont delete it this is the best game ever.

Skaruts
20th May 2009, 15:12
Thief Deadly Shadows is actually the game that introduced me to Thief, so it is my favourite game. The only thing was that it was really boring to wait, if the guards were in search mode, to blackjack them. I would like good graphics with a good game. THANK YOU FOR THIEF 4 EIDOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only 2 things:

1- Thief 3 didn't have good graphics??? o ma god!!

2- Boring to wait? That's what the game is about. Taking time, making your strike at the perfect time, lurking, watching them as they are unaware that you are about to decide their fates: blackjack, stab in the back, or simply let loose.

But since you speak of that, one major improvement I noticed in DS was that guards wouldn't stay looking for you for all eternity, as happened in DP and MA. That made the game more real in a way, and less painfull to comit mistakes. I think I went up to the end of the game with some mistakes, but all in one go, except for in the cradle, where I had to load it again a few times.
;)

Now, to everyone that is talking like "DS was crap, DP and MA were perfection", I tell you this:
I had my doubts about both DP and MA when I played them. Many aspects rly got me disapointed at the time, I even skiped some of the last missions in DP cuz I thought they were stupid as hell. But in the overall I loved them cuz they put me in the part of a thief in FPS, and in a very fun way. Also the conspiracies that made the plot caught my attention in the good way.
Same happened to me in DS, except it had no stupid missions. I had a better time playing this game than I had in DP, maybe not as good as in MA, but still had rly rly good time with this one.
None of them was perfect, and all of them were good and fun. Imo, thief 3 was much better in terms of movement, graphics, and realism. And some stuff I can't remember anymore.

Does anyone ever gonna mention that water arrows are a bit questionable too, in terms of realism? Or is everyone just pointing out things they would do otherwise and leaving some unrealistic/questionable stuff forgotten just because?

I ask this cuz many ppl here sounds like those metallica fans when they let out their black album. They just said it sucked because it was diferent (tho not that much). Not that they had actually listened to it.

Maethius
20th May 2009, 18:01
Water arrows that leave puddles on surfaces would be interesting, especially if you stepped in them and left tracks. What if you had to pick up the arrow shafts left by a water arrow? Heck, what if you had to take regular arrows and "apply" or use what you find to fletch your special weapons? In other words, you find a water crystal (a staple of the world, not just a mechanic) but you can merely THROW it to douse a torch. However, you can combine the crystal with a broadhead arrow to have a water arrow in your quiver, giving you the classic range and effectiveness of the previous games. Ever wish you could just light a torch with a fire crystal rather than explode it? Or squeeze a gas pod right behind a guard's head to put him out rather than shoot it at him, or use a gas grenade? Why not have a base arrow and a base bomb object so you can make your own gas trap? Or set a noise-maker trap that goes off if a servant bumps it with an open door?

I still like the idea of a "blackjack" arrow that hits a guard in the back of the head with a hollow "bok!" and sends him to the floor. :)

Too different for Thief, or a fresh concept?

Skaruts
20th May 2009, 19:03
lool

I only think the water arrows are a bit questionable cuz I never rly seen an effective way of replicating it in real life. But I would be sad if they would be removed, since they are very funny to use. I love using them. But I'd like to have an alternative way of putting out torches. Or that water arrows would be the alternative.

Matuzzz
20th May 2009, 19:54
Any reasonable TDP and TMA fan will not have your aforementioned "If it's from TDS, throw it out" attitude.

That would be simply wrong. I'm all for T4 using whatever that did work from TDS so long as T4's design is strictly based on TDP and TMA.

This is why people are butting heads here. People who like TDS wants to see that style continue but the TDP and TMA fans want the game they never got.

Like I said before, we are gonna be arguing over this for a very long time.

The debt to us TDP and TMA fans is long overdue. Which is why we're doin all we could to get the devs attention here.

9 years. We have waited that long. Surely, you can symphatize?

Apology accepted by the way. We're cool.



Hostile? Haha.

I guess passion can be misconstrued as hostility. Trust me when I say I don't blindly hate TDS. I believe I have written quite extensively on why TDS was a poor successor to TDP and TMA in a very, civilized manner.

If you really must know, TDS ripped me off twice. I actually upgraded my graphics card for TDS.

I just bought a PC with a GeForce MX 4000 and when I tried to install TDS it spits out an error saying that my GPU doesn't support Shader Model 2.0.

I didn't even blink when I saw that message. I bought the FX5200 and what did I get in return?

A parody of my beloved TDP and TMA. :mad2:

There you go. Now you know why TDS holds a special place in my heart.
Why do you divide fans into two groups:TDS fans and TDP,TMA fans. I think largest group is Thief fans. I play it from very beginning in 1998 and every part was great, with some cons of course, but nobody find it perfect. I think if they tried to make TDS just old Thief with some minimal improvements, it could end up badly.

Skaruts
20th May 2009, 20:22
I think no matter how good TDS could've been it would always be a potential flaming target. Unfortunately that's how it goes in everything in life. Many ppl just can't handle a change and this happens all the time with every game, every music band, every tv show, every business company, etc...

Maybe the biggest problem is expectations. I didn't expect thief 3, I only gained the knowledge of it's existence some time after it's release. So I played and see what it had. Some ppl may have been "dreaming" for some time how good it could come up to be, according to this technology or that one, the game could come up to beat the hell outta every other game and still beat the series. When they found out that tech used wasn't state of the art (or whatever level they had in mind), the rest felt like just mere details with no great value for apreaciation.

If it wasn't this, I believe it might have been something analogous.

The same WILL happen with thief 4. And the same may have happened with thief 2: I remember being disapointed cuz it didn't have any significant advancement. It seemed just like T1, only with new missions and one or two diferent items. But since I always make the math to see if the good takes over the bad (before I say "this game is the biggest crap ever"), I loved the game anyway. The same way I loved T3.

Like I said, happens all the time. Unfortunately.

But T3 isn't bad enough to flame it and point errors. Oblivion is, T3 is not. T3 is a game that needs criticizing rather than flaming. The 1st post is a good criticizing post, even though some agressiveness is in it, and that is what I mean. Saying "I can't even understand how anyone could even like T3" comes from someone that didn't realize that it was an improvement attempt rather than a sell out attempt, and won't help devs doing any better.

orderofthestick
20th May 2009, 21:26
Well that's my first post, but since I've heard about the announcement of Thief 4 while playing Thief: Deadly Shadows a fifth time or so, I thought it would be logical to start by implicating the points that I find a little bit restricting in TDS. Here we go :

MORE SPACE, FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND ACCESSIBILITY
* One of the things that I felt I missed in the old games is bigger maps. Especially city maps are quite tiny..
* I also don't feel so good, when the "thief's highway" in the Old Quarter consists of a few "must go this way" routes. The map limits can be extended to include every roof and wall.. Please keep in mind that a character that can climb walls can easily walk over some triangle shaped roof. I personally don't like it when Garrett has to share the same old means of transportation with everyone else.

MUCH MORE ADVANCED AI
* The brand essence of Thief is secrecy and sharpness. This is the idea that seperates Thief series from the others. But most of the time AI just ruins this "uuu that's really clever of me" feeling. A few more patrolling or searching skills must be integrated in the game for every character (City Watch, Hammerites, Pagans etc). For example, a guard can take the initiative to ask his friend to come to his search (he may just talk, he needn't to run and ask for help, it can add more reality) and search a room in a more "sweeping" manner. If they find out that some loots are missing, ask for additional guards to stand in front of that section etc...Its kind a boring to watch every man do the same thing, give up after some time and then return to duty as if nothing has happened (like one of his friend is killed) and let us club them...briefly, MAKE OUR JOB TOUGHER!
* And they definitely must light the blown out torches up! What sort of a guard tries to patrol in darkness?

CROSSBOW??
* A good upgrade in the arsenal can be the addition of the crossbow. If it can shoot rope arrows I'd be extremely grateful :) Some rope climbing in horizontal direction would be awesome..(like I can shoot a crossbow to the roof of the other building and by anchoring the other end of the rope to my roof, I could climb from building to building over the street when the guards below are searching for me on the street).

KEEP THE MYSTIC ELEMENTS
* Mystic and original elements like magic, glyphs (or are they totally destroyed?), fire arrows, water arrows, gas arrows and zombies add some action to the game. Its guite logical to keep these mostly unchanged.

THE STORYLINE
* Whatever the new additions you make, please don't forget that the story line really matters to the Thief fans. I personally wonder how it will be connected to the Deadly Shadows's end, and I really would like to hear something fascinating after all these years. I know its hard, with all those people having expectations at the size of a mountain, but I hope you pay the adequate amount of attention to the storyline...

Thats all I could advise for now, hope it helps the Development Team a bit. ;)

Psychomorph
20th May 2009, 21:47
I can clearly see that the first two Thief games had many aspects done better than the third Thief installament, but all in all, personally I experienced many (way to many) frustrations in Thief 1 and 2, some caused me to stop playing for several weeks(!), like it was the case with Thief 2.

The clumsy movement got me some frustrations, when I wanted to somehow climb on a ledge of an open window and instead Garrett jumped making a loud sound with his step dancing shoes, many things didn't work well in T1&2. In T3 I don't even remember such moments, while T1&2 was better in many ways, it was T3 that gave me (personally) a 100% immersive and satisfied experience, it was such a blast that I still consider it beeing the best gaming experience I ever had.

So, when we start a Thief 3 bashing thread (I know, it is meant in a constructive way and I see it as that), why not to make the same with Thief 1&2? Oh, I will indirectly do, actually (when I get all my suggestions put in words).


However, don't get me wrong, this thread is a good one. I just think we have to be fully objective and see it as "T1,2,3 - pro vs. T1,2,3 - contra" instead of "T1,2 - pro vs. T3 - contra".

Stath MIA
21st May 2009, 00:18
DS wasn't all that bad, just not up to par with the original games. I personally enjoyed its plot as well as Thief 1 and better than TMA, but its gameplay was rather weak. I'm 100% for repairing the failings of DS for Thief 4.

BlooferLady
21st May 2009, 00:44
Back to maps:

I do agree that it is unrealistic to have every single room and toilet shown on your map. The maps should range from being very vague, to completely filled in. In TMA, in the Framed mission, you have almost every bit of info you need, and Garrett lets you know that his employer is "unusually resourceful." So we know that he doesn't always have the luxury of that level of detail.

HOWEVER. I liked having the map show me where I am. Especially in large levels like Life of the Party and Ambush. I know that, yes, in real life, you would not have a little light showing where you are on your map, but it was helpful! Call me a sissy. :)

hellwalker
21st May 2009, 02:10
I agree with most of the points, but I think glowing loot was a necessity.
Thief 1&2 levels were more lit, and the way textures were made, it was easy spotting item surface next to another items surface.

In deadly shadows it would be near impossible to spot say gold piece in some dark alcove, the glowing effect sucked I agree, but there just had to be some way to draw players attention towards activable objects. It was a correct design decision, but they needed to find some way that didn't contrast so much with the rest of the game. maybe just a little bit brighter surface when you were near an item? dunno but completely removing this effect would turn looting to 3d pixel hunting, and pixel hunting was always enough pain in the ass in 2d adventure games as it was.

oh and one more thing I missed, were the funny dying noises guards made, when you knocked them down and then dropped them to water or fire. It was said to see this little things that gave so much character and style to thief 1&2 so carelessly removed.

Skaruts
21st May 2009, 02:39
I totally agree with orderofthestick and Psychomorph (except for the weak gameplay part)


* And they definitely must light the blown out torches up! What sort of a guard tries to patrol in darkness?

:lol: it was a blast to see how stupid they were. They definitely must make characters in general more natural and smart. Having them with sense of space so they don't run against a wall untill they realise they can't run that way or running away calling for help when there's plenty of guards around them.
We could use combat skills in Thi4f also. A master thief has no excuse to not know how to wield a short sword well, but also making the enemies extremelly hard to fight with so to lead players to try and be stealthy or face the concequences.

I rly wish this next one could bring all the good stuff the others missed
with refined combat, stealth, lockpicking/ pickpocketing
having more to learn from big mouths (sidequests or so)
having greater agility to climb stuff (I rly wish he could climb without needing gloves, like anyone can)
supreme AI
bigger outdoors. Huge, if possible. I think it is nowadays without forcing ppl to buy NASA's PCs)
Lots of doors/windows to barge into, for fun or for sidequests.
a few daylight missions for some (good) reason (he could go out dressed in a keepers robe)
plenty of rooftops
Sidequests with a meaning (usually their meaning is useless to both the player and the plot)
keep the rpg thingy on it.
I think I could go on forever...

dunno about the crossbow, though... I love the bow so much...

being able to buy a rope or two and attach them to piercing arrows would be a good way of having both rope arrows and a more realistic way of having them, since having 20 rope arrows means having 20 ropes in your bag. That is a lot of space needed. Being able to recover the rope if you get close to the arrow would compensate for having just one or two.

As for the maps, I think T3 had them perfect. Pure sketches, since the places are hard to get in a make a decent map, and no stupid highlight showing you were you are. I think a peace of paper doesn't have that ability,

AND DON'T FORGET TO INCLUDE THE DRUNK GUARDS, EIDOS!!! Thief isn't thief without them.

hellwalker
21st May 2009, 04:04
big outdoors should not be much problem if done correctly, I mean Assassin's Creed gives you whole city to play with, and Tes Games 20+ square kilometers of space.

not that I would like thi4f to be a true open ended game. One of the greatest parts of thief games is detailed great level design, which will hardly be possible in open ended game.

