PDA

View Full Version : LIGHT GEM - General Discussion



The Deuce
18th May 2009, 14:46
*Moderator Update* June 2013



The relationship is like this: The shroud is a quick-reference visual element for understanding whether or not you are in darkness or light, and at what point you enter from one into the other. However it is an approximation, a simplification, a shortcut. Stealth is not binary; the light gem operates as a more comprehensive detection meter and fades through various levels of brightness and darkness, like a gradient. So the light gem is more comprehensive, the shroud is faster. You wouldn't want to disable the light gem in favor of the shroud, but you might want to disable the shroud in favor of the light gem. Hope this helps clear things up a bit!





A light gem is still one of those indicators. It’s tucked down in the bottom left corner of the screen, and exhibits three states: hidden, partially visible and fully visible. In addition to the light gem is the Shroud – a murky vignette that surrounds the edge of the screen, constantly undulating as Garrett remains in shadow. Leaving the safety of darkness causes the Shroud to flash brilliant white; an effect that quickly became distracting. We understand Eidos Montreal’s desire to move players’ attention away from the light gem, but the Shroud was one of the chief elements preventing us from ever feeling immersed in the world.

“This is where our job is really complex,” says Roy. “Why? Because I can understand your point of view. But I receive other comments that this flash, people were really in love with it, because they don’t have to check the gem. Just having that flash, they understand ‘Okay, the situation has changed’. So now, they forget the rest, and when there is that small tick, they understand, ‘Okay, now I should swoop, and come back.’ But, let’s say it’s a jury with yes or no. It could be fifty-fifty. So here, this is where we have to trust our instinct and move forward. It’s impossible to please everybody, so we try to find the best solution.”


http://sneakybastards.net/theobserver/thief-hands-on/
___






Alright, before you folks crucify me, I want to mention that I'm not sold on this idea myself. I just thought of it, and wanted to throw it up against the wall to see what kind of feedback it got ;).

In the Thief games, you use a light gem to tell you how visible you are.

Not so for noise level. When it comes to noise level, there is no visible scale. You have to play it by ear, estimating how much noise Garrett is making based on what comes out of your speakers.

This makes sense. Because Thief is mostly 1st person, and because even in 3rd person (in Thief 3) you can't see all sides of Garrett at once, it's hard to tell exactly how concealed he is just from the visible shadows. Additionally, the impression of light level is relative, and difficult to judge accurately. For instance, a not-so-dark shadow might appear darker than it really is if the area surrounding it is bright, or if the floor is a dark color, etc.

But, what if there were another way to tell Garrett's visibility level based on the in-game visuals, rather than by relying on the light gem?

Garrett seems to have some pseudo-magical abilities that he learned from the Keepers. Specifically, he has some sort of ability to become completely invisible while standing in an area of shadow, whereas a normal person would be completely visible while standing in the exact same shadow.

What if this were represented in-game by Garrett's transparency level? Instead of a light gem, as your visibility level decreased, Garrett's on-screen level of transparency (his weapon and hands) would increase. As he became so transparent that he was difficult for the player to see, a wire-frame outline would start to appear so that the player could see where his hands and weapon were. In complete darkness, Garrett would be totally invisible, and all you'd see would be a bright outline.

Corvin25
18th May 2009, 14:53
......... KILL THE HERETIC!! D:<

....
Not the WORST idea. Though it would be a bit of a distraction. The light gem works because it's reliable. But transparency can't be easily seen if you're in a darker area, as opposed to a well lit area. You'd probably be more visible than you'd think.

Sorry. I do not like this idea. :(

Hypevosa
18th May 2009, 14:55
you don't always have a weapon out, and you don't always see your hands (and if you did it would be very annoying). Garrett doesn't become invisible, it's just that he blends in due to the pitch blackness of his attire, otherwise when you moved your gem wouldn't indicate you were more visible. The light gem is a good tool, and I don't see why Garrett would just ditch a good tool.

TeoRocker
18th May 2009, 15:00
Not a bad idea, but still...

What about when you're not holding a weapon? Minor issue, you can always carry the blackjack as it causes no penalty on your visibility, but there might be times when you'll have to be unarmed.

I also had a similar idea, but didn't post it yet. Still, like yours, it's just an idea and I don't really think it's even a good one. How about, instead of a light gem, we see a small human silhouette 2d sprite? The only thing you'll gain from this is that you can see how individual parts of you are covered. But I can't see how this will help the gameplay.

Now, merging my idea with yours, perhaps the light gem could be replaced with a silhouette that becomes transparent whenever you are well-hidden (in addition to your hands and weapons), so that it can be turned off if someone wants to play without it but still wants to know whether he's well hidden.

This is just food for thought. I still prefer just having a light gem :P

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom
18th May 2009, 15:20
To OP, not so good of an idea. As has been said, it wouldn't be very reliable for those who want to know how lit they are. The light gem is just perfect for what it does. I would like to see them give the player different light gems to choose from though. You know how some games let you pick a different crosshair? I'd like to choose from different light gems and even be able to disable it altogether. You can pick big, small, circle, square, oval, whatever. It would be neat to customize it a little.

TeoRocker
18th May 2009, 15:24
I wonder... What if in an alternate reality Thief I, II and III had this "invisibility" idea instead of the light gem, and someone posted on these forums an idea about a "light indicator"? What kind of reactions would he get? Not good ones, I assume ;)

The Deuce
18th May 2009, 15:26
Yeah, the main two pushbacks that came to mind when I thought of this were that 1) Garrett doesn't always carry a weapon, and it would be weird to see your empty hands sticking out in front of you, and 2) In dark places it would be difficult to see your transparency level.

For 1), I think the only solution would be to force Garrett to carry something (ie, the blackjack), at all times.

For 2), you'd have to make it so that the outline was insensitive to light level, so that regardless of the darkness of your surroundings, you could always tell your level of concealment by the brightness of the outline. Of course, then again, the outline color would need to change too, to keep it from blending in with the background. I suspect it would be garish and annoying, and not work too well...

So, consider this idea shelved. :D



Garrett doesn't become invisible, it's just that he blends in due to the pitch blackness of his attire.

You sure about that? Although the game never goes into detail, it seems to indicate that Keepers have a sort of preternatural ability that aids them in hiding, and that Garrett mastered this ability while he was with them. For instance, think about in Thief II where you meet Artemus, and then he walks away. If you try to follow him down the hall, he fades from view in front of your face.

Yotun
18th May 2009, 15:30
The problem for me is, I never assumed Garrett had any sort of magical or mystical ability when blending with the shadows - just that he dressed really dark, and was skilled enough to assume a posture that would seem neutral in the darkness. After all, there was never any 'transparency' in your weapons in the previous games, and instead when you did have your weapons out, you became more visible, which to me indicated that this was because it broke up the shape of Garrett and made him more visible, indicating that the source of his 'stealth' was natural.

In any case, I'd imagine that you can tell how well you are in the shadow, by telling how dark the place you are in actually looks like! I wouldn't mind having no light gem at all - as an option for those who want to play without one, not as default. And the gem isn't really an 'unnatural' way of knowing your stealth. You can just imagine that Garrett just has a tiny, not really that valuable stone, which absorbs light when exposed to it, and Garrett can use to judge where a place is too bright.

DoomyDoomyDoomDoom
18th May 2009, 15:38
You just described the way I always saw it. I never thought of Garrett as magic and it did seem possible (considering everything else) that the light gem was a neat little object he actually had and used.

I guess Garrett being magic invisible could be a cheap way to explain dumb AI. heh I'd like to see the AI feel around the shadows with a their hands or weapons when they can't see. Of course they shouldn't do that all the time, but like in a dark room.