Skaruts
21st May 2009, 04:36
Yea, that's was exactly what I was thinking of. But remember two things though:
Assassins Creed gives you huge cities and landscapes, yes, but there's almost no interiors. If there was any, it would have to render about twice the detail. 3 or 4 times more textures and models, without a good rendering control it would be reeeeealy harsh.

And another one is that you can play Assassins C with about 20-40 fps without noticing any bad performance, but that's due to the gameplay type. You just have to press buttons. In thief, you would have to look around swinging your mouse and there you'd notice the delay of low fps. Personally I think FPSs are good with more than 60 fps. I start feeling the mouse movement heavy below that.

But, still, if I had half that city, with interiors, rooftops and everything in thief, I'd be soooo happy. And even happier if there were more cities like that to go to. :D

Rahl
21st May 2009, 06:41
I think no matter how good TDS could've been it would always be a potential flaming target. Unfortunately that's how it goes in everything in life. Many ppl just can't handle a change and this happens all the time with every game, every music band, every tv show, every business company, etc...

Maybe the biggest problem is expectations. I didn't expect thief 3, I only gained the knowledge of it's existence some time after it's release. So I played and see what it had. Some ppl may have been "dreaming" for some time how good it could come up to be, according to this technology or that one, the game could come up to beat the hell outta every other game and still beat the series. When they found out that tech used wasn't state of the art (or whatever level they had in mind), the rest felt like just mere details with no great value for apreaciation.

If it wasn't this, I believe it might have been something analogous.

The same WILL happen with thief 4. And the same may have happened with thief 2: I remember being disapointed cuz it didn't have any significant advancement. It seemed just like T1, only with new missions and one or two diferent items. But since I always make the math to see if the good takes over the bad (before I say "this game is the biggest crap ever"), I loved the game anyway. The same way I loved T3.

Like I said, happens all the time. Unfortunately.

But T3 isn't bad enough to flame it and point errors. Oblivion is, T3 is not. T3 is a game that needs criticizing rather than flaming. The 1st post is a good criticizing post, even though some agressiveness is in it, and that is what I mean. Saying "I can't even understand how anyone could even like T3" comes from someone that didn't realize that it was an improvement attempt rather than a sell out attempt, and won't help devs doing any better.

I disagree, maybe it was not bad enough to flame, but it was nowhere near T1/T2. And we should indeed point out the errors, so maybe eidos wont repeat them. I think that was the intention of the original poster.

Regarding expectations, i did except thief 2 to be good, after thief 1 and it was. Unfortunately T3 wasnt. And its not about changes, its about bad changes.

WVI
21st May 2009, 06:53
That...post doesn't tell us much of anything, Rahl. >_>

Rahl
21st May 2009, 07:09
That...post doesn't tell us much of anything, Rahl. >_>

I meant, that most of the changes ion made were bad. Like the removing of the rope arrow, the arrow trails, the straightforward missions, inmission loading screens with the blue mist for the sake of xbox, loot changes, 3rd person view, etc.

And dont get me wrong i did like some aspects of the game, for example i liked the story, and the cradle.

Matuzzz
21st May 2009, 10:31
I meant, that most of the changes ion made were bad. Like the removing of the rope arrow, the arrow trails, the straightforward missions, inmission loading screens with the blue mist for the sake of xbox, loot changes, 3rd person view, etc.

And dont get me wrong i did like some aspects of the game, for example i liked the story, and the cradle.

I think the worst decision were steam robots from T2. It absolutly broke any tension and atmosphere. It is far more bad decision than disabling swimming or loot changing. But I liked the game. And simply accept it with them.

That is what Skaruts mean. ANY change would be bad. Everything they changed you considered as bad. And things you liked about it didnt involve gameplay. And you liked Thief 2 because it was Thief 1 with new maps, enemies, items etc...

Psychomorph
21st May 2009, 13:20
I think the worst decision were steam robots from T2. It absolutly broke any tension and atmosphere.
Haha, I can only agree, I hated these metal beasts with passion, a total killer for me. The metal faces were also very annoying (and easier to trick than human guards), generally I disliked everything about the mechanists and disliked most of the mechanist missions, I only kept playing because I knew there would be also good missions in Thief2, else I probably would have quit playing. :(

---------------


Ok. One thing I realiszed in games is, that features aone do not make a good game. The Rainbow Six franchise is the best example. Rainbow Six 3 was a game that was critizised by the old schoolers (it is literally the Thief 3 of the R6 franchise). During the developement of the sequel (R6: Lockdown) the devs asked the community what they wanted in that game (through a community mager, so it's like God speaks to you through Engel Gabriel... whatever...) and most people, of course, suggested features from the original games.
Result was a game that infact incorporated many original features, but... the game was bad, really bad (even worse than the disliked 3rd title of the series), it was a tactically linear game where you had to tactically mow down everything in your tactical way. What the game succeeded in is to lose the essence of the franchise, it's spirit and now the R6 community hails the once disliked 3rd title as the last true Rainbow Six game.

...my conclusion is, that if we will get a "Thi4f: Lockdown", you haters will kneel down and kiss Thief3's feet. :D ...

However, my point is, that what matters is the essence of a franchise, the so called spirit, Thief3 leaked in many ways, but it succeeded at the most essencial (I believe) and that must be the sole focus dealing with the fourth Thief installament and honestly, that is my main concearn. They may implement all the T1&2 features we are asking for, but they can eventually forget about the spirit.
It is an industry with the purpose of making business and if that means selling Thief's soul, than it will be sold... cheap.

But I hope the best.

*
*

ThePacifist
21st May 2009, 14:43
Arrrrggggghhhhhh! TDS was such a lame attempt and there are people here who are actually defending it.
:

because while it had it's problems, it still had moments of pure inspiration (The Cradle for example, and even the Overlook Manse was as atmospheric as any level in Thief history). Yes, The Cradle would have been better as a mission in Thief 1 or 2 (maybe, the graphics engine was archaic even by 1998 standards) but I really liked TDS and am glad it was made, problems and all.

Drackulis
21st May 2009, 15:34
only 2 things:

1- Thief 3 didn't have good graphics??? o ma god!!

2- Boring to wait? That's what the game is about. Taking time, making your strike at the perfect time, lurking, watching them as they are unaware that you are about to decide their fates: blackjack, stab in the back, or simply let loose.

But since you speak of that, one major improvement I noticed in DS was that guards wouldn't stay looking for you for all eternity, as happened in DP and MA. That made the game more real in a way, and less painfull to comit mistakes. I think I went up to the end of the game with some mistakes, but all in one go, except for in the cradle, where I had to load it again a few times.
;)

Now, to everyone that is talking like "DS was crap, DP and MA were perfection", I tell you this:
I had my doubts about both DP and MA when I played them. Many aspects rly got me disapointed at the time, I even skiped some of the last missions in DP cuz I thought they were stupid as hell. But in the overall I loved them cuz they put me in the part of a thief in FPS, and in a very fun way. Also the conspiracies that made the plot caught my attention in the good way.
Same happened to me in DS, except it had no stupid missions. I had a better time playing this game than I had in DP, maybe not as good as in MA, but still had rly rly good time with this one.
None of them was perfect, and all of them were good and fun. Imo, thief 3 was much better in terms of movement, graphics, and realism. And some stuff I can't remember anymore.

Does anyone ever gonna mention that water arrows are a bit questionable too, in terms of realism? Or is everyone just pointing out things they would do otherwise and leaving some unrealistic/questionable stuff forgotten just because?

I ask this cuz many ppl here sounds like those metallica fans when they let out their black album. They just said it sucked because it was diferent (tho not that much). Not that they had actually listened to it.

Man, I said that thief 3 did not have bad graphicks at all.:o
The second thing is(when I think about it) very reasonable actually.:scratch:

Skaruts
21st May 2009, 15:53
Man, I said that thief 3 did not have bad graphicks at all.:o
The second thing is(when I think about it) very reasonable actually.:scratch:
lol
Sry man I missinterpreted it. ;)

I agree with Rahl about the loading zones. It was a big mistake, at least the way it was made. The myst should be a subtle way of telling the player that a map boundarie is there, but it failed in subtlety big time. But it's not that big of a mistake that ruins the whole game up. PS3 and Xbox are making the devs work harder and harder every year and that is the big problem. They have to write code for this console and code for the other one, make changes here and there so it fits in that console, and the same again so it fits the other one, and they loose considerable amounts of precious time and money in stupid compatibility issues that microsoft and sony should be taking care of. (or should've taken care of in the 1st place)

As for the ropes it was a restriction they had. But one thing is true as Gman sais in his 1st post: They could've delayed the release for another year and try to make some more things happen.

But the big problem goes to the gaming industry again: adding to the consoles problem you got the budgets problems. Mostly they are forced to come out with whatever they got cuz dev time and money runs out, and that ruins a lot of games. It even makes me wonder if that wasn't what happened with Oblivion which came to be a total waste of time and resources. (and money for who bought it)

That said, I usually don't blame the devs, and mostly I try to see if it's rly worth playing. And I found T3 worth playing. But I say this again, I had to do the same with 1 and 2. I skipped the monsters and trickster missions in T1 cuz I disagreed with them (thought they were stupid).
And as for T2, there were no improvements. I definitely hated those robots. Geez... I loved the bank mission a lot, but those robots... they just weren't medievil... I even wondered about stop playing it but I didn't.
And they were both worth playing.

In all this, I think the most important thing we should ask Eidos Montreal is to give the devs the time and resources needed so they can get to give a big step forward in the series. And leave the consoles for when they have spare time.

GmanPro
21st May 2009, 17:18
I loved those robots :p

They added more to the gameplay. With them, you now have to worry about enemies that you cannot beat in a sword duel or knock out with the blackjack or with gas arrows/mines. But you can take them out with water arrows, which become more valuable as a result.

They definitely added a lot to the gameplay and made you rethink your strategy if you ran into them. I missed them in TDS. The cameras especially

Matuzzz
21st May 2009, 17:23
I loved those robots :p

They added more to the gameplay. With them, you now have to worry about enemies that you cannot beat in a sword duel or knock out with the blackjack or with gas arrows/mines. But you can take them out with water arrows, which become more valuable as a result.

They definitely added a lot to the gameplay and made you rethink your strategy if you ran into them. I missed them in TDS. The cameras especially
You COULD destroy them with mine. I always bought every mine because of them. And you could destroy them with fire arrow as well. One exact hit into his...center heart or what was that red thing.

Skaruts
21st May 2009, 17:26
I loved those robots :p

They definitely added a lot to the gameplay and made you rethink your strategy if you ran into them.

Definitely true. ;) Even though I didn't like them much, I liked the dificulty they provided. Maybe that was why I loved the bank mission so much. Can't remember well enough...

GmanPro
21st May 2009, 17:30
I always wondered why they didn't put a better vent over their 'furnace'

Those robots looked kinda weird to me at first. But after a time, I got used to them. And now, I really appreciate the art style. TMA had some great themes going for it


You COULD destroy them with mine.

But not gas mines.

ToMegaTherion
21st May 2009, 17:30
You can defeat the robots with the blackjack as well, it is not too difficult, but noisy and you usually lose some health.

Tom Pladgett
22nd May 2009, 01:47
Here's my input as an old school taffer (played through all the three previous games multiple times, and even made a few custom missions for T:TDP).

Deadly Shadows was in many ways a hit-and-miss affair. The story was quite good, actually, with a few less-than-Chekhovian plot twists (like Garrett having a moronic epiphany to break into a clock tower due to a vague prophecy about 'time standing still' - and turning out to be right on the money. Sigh). Of particular note were the splendid little mini-stories implied in some of the individual missions. You know which missions I'm referring to.

On the other hand, the mythology and overall atmosphere somewhat resembled a theme-park version of what we had seen in the previous games. As just one example, the Hammers and the Pagans were reduced down to a chivalric order of technophiles having a largely non-violent grudge against magic-wielding nature hippies who talk funny. As portrayed in the first two games, the Hammerites were insane religious fanatics, who only allied with Garrett because that was the only way to defeat the Trickster. The Pagans were unhinged animistic worshippers of eldritch horrors, who only helped Garrett to stop Karras' omnicidal plan. Having them as factions who Garrett could actually be on friendly terms with did not ring true to me.

The living city concept was a noble idea, hadn't it been for the epic fail in the AI's behaviour. Towards the end of the game, the open cityscape was invariably a chaotic circus of the macabre, with Hammers, city guards, neutrals and Keeper assassins running amok, often attacking people ostensibly on their side for no immediately obvious reason. The world's economics were royally skewed, with gold having no practical purpose after the first few missions. And why has the world's greatest thief suddenly become the city's number one celebrity, recognized by sight wherever he goes?

The third-person perspective was a problem. As mentioned above, it did degrade first-person gameplay, and being able to see around corners thanks to the camera floating three meters away from you is a tad cheap. That said, if T4 is to have a third-person view, as long as it's implemented well and is optional, I won't mind.