Qazi
18th May 2009, 16:01
I'd always thought of the light gem... to be an actual gem that Garrett carries with him. On a pendant or fob, which glowed from collecting/refracting ambient light. I wasn't something that distracted me from the immersion.

Belboz
18th May 2009, 16:13
But in the opening video for thief 1 garrett can see a keeper who does not want to be seen, so all the people around this keeper cannot see the keeper but garrett can see him plain as day.

Platinumoxicity
18th May 2009, 16:43
The translucency brings to my mind those cheesy rpgs with orcs and elves, where sneaking is viewed as the character being translucent. That's gay.

In other news:

But in the opening video for thief 1 garrett can see a keeper who does not want to be seen, so all the people around this keeper cannot see the keeper but garrett can see him plain as day.

There are some physical characteristics or behavior models that can be used to decieve the human mind to "instantly forget" that they've seen the person in question. The keepers seem to have the ability to enhance this trait.

Terr
18th May 2009, 16:44
Then why is there an invisibility potion? ;)

No, Garrett is hard to see through a combination of Stealth-Fu and something closer to Jedi mind tricks. ("This is not the shadowy figure you are looking for.")

Adding self-transparency would also be a bit self-defeating, since you wouldn't really be able to tell you were transparent or not in dark areas, because... well, you wouldn't be able to see much anyway. Remember the phrase "Can't see my hand in front of my face", referring to darkness? ;)

DarthEnder
18th May 2009, 16:53
I mentioned it in the Armory thread, but I'd like to see Garret wear a mechanical bracer with various informational devices build into it. Including:

1. Compass
2. Chronometer that serves as your mission timer.
3. Light Gem
4. Noise level meter, looking like a gauge with a little bouncing needle on it
5. Health Meter, one of the "glass tube filled with red liquid" type deals.

It's basically like a steampunk Pipboy for Garret.

And all of this is technically on his wrist, but it's all just floats in the corner of the hud for us.

Specter
18th May 2009, 17:42
Personally, I don't like the above idea. A compass I could see him using, but why some kind of timing device? And I never believed Garrett actually had a light gem. It was a necessary addition to the HUD since we are unable to see the same way Garrett would and cannot, therefore, accurately tell when completely in shadow. It is for this reason exactly that there was never a noise meter. We are able to hear exactly how much noise we are making. If you introduce this meter, then you will also have to measure ambient noise. The health meter doesn't really make sense to me either. Surely Garrett knows when he is hurt. The health bar is for us, the players, not for Garrett. All these devices are quickly adding up to changing a naturally talented thief into a technologically advanced (for the time) and out of place character.

ZylonBane
18th May 2009, 17:50
I mentioned it in the Armory thread, but I'd like to see Garret wear a mechanical bracer with various informational devices build into it. ... It's basically like a steampunk Pipboy for Garret.

And all of this is technically on his wrist, but it's all just floats in the corner of the hud for us.
You loved the TDS default HUD, didn't you?

Hypevosa
18th May 2009, 17:57
I always thought the light gem was just woven into one of his bracers.

ZylonBane
18th May 2009, 18:08
I always thought the light gem was just woven into one of his bracers.
Thief's light gem doesn't exist in-fiction. It's an abstraction of Garrett's skill at knowing how visible he is, which exists for the sole benefit of the player.

Direlord
18th May 2009, 18:16
It's not a bad idea but it seems a little pointless to might also be odd to see yourself in complete darkness with a lot of transperancy trying to aim your weapon or bow.

If i would add anything to the gem it would be a siloutte (sp) meter. it would require a buff of the AI but i hated how if you looked at the thief even though he was in the dark there was a blazing fire behind him that anyone could see.

That was an example i had in Thief 2 during the breaking into the city watch building. I was in the doorway to the head guys office door was open. My light gem was black but their was a fire in the fireplace behind me at the far end of the room. I had my mechanical eye looking and i turned to look at myself in the doorway. Was so blantantly obvious someone was crouching there kind of ruined the effect but i'm guessing with the tech of the time it was not worth or too hard to try to implement something that could detect that.