Actually, a lot of the problems in Deadly Shadows were fairly excusable. While the rope arrow was a much cooler tool to use gameplay-wise than the lame velcro gloves, I did lose count of how many times I got immobilized between ceiling timbers or was mysteriously catapulted to oblivion when jumping off one in TDP and TMA. Quality control hates that kind of stuff, so I assume that was the main reason they were dropped. Still, I'm sincerely hoping that Eidos has a crack squad of pencilnecks slaving away in a lightless underground lab working out the technological kinks from the rope arrows for T4. Dudes, this will be a selling point. Reviewers will praise it (if it works). You can even put a special mention on the back of the box! An entire E3 stand dedicated to suspended cord dynamics demos!

A lot of the issues, like the loading zones, were naturally caused by the increase in graphical detail overwhelming the capabilities of the original Xbox. I believe a lot of it can be corrected by the simple fact of having a next-gen development platform (or should we finally be calling it the current-gen?). Lots of recent games are having endless gorgeous detail landscapes streaming off the disc without loading pauses.

So, in the end, even though I've been a loyal and ardent taffer from the start, Deadly Shadows was still enjoyable for me, even with its issues. It wasn't the mind-blowing journey through the dark underbelly of a pseudo-medieval/Victorian era fantasy city that the first two games were, but neither was it a failure by my standards. It was simply a tasty tuna salad sandwich following two slices of fried gold.

Skaruts
22nd May 2009, 05:11
being able to see around corners thanks to the camera floating three meters away from you is a tad cheap.
That's the main reason why I refuse to play in 3rd person, and one of the reasons I hate playing 3rd person games in general.

Nice post. I didn't remember that skirmish of hammerites, city watch and everyone else at the end. And garret rly goes from thief to neighborhood superstar.

"To see a keeper is not an easy thing. Especially one that does not wish to be seen."

Much truth in your post.

GmanPro
22nd May 2009, 05:17
That's one of the reasons why I think placing Thief 4 somewhere in between Thief 2 and 3 would make sense. As a way to explain why Garrett is recognized by everyone.

While I usually don't like third person games, I feel I should point out that Kotor 1 and 2 were both awesome. And the Infinity engine games were near perfection, though they weren't really third person as it is commonly known, but isometric top-down. Technically still third person.

Drackulis
22nd May 2009, 09:38
[QUOTE=Skaruts;999514]lol
Sry man I missinterpreted it. ;)
QUOTE]

Is Ok :thumb::)

Garrett2727
22nd May 2009, 09:41
I agree with major most of suggestions/questions by GmanPro.

After all, devs, please don't forget that Thief 4 should be more about practicing the thievering at different places than L4D/Splinter Cell/etc -related zombie-hunting.
Of course with alot of mythic and sometimes hardly recognizable background storyline (by "hardly recognizable" I mean cryptic artifacts found by Garrett for example..) - since we really will NOT have to understand 100% of everything that can happen in the City/Outside.

And Stephen Russell's voice def should be there!

Garrett2727
22nd May 2009, 09:43
Also I really hope Garrett will have one of main roles, even if the 3rd ended like it did..

Skaruts
22nd May 2009, 10:56
One thought I had right now that I definitely would like thief 4 to include is more involving missions like that one in T1 (can't remember the name of it) in which 2 guys try to kill Garret and then you must follow them to their master and rob the whole place up.
That mission was a total blast for me. I played it in the demo, before having the game, about 20 times lol.

Missions where you get that touch of unpredictable, deviation from the plot and from the usual deeds is much entertaining and can be most interesting. Especially when they turn the plot around.

Damn I gotta get my T1 back. Shouldn't have borrowed it...

vasanx
22nd May 2009, 11:56
of course there were zombies. but not as much as in TDP

Haha. You're right. Me and my rusty memory again.

But here's how I salvage that argument. Less zombies to fight in TDS ergo, don't miss the longsword as much. There. I think that works.

Kaermes
22nd May 2009, 12:17
Just posting my 2 cents here...

There seems to be all the good points made out here already concerning like all the three games, so I'm pointing out some of my opinions briefly.

Pros (about DS):
-Story, or more precisely, the plot; I was surprised more than once during the game and some kickass cutscenes made me stare the screen in awe
-Cradle, nothing to add here
-Living city, shopping and such
-Feeling of living back in Thief world. Factions lacked the edge this time though
-Graphics were fine and good for that time, I liked them.
-Lack of those moronic zombies \o/ An undead or two can be really scary in a tomb, but masses of them? Nooooo... (and burrichs too, come on, burping dinosaurs?)

Cons:
-The AI, oh why are the guards just soooo dumb? It's long time ago I played DS through, but I can remember some things that just shouldn't have been so. Like in museum, I got caught at some point and started running away, and after many doors and running I had like 6 or more guards on my back - I threw one gas bomb, all went asleep. It shouldn't just be so easy, getting every guard pass out with one lousy bomb. I could rob the place in peace and I didn't even kill anyone. I don't want immortal and unbeatable guards - I just want them to be more scary, and not just running on my back and shouting some stupid, never reaching me, never trying to split or trap me or anything. And I also hate it when they wander around in the same routes, never changing. Why don't they change routes, go to talk to their mates, go to eat or do something else? No real life guards just wander around mindlessly in same route - especially if they have seen someone who shouldn't be there, but who disappeared...
-Living city, though it was rediculously small with little options to rob same houses again and again. In cutscenes and previous games it is HUGE, so why do we stroll so minimal area in the game? How is it living if only a handful of people habit it? And avoiding the guards in some areas was just too annoying, like, in real medieval city, are there guards in every street? They couldn't have afforded so much people to nightwatches - make it more free to wander around! And more like, there should have been very few walkers around, because it is very dangerous to wander in a dark city at nights. It would be great if you could just rob the town during nights, when no-one is around. Living time would be fun too, it isn't night all the time and even during night there are differences in how the city lives. Well this is quite lot to ask for developers, but just make it more believelable.
-Gloves/Rope arrow gone missing, 3d person view, lack of sword etc.
-Gargoyles, well they were very scary in the cutscene and had kickass voices, but they were just guards little harder to beat. Why their behavior was so idiotic and totally similar? I never had fear of getting bumped into them. Robots from T2 were much more creepy.
-Some cutscenes, especially the 3d ones... No. Thief cutscenes were art in the two first games. And the change of style, I didn't like the face of Garret at all in the final cutscene, he looked way too young and stupid :D
-Somehow I didn't like the Keepers coming as an ally, or a place you can visit. All the secrecy was stripped away and seeing them as quite as normal people was very depressing. And those telepathic assassins? Oh god.

Even so, DS was a good game, even with it's failures.

vasanx
22nd May 2009, 12:27
I guess I think that the reasons why we enjoy a certain game are usually very hard to really pin down, and by listing pros and cons we construct an illusion of understanding... but we don't really understand. And then we try to make decisions based on this illusionary understanding, and it doesn't really lead anywhere useful.

I'm not saying that it isn't worthwhile to consider what we like and what we don't like. But we should be fairly cautious about things we say, and be very cautious about thinking we can easily identify the mysterious quality that makes great games great,

Whoa. That's deep man. And I'm not bein sarcastic at all by the way.

Caution is always good.

Fraz
22nd May 2009, 15:54
I have some general suggestions that cover my experience from all the previous titles finished at least two times each (and TDP 7 or 8 times at least YES IT IS THAT GOOD)


Good Strong Story that lefts a lasting impression ... THAT LEFTS a LASTING IMPRESSION long enough that we talk about it like we are now about TDP
Story complemented by artistic unique and compelling cutscenes (not easy at all you need an artist like Garret himself ;))
Fairly long missions ... no short and easy stuff ... remember many people were unable to pass the third level "Down in the bonehoard" in TDP but the challenge and horror in it was what made it good.
I loved missions with human life and stealing from the lords but i did not enjoyed later part as much with full of magic and unrealistic creatures as compared to some initial missions in TDP so i would suggest not over do magic and freaky creatures KEEP a balance.
All weapons of TDP should be there in T4 ... i did not like unrealistic stuff like spying ORB in Thief 2 ... just include all the weapons of TDP
First person or Third person view as long as the First person is as good as it was in TDP.
hire the orginal voice actor that did it for TDP ... we need the voice of Garret.
AI should be good ... it was not good in TDS


Thats it for now ... i will come up with more later ...

Skaruts
22nd May 2009, 16:37
I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...

Matuzzz
22nd May 2009, 19:01
I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...
Foremost I didnt like nonhuman enemies too, but when I replayed TDP few times, I begin to like them. Constantine idea was good(well, I hated those apes or what was it and those green things that were launching sworms of bees)...but ghosts and zombies in appropriate numbers are fine. Robots were really annoying as I said before. Nonhuman enemies which I liked and gave me creeps were those patients from cradle. Exact like from some horror movie.

Skaruts
22nd May 2009, 19:30
The only non-humans I liked in TDP were ghosts (not sure if TMA had them).
In DS I liked them all, though. But like I said before, ghosts can be scarier. Zombies are a bit overused and they don't rly get the heart pounding. They can die, ghosts can't (or shouldn't).

WVI
22nd May 2009, 21:25
AI should be good ... it was not good in TDS

Look, to be perfectly honest, you're nuts if you think it was good in ANY Thief game. Nevermind that DS's is actually better. I should go back to a certain TMA mission and FRAPS a certain guy to prove what I'm talking about.

Psychomorph
22nd May 2009, 22:09
Ghosts were good.

Matuzzz
22nd May 2009, 22:16
Look, to be perfectly honest, you're nuts if you think it was good in ANY Thief game. Nevermind that DS's is actually better. I should go back to a certain TMA mission and FRAPS a certain guy to prove what I'm talking about.
That´s right...do you remember that in T1 and 2, they almost every time went after you when they were in search mode? Straight to my position no matter how far from the place I was.

Psychomorph
22nd May 2009, 22:19
I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...

I see it almost exactly like that. In fact, the missions that gave me the most thrill were the simple and normal thievery missions, like Baffort's Manor, Ramires Manor, especially the Mansion of the Widow in Thief 3 (forgot how called), Thief's Highway, also especially the Theater mission in T2.
The regular human sword and bow carriers were always my most favourite kind of enemies.
I absolutely LOVED the parts where the Thief games had something like a crime story, where you uncover curruptions by reading letters that were not meant to be read by any outsider, awesome, and I loved Garrett's comments on what he found out, sarcastic and ironic, priceless.
I also rather disliked the fantasy tools, I only used the regular (real) weapons, never used any of the "slow falling" and "invisibility" potions and hope not to see them in Thief4.

What I personally want is an organic world, buildings made of stone and wood, fire and moonlight to enlight the dark. I would prefer T4 to focus more on the medieval aspect, no freaks, no robots. As much as you hated the Pagans, as much I hated the Mechanists and every mission that had to do with them (kinda accept the Hammerites, they are more like a religious order, less like technofreaks).

As for Pagans, I generally kinda like ancient paganism and occultism, the magical and mystical, so I enjoyed the paranormal events in the Thief games and also liked the Pagans (Thief3's story about the witch was pretty nice). I only hope to see the Pagans less freaky and shiny, but more creepy, gloomy, mystical and occultic, as you can nicely see in some of Thief3's cutscenes.


Well, that's just my personal view on things.



That´s right...do you remember that in T1 and 2, they almost every time went after you when they were in search mode? Straight to my position no matter how far from the place I was.
That annoyed the freaking hell out of me, every time.


AI should be good ... it was not good in TDS
AI in Thief3 worked mostly better for me, than it did in the previous Thief games.

Matuzzz
22nd May 2009, 22:25
The only non-humans I liked in TDP were ghosts (not sure if TMA had them).
In DS I liked them all, though. But like I said before, ghosts can be scarier. Zombies are a bit overused and they don't rly get the heart pounding. They can die, ghosts can't (or shouldn't).
The only ghosts in TMA were no enemies. In Trail of Blood mission. And do you remember the map(I can´t remember the name) where you found secret library with that crying woman ghost? Oh man, she was not enemy, but I was scared as hell. One of very few places in TMA where i was frightened.

Fraz
22nd May 2009, 23:14
Look, to be perfectly honest, you're nuts if you think it was good in ANY Thief game. Nevermind that DS's is actually better. I should go back to a certain TMA mission and FRAPS a certain guy to prove what I'm talking about.

To me AI was not good in view the time it was released (i.e. 2004) why u r comparing it with Thief 1 or 2 1999 or 2000 ... u surely don't have any brain ... it was not good especially stealth; There were number of incidents when enemy characters were unable to spot Garret when it was visible ... On the other hand imo TDP (not TMA) was good in every sense at the time it was released ...

Psychomorph
22nd May 2009, 23:22
You heared that Matuzzz? You don't have any brain.

:lmao:

Matuzzz
22nd May 2009, 23:26
Aha! I knew that! :scratch: :D

WVI
22nd May 2009, 23:45
To me AI was not good in view the time it was released (i.e. 2004) why u r comparing it with Thief 1 or 2 1999 or 2000 ... u surely don't have any brain ... it was not good especially stealth; There were number of incidents when enemy characters were unable to spot Garret when it was visible ... On the other hand imo TDP (not TMA) was good in every sense at the time it was released ...

Oh snap, I just got owned by a second-grader. I surely don't have any brain.

Anyway, since this post is basically one relatively big "no u", I'll just say I was talking about the AI in general, not just with respect to when they came out. I don't see why it's even relevant, really. If I'm playing a game, I don't care when it came out. If I'm enjoying it, I'm enjoying it. I didn't just finish another level in TMA to go "Wow, that sure was great in 2000!".

Matuzzz
22nd May 2009, 23:54
Oh snap, I just got owned by a second-grader. I surely don't have any brain.

Guys, you should calm down and stop arguing because of such banality. I think Fraz doesn´t speak naturally english, nor do I.

WVI
22nd May 2009, 23:57
I didn't mean to sound bitter - I was being a jackass, but not with any serious overtones. It's facetious.

dnoeyen
23rd May 2009, 10:16
I really agree with the first post, but I think the guards voice acting shouldn't be forgotten.
It really makes it so much better when the guards are talking about whatever subject that actually makes sence and relates to the story.
For example, you are seen and you hop back in the shadow, the guard sometimes say "DON'T THINK YOU CAN JUST HOP BACK IN THE SHADOWS BOY!", thats just one of the things that made the game so bloody brilliant.

Skaruts
23rd May 2009, 10:23
yea, that and the drunk guards. They we hilarious in TDS. I'm still trying to remember what one of them said... some thing like "I'm a meeeaan [gibrish with a mix of coughing] ..." I rly can't remember the rest... :confused: he was like trying to scare me. :p

I remember one interesting thing in TMA that made me feel like I was in a rly living world. I think it was in the 2nd mission in the warehouses. There was this guy and a lady I found occasionally and I stood hearing their conversation. While I thought it would be over in a minute, it lasted like roughly 5 minutes. They just kept talking and talking about their lives... That made me feel (again) that satisfaction I want games to give me. :rolleyes:

dnoeyen
23rd May 2009, 10:24
I really agree with the first post, but I think the guards voice acting shouldn't be forgotten.
It really makes it so much better when the guards are talking about whatever subject that actually makes sence and relates to the story.
For example, you are seen and you hop back in the shadow, the guard sometimes say "DON'T THINK YOU CAN JUST HOP BACK IN THE SHADOWS BOY!", thats just one of the things that made the game so bloody brilliant.

It creates a feeling of being very close to the guards when you can hear them mumble something to themselves, or you can hear them talking about their lives and their wives.
It adds to the sneakyness and to the tention of don't getting caught.
(as does the music)
So I think the audio part of the game should be very solid.

dnoeyen
23rd May 2009, 10:26
yea, that and the drunk guards. They we hilarious in TDS. I'm still trying to remember what one of them said... some thing like "I'm a meeeaan [gibrish with a mix of coughing] ..." I rly can't remember the rest... :confused:

I remember one interesting thing in TMA that made me feel like I was in a rly living world. I think it was in the 2nd mission in the warehouses. There was this guy and a lady I found occasionally and I stood hearing their conversation. While I thought it would be over in a minute, it lasted like roughly 5 minutes. They just kept talking and talking. That made me feel (again) the game was something else. :rolleyes:

Yeah, thats what I mean

Skaruts
23rd May 2009, 10:36
It creates a feeling of being very close to the guards when you can hear them mumble something to themselves, or you can hear them talking about their lives and their wives.
It adds to the sneakyness and to the tention of don't getting caught.
(as does the music)
So I think the audio part of the game should be very solid.

Exactly. And it also adds to the sense of reality and imersion. Like, they're not just a skirmish of poligons covered by a bitmap, instead you get the feeling that they're just some regular guys on their everyday tiredsome duty to earn money that isn't enough for a good life, and on top of that their wives cook badly, their cousin jacob comes by for a visit and they couldn't get a day off to be with him, cuz the boss was in bad mood today... one of their coleagues that had a promotion a few days ago was fired yesterday because of that bad mood.... EDIT: and he sais that, btw, some taffer went into his house last night and robbed his medalion that had been a gift from his mother (which happened to be garret on passing by)...

It all just sums up on a very positively involving and humorous way. ;)

huzi73
23rd May 2009, 12:15
I just skiped the magic and creatures missions... (Ctrl+alt+end), didn't enjoy them not even a bit. Including the trickster. Nor did I enjoy the unrealistic gadjets too. I hardly ever used them, except for the water arrows and rope arrows (I found, and still find, these unrealistic too, but in a more acceptable way. I didn't like the pagans much aswell, in DS.

Even though I embrace this game with heart since the very beggining, when I 1st played TDP, upon reaching certain missions, I began to wish the world around would be more realistic, and I wished it would be made in future sequels. It never came to be such. But I certainly had complete despise for most of these surreal things all the way...

I wouldn't ask Eidos to make the game that way, since many fans probly enjoyed it the way it is, but I'd ask them to justify these stuff in some realistic way. Fantasy tastes good, but only if it can fit in the real human notions of logic.
And thats why I didn't buy the robots in TMA, awell as other sufisticated gadgets, it doesn't fit in medievil times imo. Why would garret still be using a blackjack and a sword if the builders had such sufisticated means at the worlds disposal?

And, please, don't repeat the pseudo-factions thing,.. it just doesn't feel right...

While I agree with your arguement on realism,look at it this way,if you had 2 play through 12-15 missions,with only humans in them,you'd probably be bored by the 5th mission or so,thinking to yourself,oh yawn,more of the same.up until the 8th mission,TDP had me playing it for the sake of it being different.I mean ok,there were a couple types of undead,humans,a burrick or two and hey!What a surprise!a few Craymen!but from the cut scene in which Constantine reveals his true form,I was totally hooked.Now the game became less medieval/steampunk and much more dark fantasy.Thief 2 was more victorian for the 1st half,and then over the top steampunk for the rest.TDS was a watered down version of TDP imo,with the chaos reserved for the last mission.I too love a few well planned Mansions/banks/museums etc.But constantly going up against humans without a break from the realistic setting can get quite tedious.(the first games that come to my mind are hitman and splinter cell.which were both not primarily action games,and focused more on stealth.And both bored me to death)sure,good games have been made using realism,but the immediate ones that come to mind are either wwll shooters or cod4.and those are basically run and gun action.I personally would love to see Thi4f being a mix of TDP & TMA,featuring a balance of undead/haunted/pagan/chaos/creature/human/castle/mansion/bank/mechanist/techo/steampunk.not just one or 2 ''non human'' missions,but rather a fine mix of each.
I know many will agree/disagree,but this is purely my preference.

Skaruts
23rd May 2009, 16:36
I didn't say the game should only include humans. I didn't mind the zombies and I loved the ghosts. I agree with that of trying to make a game less tedious and repetitive, which they actually worked around well. But the Apebeasts,Bugbeasts, Frogbeasts and even the Trickster's just seemed out of that world. I didn't like them for both not having an imediate clue of how to kill them (died many times before I understood how, when I did) and for thinking that it was a step too far out from the limits.

Kinda like the pagans in DS, like Psychomorph said, they were too freaky and shiny. In the case of TDP's monsters and the levels they were in, I felt like playing Alice in Wonderland, or even McGee's Alice. Just felt totally out of place.

I prefered the freaky and shiny pagans in DS to that.

BlooferLady
23rd May 2009, 17:07
I'm going to have to argue for the strange creatures. I hate having to work my way around the undead. Just... not a fan. TMA was a breath of fresh air for me for that specific reason. I personally don't have a problem with any of the opponents in the game, as long as there is a variety. TDS was very undead-heavy to me, so when all I had to contend with were bugbeasts, I was a very happy tafferette.

If you don't like the fantasy creatures, what did you think of the Kurshok and the ratmen in the sunken citadel?

Skaruts
23rd May 2009, 18:01
They had a certain style. I kinda liked them. The only thing I disliked (but that was a general problem) was their AI. Their voices were nice aswell.
In DS I liked everything in this matter. Just not the pagans that much.

The rats certainly fit into any medievil story. Whatever their size. :p

GmanPro
23rd May 2009, 19:34
I would prefer less crazy monsters and more humans/robots

Ice1019
24th May 2009, 05:16
I would prefer less crazy monsters and more humans/robots

Totally. I'm not quite sure why, but sneaking past guards and Karras' Children seemed cooler than all the monsters from the first game. I think part of it was how the guards could occasionally hint at a plot point, or a key to beating the mission, or just something funny. It made the world seem more alive.

vasanx
24th May 2009, 05:23
Everybody here complain about a LOOOOT of cons about TDS. Okey, you couldnt swim,there were less items to obtain,different movement...but such great ideas in making levels and such nice architecture is more important to me. And of course shadows, which was thing that this game missed. I dont think TDS changes too much from his predecessors. It maintain its spirit.

I'm sorry but I would not never put the words 'maintain' and 'TDS' in the same sentence. TDS had its moments with its level and what not but that is not enough to counter all the stuff it did manage to screw up.

You're right. Everybody did complain too much in a thread titled, 'What was wrong with TDS you may ask?'

As promised, I replayed TDS. I wanted to be more fair I guess, both to IS and the two TDS fans here so, here is the list of things I noted during my playthrough.

And just to shake things up, I'll be startin with the Pros. But even the Pros could use some work so, go figure.


PROS

1. Lockpicking.

Loved the hand animation and all. Sadly, it wasn't as immersive as it could've been because we could see the insides of the lock. I want to find the sweet spot just by listening for it. Plus, it got to be a bit too easy because your right hand kept goin up whenever it hits the sweet spot and you can Right-click to speed up the lockpicking. Not a lot of tension there.

2. Body Awareness

This was done nicely. It was always weird in TDP and TMA to look down and not see your lower extremities.

But the thing about Body Awareness, the player becomes aware. Like really aware. Where is my Climbing Gloves when I'm climbing? I remember seeing and buying something that looked like a baseball glove at Undercurrent.

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/4136/glove1.jpg (http://img34.imageshack.us/my.php?image=glove1.jpg)


3. Wall hugging

I liked this actually. But its weird when you wall hug and a guard can't see you when he's like 3 inches away from you. In TDP it doesn't matter how dark it is, if the guard comes close enough he will spot you because the eyes adjusts and you will be noticeable.

But in TDS Garrett's a freakin' chameleon!

4. Guards didn't ignore door to their room being opened.

It was always odd in TDP and TMA when the door creaks open and the guard will be like, "Hello, anyone there?" and that's it.(There. I just criticized TDP and TMA.)

5. Oil flask

Loved seeing them guards slip. But for some reason when I use it on a staircase, the guards would only slip a few steps. Shouldn't they be rolling down the stairs?

6. Candlestick.

This was a nice touch but again it's plagues by inconsistency. You can extinguish candlesticks on tables but not those mounted on walls? Why?

7. Dagger

I like the dagger actually. But too bad they had to remove the longsword to include it. And if you're gonna replace something, why don't you replace it completely?

What happened to the 'hold the mouse and Garrett pulls back for extra oomph swing' ?
I missed Garrett's grunt (in a very non-homosexual way I might add)

CONS

This is gonna be quite a list. I advise coffee breaks in between.

1. Guards Banned from Shops

How is it that the guards can chase you everywhere in the city but not into the shops? They just wait outside for you. Is it because they don't have a warrant?

2. Torch

I don't know bout you but I find this extremely irritating. Some torches require more than a few water arrows to extinguish it. Is there like a sweet spot in the flame too? Just die already.

3. AI

This is the first mission. I'm at the Castle front yard and I was spotted. So, I ran up the ladder on my left and the next thing I know, there's a guard conference happening near the ladder's foot.

Two things to note. One, guards can't climb ladders. Really? How hard can it be?

Two, they have a death wish. There I was in Legolas mode and them guards just stand there. Some don't even look up. They go into the 'Come out, Come out wherever you are' mode.

Either give them a shield already or jack up their IQ.

4. Parrying

Thanks to the removal of the longsword, guard confrontation has been reduced to 'Let's stab each other as quickly as possible and see who bleeds out first'

That's why we hate the dagger. Not because it is a dagger but because we miss the brilliant swordplay from TDP and TMA.

There's nothing like hearing that sickening metal screeching sound you get when you successfully block a swing. None of that in TDS.

5. Hiding the Body

I've yet to read bout this but I could've missed it. In TDS, it's hard to chuck a body. You gotta be at the right distance, angle and elevation or some ***** before you can get that rotting/stinking body off of you.

If that's not annoying enough, TDS' Garrett goes, "Aah, aah" whenever you can't dump a body in a particular place. Since this happens a lot, Garrett ends up doing this wierd medieval rap. Just thinking bout that during gameplay kicks you out of the experience.

6. Loot in the Dark

We've talked bout this. Everything looks the freakin' same. In TDP and TMA when you look at something, you instantly know whether it's a loot or not. As for the TDS was too dark argument, here's what I've to show,

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9338/loot.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/my.php?image=loot.jpg)

Wow! I'm so confused. Which is the loot? Is it the bluish looking thingy or is it the golden looking thingy? Surely a vase made of gold won't look golden right?

7. Highlight

I'm not gonna waste explaining this. Just look:

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6923/hilite.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hilite.jpg)

Like my old man used to say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Ok, he didn't but u get the point.

I've got loads more but I'll stop here for now. Let's hear the rebuttals.

GmanPro
24th May 2009, 06:38
The only thing I want to point out is that the guards would slip and fall down the stairs if you place the oil flasks just right. They'd go into ragdoll mode and enter a knocked-out phase as if you had blackjacked them. But it was kinda inconsistent. Same as some of the torches, as you also pointed out.