Terr
18th May 2009, 18:20
Yeah, detecting silhouettes is tricky, because you have to render a bit of what the guard would see (if the guard were a player) and make some calls about outlines etc.

Also, it totally breaks the light gem mechanic, because suddenly you are hidden only from certain directions. You'd need to make your "light-gem" some sort of 3D marble with quadrants.

Botlas
18th May 2009, 18:48
This idea works if you always saw a part of Garrett or played in third person. It doesn't work if you play solely in first person (which I do).

There is a trend towards removing the UI in games, which I think Thief would benefit from as it increases immersion. I don't know how this would work in Thief though; I think the best you could do is try to make the gem smaller/transparent so it's less noticeable unless you're looking at it, or perhaps just moving it to the side. Then again, that might make stealthing harder.

I think EM should leave this alone, but who knows, they might come up with something good.

The Deuce
18th May 2009, 18:59
Belboz:

But in the opening video for thief 1 garrett can see a keeper who does not want to be seen, so all the people around this keeper cannot see the keeper but garrett can see him plain as day.

Terr:

No, Garrett is hard to see through a combination of Stealth-Fu and something closer to Jedi mind tricks. ("This is not the shadowy figure you are looking for.")

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that Garrett's stealth ability is not supposed to be 100% natural. There's some sort of Keeper ability that augments the effects of darkness and stealth. Garrett is unusually talented both at seeing through this ability, and at using it.

Although the game never goes into details (probably for the same reason that it doesn't show Garrett's face: to keep Garrett and the Keepers more mysterious) Artemus's statement at the beginning of Thief 1 that it is difficult to see a Keeper who doesn't wish to be seen does seem to indicate that it's a kind of Jedi-esque mind trick. Garrett was able to see him due to a partial immunity to the effects of this trick, not because of especially acute night vision or something like that (note that Garrett didn't even realize that Artemus was trying to hide. He just noticed that other people seemed like they couldn't see him).

For those of you who have played White Wolf's Vampire games, I think it's something similar to how Obfuscate works in that.

ZylonBane
18th May 2009, 19:15
There is a trend towards removing the UI in games, which I think Thief would benefit from as it increases immersion.
The original Thief already has a UI that's as minimal as possible without losing vital information. Those LGS guys knew what they were doing.

Terr
18th May 2009, 19:29
This idea works if you always saw a part of Garrett or played in third person.
Well, in some cases, but it's still not great. Consider a bright spotlight making a circle on a far wall. Garret is entirely in darkness, but is between the wall and a guard.

The guard should see him, the silhouette would be very strong, but the actual amount of light that's falling on Garret's back (bounced off the wall) is tiny--You wouldn't be able to tell the difference from third-person view.

Qazi
18th May 2009, 19:57
That was an example i had in Thief 2 during the breaking into the city watch building. I was in the doorway to the head guys office door was open. My light gem was black but their was a fire in the fireplace behind me at the far end of the room. I had my mechanical eye looking and i turned to look at myself in the doorway. Was so blantantly obvious someone was crouching there kind of ruined the effect but i'm guessing with the tech of the time it was not worth or too hard to try to implement something that could detect that.

Wasn't that a glitch? I'd find that most doorways would have a sweetspot of shadow you could crouch inside, and for no discernable reason you'd be perfectly hidden. Usually the game is ok with the silhouette deal, because if you can see a light source to be silhouetted against, Garrett won't be in full shadow.
Granted, I didn't deal with silhouettes against ambient light/lit up backgrounds.

Ikana
27th Aug 2009, 03:33
Alright, before you folks crucify me, I want to mention that I'm not sold on this idea myself. I just thought of it, and wanted to throw it up against the wall to see what kind of feedback it got ;).