I agree with everything else you said though. Especially about the weak-sauce dagger combat. No dodging, no parrying, no angled swings. Really takes away from the "swashbuckling" experience that was possible in TDP/TMA.

That part about guards not being able to enter shops was a good point (pure immersion breaker). I always become painfully aware that I am playing a game when things of that nature start to happen. Too much about TDS was set in stone (for lack of a better term). Notice also how whenever you wanted to pick a lock, you'd have to enter a "lockpicking mode." Garrett starts up an animation and the gui changes etc, and its difficult to pry yourself away from this "mode." Same thing with the climbing gloves, and ladder climbing, and whenever you wanted to blackjack somebody. That game just didn't feel fluid, as it should have.

WVI
24th May 2009, 07:24
3. Wall hugging

I liked this actually. But its weird when you wall hug and a guard can't see you when he's like 3 inches away from you. In TDP it doesn't matter how dark it is, if the guard comes close enough he will spot you because the eyes adjusts and you will be noticeable.

But in TDS Garrett's a freakin' chameleon!

This was actually about hitboxes more than anything. They were more refined in DS.


As for the TDS was too dark argument...

Don't bother. DS was factually much less dark than TMA.

Anyway, I just finished DS. That was a surprisingly cool ending. It was pretty epic, too. As the game faded to black, Garrett got struck with a mortal blow. I still won. :D

vasanx
24th May 2009, 08:02
The only thing I want to point out is that the guards would slip and fall down the stairs if you place the oil flasks just right. They'd go into ragdoll mode and enter a knocked-out phase as if you had blackjacked them. But it was kinda inconsistent. Same as some of the torches, as you also pointed out.

I agree with everything else you said though. Especially about the weak-sauce dagger combat. No dodging, no parrying, no angled swings. Really takes away from the "swashbuckling" experience that was possible in TDP/TMA.

That part about guards not being able to enter shops was a good point (pure immersion breaker). I always become painfully aware that I am playing a game when things of that nature start to happen. Too much about TDS was set in stone (for lack of a better term). Notice also how whenever you wanted to pick a lock, you'd have to enter a "lockpicking mode." Garrett starts up an animation and the gui changes etc, and its difficult to pry yourself away from this "mode." Same thing with the climbing gloves, and ladder climbing, and whenever you wanted to blackjack somebody. That game just didn't feel fluid, as it should have.

So they do Jack and Jill after all. Thanks for that GmanPro. But yeah, it's the inconsistency that really irked me.

A swordplay enthusiast at last! :friends:

Your point on the 'lockpicking animation breaking the immersion' is something I didn't think through properly.

I was kinda ok with it but now that I think of it, you're totally right!

The game MUST NOT TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM THE PLAYER and these animations do just that.

Even the ladder climbing thing. You gotta wait a few secs for Garrett to move into position.
I know they were driving the body awareness thing here but climbing ladder and lockpicking felt so much more natural in TDP and TMA.

This is what EM must take note of if they're serious about immersing the player in the game world.

GUI. I totally couldn't stand it in TDS. I always enjoyed the idea of a HUD-less design. Call of Cthulhu was the most immersive game I've ever played. And I know TDP and TMA isn't perfect in this regard but TDS simply cluttered the screen with ***** we don't need.

Most annoying of all of em is the GUI when you're climbing. Why the hell do I need to see this again?

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6044/guituo.jpg (http://img33.imageshack.us/my.php?image=guituo.jpg)

I don't know if a HUD-less design would work in T4 per se but if it did, this is my pitch on improving TDP and TMA's original design.

Invisibility gem - Since body awareness is everything, why not make it more useful than just being able to look at your crotch and know it's there.

Allow Garrett to see his belt. That's where the gem is rite? This could only add to the tension because imagine moving into a new position and having to check whether you're hiding properly. You actually have to look away from the approaching guard.

But I dunno, maybe it will break the gameplay or somethin. But you gotta admit, that is as real as it gets.

I can only come up with a solution for the gem without goin into an animation for the rest. :D

Guess it's not that easy after all.

Matuzzz
24th May 2009, 08:24
I'm sorry but I would not never put the words 'maintain' and 'TDS' in the same sentence. TDS had its moments with its level and what not but that is not enough to counter all the stuff it did manage to screw up.

You're right. Everybody did complain too much in a thread titled, 'What was wrong with TDS you may ask?'

As promised, I replayed TDS. I wanted to be more fair I guess, both to IS and the two TDS fans here so, here is the list of things I noted during my playthrough.

And just to shake things up, I'll be startin with the Pros. But even the Pros could use some work so, go figure.


PROS


1. Lockpicking.

Loved the hand animation and all. Sadly, it wasn't as immersive as it could've been because we could see the insides of the lock. I want to find the sweet spot just by listening for it. Plus, it got to be a bit too easy because your right hand kept goin up whenever it hits the sweet spot and you can Right-click to speed up the lockpicking. Not a lot of tension there.

2. Body Awareness

This was done nicely. It was always weird in TDP and TMA to look down and not see your lower extremities.

But the thing about Body Awareness, the player becomes aware. Like really aware. Where is my Climbing Gloves when I'm climbing? I remember seeing and buying something that looked like a baseball glove at Undercurrent.



3. Wall hugging

I liked this actually. But its weird when you wall hug and a guard can't see you when he's like 3 inches away from you. In TDP it doesn't matter how dark it is, if the guard comes close enough he will spot you because the eyes adjusts and you will be noticeable.

But in TDS Garrett's a freakin' chameleon!

4. Guards didn't ignore door to their room being opened.

It was always odd in TDP and TMA when the door creaks open and the guard will be like, "Hello, anyone there?" and that's it.(There. I just criticized TDP and TMA.)

5. Oil flask

Loved seeing them guards slip. But for some reason when I use it on a staircase, the guards would only slip a few steps. Shouldn't they be rolling down the stairs?

6. Candlestick.

This was a nice touch but again it's plagues by inconsistency. You can extinguish candlesticks on tables but not those mounted on walls? Why?

7. Dagger

I like the dagger actually. But too bad they had to remove the longsword to include it. And if you're gonna replace something, why don't you replace it completely?

What happened to the 'hold the mouse and Garrett pulls back for extra oomph swing' ?
I missed Garrett's grunt (in a very non-homosexual way I might add)

CONS

This is gonna be quite a list. I advise coffee breaks in between.

1. Guards Banned from Shops

How is it that the guards can chase you everywhere in the city but not into the shops? They just wait outside for you. Is it because they don't have a warrant?

2. Torch

I don't know bout you but I find this extremely irritating. Some torches require more than a few water arrows to extinguish it. Is there like a sweet spot in the flame too? Just die already.

3. AI

This is the first mission. I'm at the Castle front yard and I was spotted. So, I ran up the ladder on my left and the next thing I know, there's a guard conference happening near the ladder's foot.

Two things to note. One, guards can't climb ladders. Really? How hard can it be?

Two, they have a death wish. There I was in Legolas mode and them guards just stand there. Some don't even look up. They go into the 'Come out, Come out wherever you are' mode.

Either give them a shield already or jack up their IQ.

4. Parrying

Thanks to the removal of the longsword, guard confrontation has been reduced to 'Let's stab each other as quickly as possible and see who bleeds out first'

That's why we hate the dagger. Not because it is a dagger but because we miss the brilliant swordplay from TDP and TMA.

There's nothing like hearing that sickening metal screeching sound you get when you successfully block a swing. None of that in TDS.

5. Hiding the Body

I've yet to read bout this but I could've missed it. In TDS, it's hard to chuck a body. You gotta be at the right distance, angle and elevation or some ***** before you can get that rotting/stinking body off of you.

If that's not annoying enough, TDS' Garrett goes, "Aah, aah" whenever you can't dump a body in a particular place. Since this happens a lot, Garrett ends up doing this wierd medieval rap. Just thinking bout that during gameplay kicks you out of the experience.

6. Loot in the Dark

We've talked bout this. Everything looks the freakin' same. In TDP and TMA when you look at something, you instantly know whether it's a loot or not. As for the TDS was too dark argument, here's what I've to show,


Wow! I'm so confused. Which is the loot? Is it the bluish looking thingy or is it the golden looking thingy? Surely a vase made of gold won't look golden right?

7. Highlight

I'm not gonna waste explaining this. Just look:


Like my old man used to say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Ok, he didn't but u get the point.

I've got loads more but I'll stop here for now. Let's hear the rebuttals.

Weeell, now I really think I´m going to stop to try discuss here anything. You mentioned such banal things, but I won´t go to write down pros and cons of TMA. I just noticed some mistakes in your post.
-I don´t know about wall, but guard in TDS noticed you when you stood in the most dark places when he ran into you, in TMA when I was in darkness where bar was totaly black, guards sometimes just didn´t stop walking, he was banging his head whith mine, but still didn´t notice me.
-I don´t remember guards in TMA were able to climb a ladder.
-I didn´t spend more than 1 arrow on each torch. And if I did I just said to myself, that I must be getting old, as I said in TMA.
-You were right, that sword is missing in fighting with guards, but I usually played each Thief game on Expert, so I didn´t have to fight guards and didn´t notice that. And if you like sound of swords, than there is plenty of them in Oblivion.
-Yes you couldn´t throw body into the wall like in TMA, where you threw him right into the corner and from the wall was sticking out just his leg, body usually disappeard.

You just don´t want to see ANY change in that game. For example about that body. If it was disappering in TDA and not in TMA, you would write an essay here about it.

Why didn´t you mentioned some other pros. For example great graphic and especially architecture. Implementation of physics, possibility to see my own body and hands(garrett was able to fly in TMA, he didn´t use the ladder stading in front oh him, he just flew next to him)...

You were so prejudiced against TDS from the day it was released that you were just going through the map and searching something you don´t like. You didn´t play and think about storyline or something what player should do when wants to enjoy the game.

ToMegaTherion
24th May 2009, 08:29
OK, time for some quick comments about your cons...

1. Granted, and indeed the idea of Thief Shops you can just wander into is sufficiently ridiculous for me to treat it simply as an abstraction (and indeed a fairly pointless abstraction).

2. As in Dark Project and Metal Age, you have to hit the right spot.

3. Granted, but a criticism that could be levelled at all three games, all of them responded ineptly to areas they couldn't reach, and they couldn't reach lots of really easy-to-reach areas. Apart from the tendency to drop to lowest alert state even after having spotted the player, Deadly Shadows AI generally acts more plausibly than the previous two games. None of the games has good or believable AI, though.

4. If you can beat 50 guards simultaneously, the swordplay is not brilliant, it's broken. And parrying was a suboptimal choice unless you ended up stuck in a corner fighting lots of guards, and even then it is probably suboptimal. The fact that the dagger isn't a win-immediately cheat like the sword was is an improvement.

5. This is the same as in the other games, I think, but the positioning is different, so if you are used to previous games then you get it wrong a lot more.

6. Granted, although there isn't really any way to tell whether that possibly-silver thing in your screenshot isn't loot.

7. The highlighting is horrible, fortunately JohnP makes it much better, but it is worth mentioning again and again that ugly blue highlighting and loot glint is nothing other than hideous. It makes you wonder when something so unbelievably vile gets in a game.

vasanx
24th May 2009, 09:07
Weeell, now I really think I´m going to stop to try discuss here anything. You mentioned such banal things,...

Banal is necessary in a game that is 3 yrs away. It's a reminder for the devs who don't actually go and read through every single post here. If they missed the first time around, my post could be the one they read. And I think my explanations are pretty unique and even, entertaining.

I'm pretty sure no one will get bored reading my post unless you choose to.

Mistakes, huh? And what mistakes exactly? Oh, that's right, you didn't feel like writing it but you just wanted to point it out anyway. :thumb:

"but guard in TDS noticed you when you stood in the most dark places when he ran into you..."

You don't say.

"I don´t remember guards in TMA were able to climb a ladder"

Wow. I was explaining how TDS being the "improvement" still couldn't fix this problem. Read the thread's title again, will you? It's not 'Why TDS is lousy compared to TDP and TMA?'

"And if you like sound of swords, than there is plenty of them in Oblivion."

Oh, stop already! I can't stop laughing. This is too funny. NOT!

"Yes you couldn´t throw body into the wall like in TMA, where you threw him right into the corner and from the wall was sticking out just his leg, body usually disappeard"

Again comparing the wrong stuff in TDP and TMA. You need to get on the program here.

We are discussing what is wrong in TDS that can be improved in T4. TDS tried to improve stuff from TDP and TMA and failed. Please don't waste your time and ours by writing bout stuff that we all know was broken in TDP and TMA.

"You just don´t want to see ANY change in that game. For example about that body. If it was disappering in TDA and not in TMA, you would write an essay here about it."

Really? So, you really can't see the Pros list I've written above? Wow. We know bout the disappearing body. Stop comparing obvious stuff already.GOD! :mad2:

"Why didn´t you mentioned some other pros."

Why I didn't mention? That's a given. I was showing how I can appreciate TDS too but you have me dead for a TDS hater, don't you? Jeez.

"Fly in TMA?" Oh, gosh. I've already acknowledged that Body Awareness in TDS is nice, what else do you want me to say?

"You were so prejudiced against TDS from the day it was released that you were just going through the map and searching something you don´t like. You didn´t play and think about storyline or something what player should do when wants to enjoy the game."

Searching for something, huh? And I hacked the codes too so that TDS will play like crap and I can complain about it here. :thumb:

Storyline? Who's complainin bout it here? Who?!

And by the way, if you don't feel like discussing, feel free to do so. No one is stopping you.

p.s. Try to delete some stuff when you're quoting a large post. We get it that you're quoting that person but you don't have to eat more space than it is necessary.

Matuzzz
24th May 2009, 09:24
There is no need for such aggressiveness. I would just like if T4 would be in TDS way.(of course not completely)

vasanx
24th May 2009, 09:27
There is no need for such aggressiveness. I would just like if T4 would be in TDS way.(of course not completely)

I might have used too much red in my post but I really don't think it was that bad.

I know you do.

But there are ways to present one's POV. That's all I'm sayin.

Skaruts
24th May 2009, 12:47
I'm sorry but I would not never put the words 'maintain' and 'TDS' in the same sentence.

I would: Maintain some of the body awareness details as in TDS.
It's simply brilliant. For at least 3 reasons:

- When you turn the mouse his head turns, unlike every other game where the whole body goes spining. He's a thief and needs to stand still while checking his surroundings. Besides, there's nothing wrong with his neck.
- You can see that he holds his weapons like a normal person, unlike other games where the main character holds his arm streched forward at all times like a retard. Even in the best up-to-date FPSs.
- The movement seems realistic as you see the camera bumping while he walks.

there. Used both words. :p

as for point 6, I agree with having loot to blend with other objects. After all, loot objects are objects like any other, but you forgot how the game tells the player which one is a piece of loot and which isn't. It glows. So it's never as hard as you say to distinguish them in TDS.
Even though the glow isn't too realistic, it's a necessary evil.

And I think the same goes to the door glow. Even though it could be more subtle, it's a good thing that it's there. Otherwise you'd be clicking around to put out a candle and then you'd get that in the cons instead.

Psychomorph
24th May 2009, 13:40
As for the glow to distinguish loot from not-loot, in the first titles we have a glow, as you say the necessary evil, in the third game we have the constant sparkles, why not to combine both? The loot remains blend in with other non valuables (in T1&2 it isn't really the case actually, you can distinguish stuff, but it is less obvious so you have to double check), but looking at them they get a little bit of a sparkle (like realistic light reflexions), telling you that it is valuable.

Not sure how to do this with other objects (doors, scrolls, etc), I'll think about that.

As for the door glow, I have to say that I never really liked it, because when I sneak through the dark and suddenly a droor glows, I instinctively feel exposed, because the glow looks like the spot is lit out, very unnatural to the feel.
In T3 the glow is intensive too, but the blue glow does not look authentic, so it becomes much easier to distinguish which glow is real light (and exposes me) and which is just a usable object.

I think there has to be a better solution for usable/pickable objects than what has been done before in the previous Thief titles.

Skaruts
24th May 2009, 19:13
I can't rly remember how the objects were in T1 and 2, can only remember doors.

I never had any of those problems with door glow that you talk about. I never took it as if it's being lit up, but rather as it being pointed at. Much like it was in T1 and 2. None of these two issues ever bothered me in any way (in gameplay effeciency terms), but I do agree that it's too intense and a better solution should be put to use.

I sure hope they've thought some way to solve that.

But every game I've seen has some way of telling you that you are close enough, or pointing the right direction to press the button and take the desired effect. This is my favorite way, though (but not necessarily TDS's way), cuz I hate when I see a hand icon popping out on the screen as a hint for interaction.

BlooferLady
24th May 2009, 20:40
Having trouble putting torches out, huh? Just a general Thiefsie tip: aim for where the bracket that the torch is sitting in meets the wall. Works 99% of the time. Compliments of my brother.

So much of this stuff I would never notice, but they are good points. (Hence why I'm not a game developer ;)) I never noticed the blue door-glow. But yeah, it's a bit weird. There's no reason to change the color of the object that gets highlighted. Just keep it like it was in the first 2 games.

vasanx
25th May 2009, 02:29
OK, time for some quick comments about your cons...

1. Granted, and indeed the idea of Thief Shops you can just wander into is sufficiently ridiculous for me to treat it simply as an abstraction (and indeed a fairly pointless abstraction).

2. As in Dark Project and Metal Age, you have to hit the right spot.

3. Granted, but a criticism that could be levelled at all three games, all of them responded ineptly to areas they couldn't reach, and they couldn't reach lots of really easy-to-reach areas. Apart from the tendency to drop to lowest alert state even after having spotted the player, Deadly Shadows AI generally acts more plausibly than the previous two games. None of the games has good or believable AI, though.

4. If you can beat 50 guards simultaneously, the swordplay is not brilliant, it's broken. And parrying was a suboptimal choice unless you ended up stuck in a corner fighting lots of guards, and even then it is probably suboptimal. The fact that the dagger isn't a win-immediately cheat like the sword was is an improvement.

5. This is the same as in the other games, I think, but the positioning is different, so if you are used to previous games then you get it wrong a lot more.

6. Granted, although there isn't really any way to tell whether that possibly-silver thing in your screenshot isn't loot.

7. The highlighting is horrible, fortunately JohnP makes it much better, but it is worth mentioning again and again that ugly blue highlighting and loot glint is nothing other than hideous. It makes you wonder when something so unbelievably vile gets in a game.

1. Fairly pointless? I really don't think so. When a game makes you question simple logic, it fails. Whether having a shop that sells flashbombs in the open is really besides the point because it's acceptable in that game world.

But the guards not following you in and continue waiting outside is unacceptable. The only way I can rationalize such a moment is that Garrett being chased after for a while yells back, "Ok, guys. Chasing me around Stonemarket has been fun but I'm low on health. Lets take five so I can stop by the shop and grab some health potions. And I promise, you guys can continue chasing me after I come out of the shop. Ok guys?"

And the guards go, "Sure Taffer. We can use a drink while we wait for you outside"
(The hillarious dialogue (I hope) is not meant to insult you by the way)

2. Looks like everyone has taken Legolas' Advanced Archery course here. I am pretty sure that TDP and TMA had more obedient torches. Something was not right in TDS.

You need to fire your water arrow from the correct spot or something because the water arrow hits the flame and I don't know about you, but when I see water splashing on a flame, I'd like to think I'm hitting the right spot.

Move a few feet in front or to the side, and maybe then it will work.

TDS is inconsistent here as it is in other areas. That's what I'm driving at.

3. Yes, yes. But lets not talk bout stuff that's already broken in TDP and TMA. TDS bein the technological improvement over its predecessor still couldn't get this right.

I don't know if it's because of tech. limitation, consolitis or they missed it during playtest, if there even was such a concept in IS but when I pick on stuff like this, it's more of a reminder.

4. The 50 guard example again. Hmm. You seem to suggest that Garrett is invincible with his sword in TDP and TMA. Swordplay in the older games isn't unbalanced in the previous two titles at all.

In fact, swordplay was never a good alternative in the first place since the guards will almost always bring down your health shields. And there's only so much health potions you can take.

It gets especially tricky when there's an archer around when you're busy parrying and, if you can't get to him fast enough you better run.

So, I don't get where this swordplay is an immediate win thing is coming from.

5. I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier to dump a body in TDP and TMA. Plus the added benefit of not having to listen to Garrett rapping.

6. But that's where the fun is, right? Guessing whether it's a loot or not and end up picking up junk. I missed some silver plates before I realized they're not junk. And even then, you wouldn't be picking up junk as much since the bulk of loot in TDP, TMA looks like loot.

But you couldn't do that in TDS if there was no loot glint because they only had one candlestick model.

The main idea here is to remove the loot glint system from T4. IS chose not to follow LGS' model so that they can justify loot glint as an "improvement".

7. :friends:

GmanPro
25th May 2009, 05:57
The loot, in general, was not as visually appealing to me in TDS. Loot in TDP/TMA and Deus Ex, was always a treat to find. I'd get really exited whenever I found valuable items in those games. Finding loot in TDS felt more like a chore. Also, I miss that sound effect from the previous games. That was sooo satisfying to hear.

ToMegaTherion
25th May 2009, 10:04
I agree with you GmanPro, I rather liked the general drab graphics style in Deadly Shadows but the loot could have been prettier.

In reply to vasanx:

1) By fairly pointless I meant having the shops there in the first place is fairly pointless. Leaving aside the guards not following you in, the idea of having thief shops is pretty silly to start with, then annoying whenever you have to traipse over to Stonemarket every time you want a moss arrow, and doesn't, for me, add anything to gameplay except annoyance and doesn't add anything to atmosphere except disbelief. I find it a bad idea entirely, and difficult to take seriously.

2) It's been a long time since I played the old Thief games, as I recall to put out a torch you had to not shoot the flame but shoot the metal part of the torch for best results, this seems to be similarly true in Deadly Shadows. Maybe the larger size of the torches in Deadly Shadows makes it harder?

3) OK, I guess we should be more careful to differentiate between "things TDS did wrong that TMA didn't" and "things where TDS failed to improve on TMA".

4) I'm pretty confident in beating most guards with a sword without losing health. Indeed if you take every melee guard in a level and put them in a room with me, as long as it's not too small a room, I think I'll win fairly comfortably. I never actually tried 50 guards at once because it gets tiring, but I did do 40 apebeasts once.

5) Again, been too long to remember properly. I think you can do it closer to a wall in the earlier games, but not right up to it, but I could be wrong.

6) Things are indeed better in the first two games, because although the first time you might not know soemthing isn't loot, you know the second time. In Deadly Shadows you often have to wait for the glint to make sure.

7) :)

Skaruts
26th May 2009, 17:50
I remember there was a big problem with picking objects that weren't loot (I believe in TDS too). When you realised you picked something that wasn't loot you had to throw the object away and that would make lots of noise, cuz garret was never as delicate in handling objects as he was in stealth.

That is the main reason I disagree with not being able to distinguish loot.

If there is a way to evaluate the objects before grabing them, which happened in thief 2 at least, since loot objects were often golden chalices and golden plates, golden in general, then I agree with not making them glow while not pointed at (and even if pointed at).

But there should be a way to gently put the object back into it's place, completely silently, for those times when you accidentaly pick the object next to the loot one, or there's a chance of being spoted for dropping the object at the wrong place and sounding like an alarm. I remember looking for carpets to drop them on, when that happened, but sometimes it wasn't enough, and it was frustrating.

ToMegaTherion
26th May 2009, 17:53
Use R in Dark Project and Metal Age, right click in Deadly Shadows. It is not perfect but it is OK.

Skaruts
26th May 2009, 18:20
I always used the key/button to "drop softly". I was taking that into account. It wouldn't save from being heard many times.

GmanPro
26th May 2009, 18:24
Or maybe ttlg meant to keep that feature as another mechanic that encourages the player to carefully think and plan before taking action.

ToMegaTherion
26th May 2009, 18:37
If they did that then they're pretty silly, since in some cases it is actually impossible to avoid innocently picking up trash.

Caranfin
26th May 2009, 19:21
It was not impossible in the first two games due to the loot actually looking like loot, or in DS due to the awful loot glint. In TDP and TMA the player develops an eye for loot and with practice can avoid picking up the non-valuable objects. If you do pick up trash, it's your own fault. Personally I think it's a good thing to make the players think what they'll pick up from a dining table with a bunch of candlesticks and plates and goblets, for example, instead of just right-clicking everything they see and setting them back again without sound if it's not valuable.

Garrett being unable to put them back down softly does seem like a bit of an artificial way of punishing the player at times, though.

ToMegaTherion
26th May 2009, 20:09
That would be nice argument, but since you automatically pick up anything from a chest you open, and that can be junk, it is indeed impossible to innocently avoid picking up trash. Sometimes it happens when there is actually no carpet for miles around, which cause a bit of a problem (e.g. Bafford's Manor, just leaving the basement).

Caranfin
26th May 2009, 20:39
Oh right, I totally forgot about that. Might be a clue that it's time for me to replay the games again. :) The obvious solution is of course to make the chests actually contain the items and not just automating the pick-up process when you open them.

Skaruts
26th May 2009, 23:02
Well, the auto-pick up has been already discarded in TDS. I don't think that'll ever be a problem again.

I would like it if they would make it as before, so the player can develop his sense of distinguishing loot when there's any. Keeps things more realistic, and better looking too. ;)

But I'd like it if they would find a solution to drop things silently. It's still needed even without auto-picking from chests. For example, imagine the bottles-holder in the cellars (there's many of them in thief 2, if I'm not mistaken), there's very few chances you'll distinguish a valuable bottle from all the others.

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom
27th May 2009, 04:13
I am playing TDS again. I am using Johnp textures and minimalist mod.

I have 2 humongous issues with the game right now.

As has been discussed here, Garrett does not drop things silently. This seems a lot worse in TDS. Any time I drop something that turned out to be junk I hear a curious guard comment or worse, they go looking. I love that they can hear these things, but I hate that I have no means of just placing an item down. I know about the difference between the throw button and the drop button. I can't believe how infuriating it is. I remember hating it, but not this much. I believe the minimalist mod improves the ai senses. That must be why this is such a huge issue for me now. ><

Garrett keeps stepping off ledges! In the next game, I hope Garrett can lean with his torso and not move his legs. I keep falling because of this crap. I'm so used to leaning a lot in the previous games. In TDS I try not to.