In the Thief games, you use a light gem to tell you how visible you are.

Not so for noise level. When it comes to noise level, there is no visible scale. You have to play it by ear, estimating how much noise Garrett is making based on what comes out of your speakers.

This makes sense. Because Thief is mostly 1st person, and because even in 3rd person (in Thief 3) you can't see all sides of Garrett at once, it's hard to tell exactly how concealed he is just from the visible shadows. Additionally, the impression of light level is relative, and difficult to judge accurately. For instance, a not-so-dark shadow might appear darker than it really is if the area surrounding it is bright, or if the floor is a dark color, etc.

But, what if there were another way to tell Garrett's visibility level based on the in-game visuals, rather than by relying on the light gem?

Garrett seems to have some pseudo-magical abilities that he learned from the Keepers. Specifically, he has some sort of ability to become completely invisible while standing in an area of shadow, whereas a normal person would be completely visible while standing in the exact same shadow.

What if this were represented in-game by Garrett's transparency level? Instead of a light gem, as your visibility level decreased, Garrett's on-screen level of transparency (his weapon and hands) would increase. As he became so transparent that he was difficult for the player to see, a wire-frame outline would start to appear so that the player could see where his hands and weapon were. In complete darkness, Garrett would be totally invisible, and all you'd see would be a bright outline.

I like to think of the gem not being part of the game world.. that is to say... there is no light gem, similar to how Garrett doesn't have a pocketful of red shields..but we see them anyways..

I say keep the gem.

jtr7
27th Aug 2009, 03:38
Silhouettes and backlighting would kill the game. It's not a glitch. In the older games the light gem and visibility was limited to the darkness on what Garrett was standing on, even if everything above the soles of his boots was fully lit. In TDS, Garrett's shadow was made detectable to AIs, but they took that out.

bambini
27th Aug 2009, 09:10
A light gem idea that I've been toying with for a while is an actual, real "gem" with an LED inside that can plug into your USB port and gets brighter/dimmer when you play Thief 4. I can picture it being part of a "Collector's Edition" version of the game, or offered when you pre-order.

You would still need the light gem on-screen, as the limitations would be that if you were playing Thief 4 in a well-lit room you wouldn't be able to see if your little doodad was lit up or not, but it would probably be a fun little gadget nonetheless.

Also, it might encourage people to play Thief in a dark room with the curtains closed, which, let's face it, is the way to get the most from the game (except Shalebridge Cradle. For that you need lights on and someone else - preferably your mummy - in the room to hold your hand) :)

jtr7
27th Aug 2009, 09:54
Hahaha! :thumb:

Repost your idea in the Merchandising thread (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=88631). :cool:

bambini
27th Aug 2009, 10:34
Consider it done :)

jtr7
27th Aug 2009, 10:41
;)

I can't imagine it would be too expensive to mass produce, and probably cheaper than the Batman: Arkham Asylum Collector's Edition Batarang.

esme
27th Aug 2009, 10:54
Batarang ? this I gotta see .... search furtle search ..... :eek: £60!!!!! and you can't even use it !!!!

taff me :(

.... mind you that includes the game .... hmmmm .... bet it's made of plastic ...... suppose you could use it as a template

bambini
27th Aug 2009, 11:13
For £60 I'd want Adam West to come and show me how to use the Batarang as well :)

Davehall380
27th Aug 2009, 11:26
Im not sure that we need a replacement for the light gem - its been fine for the past three games, and so long as we dont think about it to much, it doesnt really destroy the immersion. OK, so some people would like to know HOW Garrett knows these things - I just always assumed it was a way to let the player know that they were concealed in the same way that it would be plainly obvious to a master thief (he wouldnt need to check a light gem standing next to a lit fireplace now would he?)

esme
27th Aug 2009, 11:30
For £60 I'd want Adam West to come and show me how to use the Batarang as well :)don't be silly he wouldn't fit in the box ... unless they made it larger .... and then there's the need for airholes ..... and who would be mayor of Quahog ?

nope, none starter I'm afraid ;) :D

kin
27th Aug 2009, 11:38
One ingame explanation for the light gem could be in one of the first missions.You steal this gem from a mine for example and realizing on the way out into the light that it emits light when it gets light (Of course Garrett knows that from Thief 1 but it could be a small gemless mission off G's past to show how he got it).