These might not be issues in the regular game difficulty and in third person, but it just goes to show how extremely annoying those things can be. These two have jumped way up on my list of things I hate in TDS.

While I'm on it. I read you guys talking about how the loot looks. The loot does tend to look more...obvious in the first two games. I installed some graphic enhancement to the first games the other day and it really makes the loot stand out! In T3 the way the loot looks doesn't really work without the painful glint. This seems mostly a problem with the improved shadows. Everything is dark, it's so hard to tell what's worthwhile in TDS. Even when I can see loot it tends to look rather plain. At least I know a gem is loot just by looking at it's shape. A candle holder, bowl, or cup is a tough call unless I'm ready to make some noise.

Really, we should be able to place an object down. I don't want to alert the guards for no good reason. It shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not I'm just randomly picking things up. It's gamey at it's gamest. I don't believe it was intentional, but then again, why the heck would they make it that way? It could not have been difficult to come up with a way for Garrett to make less or no noise when he doesn't want something. I dunno, I can't see why it's been that way all along unless it's supposed to be gamey. And that's just lame.


5. I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier to dump a body in TDP and TMA. Plus the added benefit of not having to listen to Garrett rapping.


LMFAO, rapping, I just got that.

vasanx
27th May 2009, 10:24
LMFAO, rapping, I just got that.

Finally! Someone took note of that joke after all. Thanks. :D

vasanx
27th May 2009, 11:02
I would: Maintain some of the body awareness details as in TDS.
It's simply........

....there. Used both words. :p


The word 'maintain' was used in the context of TDS "continuing" the TDP and TMA spirit. :mad2:

Body awareness in TDS is a given.



as for point 6, I agree with having loot to blend with other objects. After all, loot objects are objects like any other, but you forgot how the game tells the player which one is a piece of loot and which isn't. It glows. So it's never as hard as you say to distinguish them in TDS.


I said, it would have been hard to distinguish if there was no loot glint since the loot candlestick and the junk candlestick looks the same which is of course the reason why the loot glint is there in the first place.

IS basically created the situation to bring in "additional features" to the game. They thought they were being clever but we saw right through it.



And I think the same goes to the door glow. Even though it could be more subtle, it's a good thing that it's there. Otherwise you'd be clicking around to put out a candle and then you'd get that in the cons instead.

Everyone agrees door glow is necessary. God knows I missed a few doors in my TDP days if they're far away and there are no torches.

Just don't put blue, orange, tangellow or pink glow no more. Leave its original color be.

ToMegaTherion
27th May 2009, 11:21
The irritating white flash that occasionally highlighted important items / notes etc was pretty tiresome too, I don't think anyone else mentioned that. Quite funny that Garrett could not only detect loot from afar but also could notice whether notes were key to objectives or just background information without even reading them!

huzi73
27th May 2009, 11:48
The irritating white flash that occasionally highlighted important items / notes etc was pretty tiresome too, I don't think anyone else mentioned that. Quite funny that Garrett could not only detect loot from afar but also could notice whether notes were key to objectives or just background information without even reading them!

I think it was mentioned,refered to as loot glint

vasanx
27th May 2009, 11:51
Having trouble putting torches out, huh? Just a general Thiefsie tip: aim for where the bracket that the torch is sitting in meets the wall. Works 99% of the time. Compliments of my brother.

Thank u BlooferLady's brother. So, hit the bracket, huh? That's very....logical. And I know TDP and TMA isn't that perfect either so don't bother people.

They really gotta fix this in T4. If the water arrow hits the flame and I don't care if it hits the blue part or the orange part of the flame, it has to go off. Period.

Unless it hits the wall next to the torch of course. Because that would mean you're a lousy shot and I ain't a lousy shot.

I can hit the wings off of a fly with my broadheads if you catch my drift.

BlooferLady
27th May 2009, 16:08
5. I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier to dump a body in TDP and TMA. Plus the added benefit of not having to listen to Garrett rapping.

He does that in the first two as well. Well, he doesn't give you the "uh-uh" noise, it's just a grunt. Which is either more or less awkward and stupid to me, depending on how I feel that day.:scratch: I don't know how else you would indicate that you're too close to a wall, though.

Skaruts
27th May 2009, 16:47
maybe having 10 or 20 very short sentences that garret could say alternately, like "there's not enough space here.", "can't" or "better try a diferent angle"... so on.

Of course that would have to be made in a way that he would say it when you press the button once and then he would shut up if you keep pressing it like a maniac, only saying something again after 20 clicks or after 10 seconds without clicking. Otherwise it would feel just like the musician garret from TDS :mad2: :lol:

Silent-Wolf
27th May 2009, 18:06
One neat touch I liked from TDS but it wasn't taken advantage of enough was being able to manipulate the environment ot create an "accident" for instance like in the Hammers Factory a guard would walk through a furnace which you could switch on to kill him. Another example was in the Pagan Santuary where you could push a giant cog that would sometimes kill a person that was underneath it.

Maybe T4 could use some inspiration from the Hitman series in which you can carry poison or even chloroform to take out guards or targets. Well maybe poison is a bit too far but it's an alternative option.


However, I wholly agree that the first 2 games were far superior but it didn't stop me from enjoying TDS.

As for putting out torches I always aimed above the flames so that the water splashed down onto them, this aiming for the metal bracket is nonsense IMO. I hardly had any issues with failed attempts doing it my way and if I did I'd just assume it was error on my part and readjust my position or aim slightly differently.

I also agree that the item "glint" needs removing entirely, pah, I can find my own loot thanks without some noobish help like that. Took the pleasure away from discovering any for yourself that one. Maybe use it on the tutorial mish but not afterwards.

Cheers guys, I have enjoyed almost all comments on here and can't wait for the first screen shots to come out.

Sierra Oscar
27th May 2009, 18:09
The irritating white flash that occasionally highlighted important items / notes etc was pretty tiresome too, I don't think anyone else mentioned that. Quite funny that Garrett could not only detect loot from afar but also could notice whether notes were key to objectives or just background information without even reading them!

I would rather that be an option, not taken out entirely.

Skaruts
27th May 2009, 18:14
As for putting out torches I always aimed above the flames so that the water splashed down onto them, this aiming for the metal bracket is nonsense IMO. I hardly had any issues with failed attempts doing it my way and if I did I'd just assume it was error on my part and readjust my position or aim slightly differently.

Same here. I always pointed above the flame and hardly ever missed. :p

Taffer17
27th May 2009, 21:26
First time poster, so sorry if I replied to a specific post...

Anyway, Thief 4 needs some more Easter eggs like the ones in T1 and 2. When I accidentally found the basketball court I remember being so thrilled. And in Thief 2 outside Shoalsgate Station, where you throw the scouting orb over the wall and see two zombies doing the thriller dance, I had a really good laugh about that one...although I wish there was some way to get into the interrogation room in that one...anyway as far as I know, TDS didn't really have any easter eggs, or if they did, not any worth hearing about. This must be fixed! :p

Lady_Of_The_Vine
27th May 2009, 23:21
First time poster, so sorry if I replied to a specific post...

Anyway, Thief 4 needs some more Easter eggs like the ones in T1 and 2. When I accidentally found the basketball court I remember being so thrilled. And in Thief 2 outside Shoalsgate Station, where you throw the scouting orb over the wall and see two zombies doing the thriller dance, I had a really good laugh about that one...although I wish there was some way to get into the interrogation room in that one...anyway as far as I know, TDS didn't really have any easter eggs, or if they did, not any worth hearing about. This must be fixed! :p


Welcome! :wave:

We have a thread about easter eggs here if you want to read what other people think too. :thumb:
http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=88773

Taffer17
28th May 2009, 00:42
* Some rope climbing in horizontal direction would be awesome..(like I can shoot a crossbow to the roof of the other building and by anchoring the other end of the rope to my roof, I could climb from building to building over the street when the guards below are searching for me on the street).
;)

sweet idea. stuff like that. that's a good change to the game and a positive addition. now removing rope arrows and replacing them with climbing gloves just removed a lot of the versatility of the game. with the rope arrows you could shoot htem at a ceiling and you could go anywhere from there. with the climbing gloves for the most part u were stuck on a surface of wall 3 feet wide and it led to nowhere. you jumped up on that wall in order to escape a guard only to find out there you had nowhere to go and that the guards weren't leaving. i admit i was excited when i heard that i could scale walls, then the excitement dropped when i found out it was only stone walls...then i was royally disappointed once i received hte climbing gloves. :( it was a sad sad moment in my years of thief playing.

although there were some good maps in TDS (the cradle), for the most part they weren't that good. yes the architecture looked nice but it was mostly hte graphics. TDP and TMA had absolutely stunning levels like both Lost City levels and Life of the Party, and Constantine's mansion, and i for one loved the undercover Hammerite level. That was a really cool idea. and even though now its very tame, nothing beats the first time i played any of the zombie levels in TDP. My heart was beating like crazy. I freaked out when playing the first haunted cathedral level just running through the city and then the first couple times i played the game, i had to have my brother play Return to the Haunted Cathedral (i was a wee 9 or 10 around that time)...or maybe i did the level skip code...i dont remember if it was in the original game or only thief gold... now of course TDS had hte cradle and that was definitely one of the scariest levels i've ever played and far scarier than any movie i've watched since i was participating in it. I played it in surround sound and when I read that note about the lady who carried her baby around and then left the note and heard crying, i nearly soiled myself. that was genius. Sooo, thief 4, DEFINITELY needs at least one or two levels like the cradle or haunted cathedral and to build off of that, without the amazing audio, thief is nothing so don't forget that.

and as far as the steam robots went, i found those terrifying the first several times i played TMA. it made me terrified of leaving the shadows.

and day levels? really? thief is about shadows! has anyone gone outside and tried to hide in a shadow? it's sort of pointless. not to mention, where's the ambience? also, TDP had one level during daylight i recall. Cragsleft Prison... it was mostly indoors for a reason. and when u did go outside at the very top and encountered the Hammer on patrol, there was no way you could hide from him. no shadows!
and this long-winded rant sums up my second post ever :lmao:

Taffer17
28th May 2009, 00:44
thanks for the link to the easter egg thread...way too many threads to read through. this is gonna take me weeks haha

TeoRocker
28th May 2009, 02:47
But every game I've seen has some way of telling you that you are close enough, or pointing the right direction to press the button and take the desired effect. This is my favorite way, though (but not necessarily TDS's way), cuz I hate when I see a hand icon popping out on the screen as a hint for interaction.

In TDP and TMA, it was Garrett saying something.

Skaruts
28th May 2009, 02:58
Nope. He wouldn't say anything when you pointed at loot or doors. Only if it was something more relevant than just that (like plot items/paths).

vasanx
28th May 2009, 03:35
He does that in the first two as well. Well, he doesn't give you the "uh-uh" noise, it's just a grunt. Which is either more or less awkward and stupid to me, depending on how I feel that day.:scratch: I don't know how else you would indicate that you're too close to a wall, though.

But the thing bout TDS, the collision detection or whatever the tech term is, was broken.

You had to find the right spot and distance to dismount your load and it forces you to right-click so many times and that's where the 'Garrett rapping' phenomena arises.

TDP and TMA had its moments too but it was nothin compared to TDS.

Here's what I'm thinking. Instead of forcing the player to stop and waste time thinking where the body should go ala Monk, why don't they fix it already?

Don't even include the grunt/uh-uh noise in T4 because in T4 you can throw the body anywhere just like in the real world.

How's that for a solution? :naughty:

Skaruts
28th May 2009, 04:15
Another thing that didn't rly bothered me.

Much probly the colisions in thief 4 will be improved and you may be able to drop the body more comfortably. Ragdolls have been improved as the time goes by (just like everything else) and probly that won't be a problem anymore. Though I can't rly tell for sure.

I believe what made them have to do it that way was to prevent ragdolls from overlaping the walls as it ocurred in TDP and TMA, with NPC models, as much as a ppl blinks their eyes. (ok I'm exagerating :p)

Knowing how things work from the backstage of a game leads me to excuse many things. Of course, I don't excuse things I know that could've been done better or I believe that could be fixed easily.
But while I don't rly know how ragdolls are programed, I fear it must have been a pain to get them working properly, and to interact/colide properlly with the world around as they seem to do nowadays. Even though, I see ragdoll issues all around.

Even in Assassins Creed, that is a fairly recent game and well worked upon (in some matters), they have a few malfunctions.

vasanx
28th May 2009, 04:25
CROSSBOW??
* A good upgrade in the arsenal can be the addition of the crossbow. If it can shoot rope arrows I'd be extremely grateful :) Some rope climbing in horizontal direction would be awesome..(like I can shoot a crossbow to the roof of the other building and by anchoring the other end of the rope to my roof, I could climb from building to building over the street when the guards below are searching for me on the street).

Thank you Taffer17 for that quote. Totally missed that post. Amazing, amazing idea.

This will totally open up the map as Garrett can now go anywhere he wants to with ease.

Usually this would have been impossible if they had a huge street and the best they could do is have the roofs connected somewhere further down the street.

With orderofthestick's idea, Garrett can finally get the freedom of movement he was denied in TDS.

And imagine scaling the rope horizontally in first person? Looking at the sky and then move the mouse to see the streets below. If they can make the rope swaying happen, I'll be only too happy to purchase a Motion Sickness bag.

That's the kind of First Person realism we want in T4 EM.

And by the way, why the heck would Garrett be moving on the streets with his Wanted poster plastered everywhere?

Shouldn't the people recognize him and not the guards alone? What? No one reads the Wanted posters no more?

Rooftops should be his main choice and to not make it too easy for Garrett, besides having guards, what they can do is, block his rooftop passage on occasions so he'll have to use the streets.

Maybe the ledge broke off or the building was demolished or somethin and, even with the rope arrow, he still couldn't get to the other section of the rooftops unless he uses the street first.

Now, that would make travelling the City Hub a lot more interesting and this will also solve the problem of having to listen to repeated dialogues.

I like listening to the wind, the creaking of the rooftop or the sudden shriek of a crow when I'm rooftopping. And looking at the moon and the rolling clouds above and the view of the City's outskirts from the top would be oh! so cool.

I beseech you EM. Make this happen already....

Hypevosa
28th May 2009, 04:33
Thank you Taffer17 for that quote. Totally missed that post. Amazing, amazing idea.

This will totally open up the map as Garrett can now go anywhere he wants to with ease.

Usually this would have been impossible if they had a huge street and the best they could do is have the roofs connected somewhere further down the street.

With orderofthestick's idea, Garrett can finally get the freedom of movement he was denied in TDS.

And imagine scaling the rope horizontally in first person? Looking at the sky and then move the mouse to see the streets below. If they can make the rope swaying happen, I'll be only too happy to purchase a Motion Sickness bag.

That's the kind of First Person realism we want in T4 EM.

And by the way, why the heck would Garrett be moving on the streets with his Wanted poster plastered everywhere?

Shouldn't the people recognize him and not the guards alone? What? No one reads the Wanted posters no more?

Rooftops should be his main choice and to not make it too easy for Garrett, besides having guards, what they can do is, block his rooftop passage on occasions so he'll have to use the streets.

Maybe the ledge broke off or the building was demolished or somethin and, even with the rope arrow, he still couldn't get to the other section of the rooftops unless he uses the street first.

Now, that would make travelling the City Hub a lot more interesting and this will also solve the problem of having to listen to repeated dialogues.

I like listening to the wind, the creaking of the rooftop or the sudden shriek of a crow when I'm rooftopping. And looking at the moon and the rolling clouds above and the view of the City's outskirts from the top would be oh! so cool.

I beseech you EM. Make this happen already....

Unless Garrett got extremely careless or lazy, his face shouldn't be recognizable to anyone he hasn't met personally, or on posters for that matter. I have a post about getting posters and notoriety for being stupid during missions if you want to search it. But as it stands Garrett is the master thief, and all people have to go on are lore, and nothing (that they know to be) factual.

I personally don't want a crossbow, I like the bow as it is... why are we giving Garrett what's basically a gun? :( I don't know, I'm just really attached to the bow...

vasanx
28th May 2009, 04:37
I believe what made them have to do it that way was to prevent ragdolls from overlaping the walls as it ocurred in TDP and TMA, with NPC models, as much as a ppl blinks their eyes. (ok I'm exagerating :p)

Knowing how things work from the backstage of a game leads me to excuse many things.

Even in Assassins Creed, that is a fairly recent game and well worked upon (in some matters), they have a few malfunctions.

Yeah, I get that part bout how people need to know more bout their ***** before they start complainin.

But like you said, even with the tech at hand, laziness and/or oversight can still screw things up.

I just pray that EM is much much better than this. Look at Dead Space for QA and playtesting inspiration.

That thing was so ready when it came out, it was readyculous!

Get it? Ready + ridiculous? :D (I know you guys get it, that was me being funny)

vasanx
28th May 2009, 04:55
100th post! Booyah!


Unless Garrett got extremely careless or lazy, his face shouldn't be recognizable to anyone he hasn't met personally, or on posters for that matter.


Face is one thing. But what bout the hood? The poster has Garrett in a hood and was there anyone else in the city wearing a hood?

Garrett was the only dude in the entire city in a hood and if that doesn't raise the flag for the people, I don't know what will.



I personally don't want a crossbow, I like the bow as it is... why are we giving Garrett what's basically a gun? :( I don't know, I'm just really attached to the bow...

Haha. Don't worry. If they do include the crossbow, it is not meant to be a replacement because as we have all discussed before, pulling another dagger stunt isn't gonna help with the fans of the original.

We can still use the bow I guess for horizontal scaling but I don't know how you can achieve the anchoring of the rope on your side without including an animation.

Since, we have already established that animations will remove the player from the experience, it has to be done in real time.

This could sound stupid so, don't be too mean bout it. How bout having a rope with arrows on both sides? He selects his two-headed? rope arrow, shoots at the wooden pillar next to him and then selects the rope arrow that's stuck to the pillar and, use it to shoot onto the pillar across the street.

How's that? :naughty:

Skaruts
28th May 2009, 06:59
The two-arrows-rope isn't a bad idea, at all. I just wouldn't like to be able to get 20 rope arrows as before... I hate that. Why? Try taking 20 ropes, half-inch thick, long enough to reach the second story window, and put them in a sac, see if they all fit nicelly in there. :p Two recoverable ropes, would be enough for most cases. So you could attach them to a normal piercing arrow and have fun from there. Exactly the same but more realistic.

As for the animation, it wouldn't necessarily have to include an animation. Most things in Thief never included animations. For ex., opening a door, picking up objects, dropping them also, using a key on a door, etc. And most likely they will stay the same. Else, they will surprise me astonishingly.
But I can't see how a "door-knob-turning" animation, for ex., would be consistent without taking over the player's controls to place garret's model in position so his hand would grab the knob right, lest you'd see the knob turning alone cuz his hand was 1 or 2 inches aside.
Same goes to picking up objects.

So, for practical reasons, it shouldn't include an animation, unless they have some rly brilliant ideas, or unless I'm missing something. (I hope so, indeed...) Otherwise, leaving "taking over" aside, you have only two options left: either hearing garret rapping for not being correctly placed to turn the knob, or having inconsistent animations that will fill future forums with flaming posts and their hearts with grief.

There could be a knot done without animation (by simply clicking on a light-post or some thing which could bear a knot).
It wouldn't bother me at all. What would bother me would be if that had an animation and the rest of the stuff didn't.

vasanx
28th May 2009, 09:47
The two-arrows-rope isn't a bad idea, at all. I just wouldn't like to be able to get 20 rope arrows as before... I hate that. Why? Try taking 20 ropes, half-inch thick, long enough to reach the second story window, and put them in a sac, see if they all fit nicelly in there. :p Two recoverable ropes, would be enough for most cases. So you could attach them to a normal piercing arrow and have fun from there. Exactly the same but more realistic.


Really? I thought people were gonna skewer that the moment they read it. Haha. Ok, then. Go Two-headed rope arrow!

The '20 rope arrow' thing is a sensitive subject. I mean, you either do Halo or Half-Life when it comes to inventory and Thief simply belongs in the latter category.

Personally, I don't want to think too much bout it because if you really want realism, Garrett won't be able to carry half the stuff he's used to carrying around. Sure, he can have a sling bag of some sort but unless his cape has pockets all over em, there's just no way.

A Halo version of Thief could be an interesting approach. Maybe they'd incorporate it into the Difficulty levels instead of just adding more Objectives? I dunno.



Most things in Thief never included animations. For ex., opening a door, picking up objects, dropping them also, using a key on a door, etc... or unless I'm missing something...hearing garret rapping for not being.....

Err....You apparently didn't read the posts on TDS' annoyin lockpicking and ladder climbing animation that I was talking bout with the others.

So, 'Garrett Rapping' is taking off, huh? I want a dollar everytime someone says it! :D

esme
28th May 2009, 13:40
20 rope arrows ! :eek:

most city missions I can manage with 1, maybe 2 if there's an awkward multiple jump section

I think the most I've ever used was 5 and that was a T2 fan mission with wooden beams over lava being the only way to get to the objective ... and I retrieved all the arrows on the way back

thats the nice thing about rope arrows, you use them over and over without even thinking about it

I suggested the double headed rope arrow thingy in the "THE ARMOURY: Tools of Your Trade" - Weapons/Equipment Discussion Thread (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=88479) at this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=990474&postcount=87&highlight=twinned%20arrow)

I also suggested this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaages ago at TTLG http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1673260#post1673260

I'm liking the way the idea is catching on though

but in the interests of getting any kind of rope arrow in thief 4 I'll waive copyright :D

....one of you taffers would only nick my profits anyway :lmao:

Skaruts
28th May 2009, 16:37
Err....You apparently didn't read the posts on TDS' annoyin lockpicking and ladder climbing animation that I was talking bout with the others.

So, 'Garrett Rapping' is taking off, huh? I want a dollar everytime someone says it! :D

I did.
When I talked about the game having to take over player controls to place the model correctly, I was taking those situations in consideration, though I didn't say it. It was there that I learned that everyone seems to have hated loosing control. Which may happen in every animations as you can see. (Animations that don't relate to garret's body, I mean)


The '20 rope arrow' thing is a sensitive subject. I mean, you either do Halo or Half-Life when it comes to inventory and Thief simply belongs in the latter category.
I know. :p But I'm not saying I want full realism, that would make the game extremely hard and no much fun. If there was full realism, loot objects would make lots of noise inside the bag, for ex.
It's just the the most obvious stuff that makes me want that. Besides, like esme said, you only need a few for each level, and you can always take them back. Except maybe if it were the two-arrows-rope.

PiCroft
29th May 2009, 00:12
I'd love it if they brought back the steampunk feel of thief 2. I like TDS but it had a very medieval feel, like every piece of advanced technology brought about in T2 was magically vaporised.

I found the mechanical and steam-powered security devices very immersive and creepy. It also adds exxtra stuff for the player to do. A lot of the T2 missions had devices and machines that the player could manipulate, lights could be turned off and alarms could be shut down.

vasanx
29th May 2009, 05:42
I suggested the double headed rope arrow thingy in the "THE ARMOURY: Tools of Your Trade" - Weapons/Equipment Discussion Thread (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=88479) at this post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=990474&postcount=87&highlight=twinned%20arrow)

I also suggested this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaages ago at TTLG http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1673260#post1673260

I'm liking the way the idea is catching on though

but in the interests of getting any kind of rope arrow in thief 4 I'll waive copyright :D

....one of you taffers would only nick my profits anyway :lmao:

This is not goin to work. And don't think for a second that I'd do an out of court settlement esme. You better be ready coz my guys are from Wolfram & Hart. :naughty:

Seriously though, I hope EM has read our rope arrow dilemma by now.

It would be nice if EM can start a thread here that will list down all the things they have noted from our rantings. What you guys think?

Hypevosa
29th May 2009, 05:52
you could 'Prime' a rope arrow.... equip the arrows, press a button, and when you click to fire garret taps the metal against the wood of the bow, setting off the magic mechanism that makes the rope drop, then holds the end of the rope in his left hand with the bow, and fires. This leaves the rope in the curve of the bow, and allows him to use the bow as a zipline when he ties it to something around him. Or if we don't want thatt he can just pull the bow over across his shoulders, and then jump down and swing into the wall, and climb up the rope... But that's what makes most sense to me if we want to keep the rope arrows AND use them for horizontal crossings.

vasanx
29th May 2009, 06:05
I did.
When I talked about the game...

Duly noted.



I know. :p But I'm not saying I want full realism, that would make the game extremely hard and no much fun. If there was full realism, loot objects would make lots of noise inside the bag, for ex.
It's just the the most obvious stuff that makes me want that. Besides, like esme said, you only need a few for each level, and you can always take them back. Except maybe if it were the two-arrows-rope.

I know you know but I wanted to compare Halo and HL2 to show two, very, different inventory systems.

HL2 could have easily carried 20 rope arrows if Gordon needed it and HL2 fans would have still ignored it. It still works in that world. Your :p Sir, is totally unwarranted. Mine however, isn't...:p


That's the problem with two headed rope arrows. You can only use em once. Instead of making them into some exotic or insanely expensive arrow, why don't we just stick to our regular rope arrows?

When you need/want to do horizontal scaling, Garrett selects two rope arrows from the inventory (I dunno how that will be implemented) and ties both end. There you go.

And, if you really love your rope arrows, you can always scale the rope until the middle where the knot presumably is and either cut, undo the knot with one hand or chew through it.

This will result in Garrett doin a Tarzan swing before crashing through a window and scare the bejesus out of a half-naked Lady Rumford in the shower. :naughty:

Hypevosa
29th May 2009, 06:20
tying 2 rope arrows would not work... no knock means no bow, and the fletching would get all messed up meaning unreliable trajectory...My suggestion above even assumes that the rope's weight won't effect the trajectory terribly (probably just means you could only really shoot the arrow as far as the rope extends... which makes sense anyways.)

Lady_Of_The_Vine
29th May 2009, 14:30
I think it was mentioned,refered to as loot glint

A beautiful phrase... just a horrible concept. :D

LightWarriorK
29th May 2009, 15:34
Yes, I really hated the whole loot system of TDS. The "glint," the fact that you were informed in-mission how much was left, the fact that there were "special" items as opposed to just being of more value.....

I'm hoping that they really rework the whole system.