Davehall380
27th Aug 2009, 11:41
Do we need an explanation?

jtr7
27th Aug 2009, 11:54
Im not sure that we need a replacement for the light gem - its been fine for the past three games, and so long as we dont think about it to much, it doesnt really destroy the immersion. OK, so some people would like to know HOW Garrett knows these things - I just always assumed it was a way to let the player know that they were concealed in the same way that it would be plainly obvious to a master thief (he wouldnt need to check a light gem standing next to a lit fireplace now would he?)

Correct! But he could stand in the shadow next to the lit fireplace and not be seen, when in real life, of course he would. The excuse could be made about being distracted, not being able to see 360-degrees, and other factors one cannot account for without deliberate thought. That's why I want it in his eye and magical, so he doesn't have to think about any part of his body lit by a shaft of light he can't see without twisting around. Dropping down into a room you can't see much of from above, a focused beam from a window blocked by crates and supports pillars could shine on your back before you even see the light beam or where it lands, but to your eyes up front, looking down or forward, you would only see a little change in ambient light, while someone behind could see you well enough.

Davehall380
27th Aug 2009, 12:03
There is definitley scope for adjusting the way that the game adopts the light gem. However, I think that too much explanation and focus would start to ruin it slightly - I for one like the unexplained parts of the game. A scientific explanation of how everything happens (which is bound to happen in a forum of logical people ;) ) is understandable, but this is a magical universe not bound by real-life laws.

I would like to see it incorporated into the eye, as the eye is something which (as I argued in a previous thread) has a fair bit of potential. However, lets not give to much of the game away, eh?

bambini
27th Aug 2009, 12:15
don't be silly he wouldn't fit in the box ... unless they made it larger .... and then there's the need for airholes ..... and who would be mayor of Quahog ?

Pizza Delivery Man: Pizza for Adam West.
Mayor Adam West: NO! You gave me Canadian bacon instead of bacon? This misdeed cannot go unpunished. Pizza delivery man, prepare to meet your maker at the hands of my cat launcher! [grabs a bag of cats and shoots them at the man using a crossbow]
[later]
Mayor Adam West: Damn, I lost him. Alright cats, back in the bag. Come on Fluffy, come on Mittens, come on Paul. Haha, what a ridiculous name for a ca-at. PAUL! That's a person's name! A person's name! Hahahahaha! Oh! Paul...

Sorry, I couldn't resist a Family Guy quote ;)

Davehall380
27th Aug 2009, 12:17
Adam West, Adam West [sliding down his chair underneath a covererd dinner table]. . . ill come out when their all gone ;)

13LACK13ISHOP
27th Aug 2009, 18:35
Silhouettes and backlighting would kill the game. It's not a glitch. In the older games the light gem and visibility was limited to the darkness on what Garrett was standing on, even if everything above the soles of his boots was fully lit. In TDS, Garrett's shadow was made detectable to AIs, but they took that out.

I would not mind this. I think this would be pretty cool. Though having said that I like difficult games and I can see why some might not like this. I would like to be able to customise the light gem like somebody already said. I think it would be a pretty neat feature.

Davehall380
27th Aug 2009, 19:44
If you take into account the player shadow, then you force the player to almost certainly play the majority of the game in 3rd person. Ok, high level players will calculate where there shadows will fall before approach, but for the rest of us this will mean playing in 3rd person to avoid alerting guards by accident.

As for a customisable light gem, its a nice concept certainly. But at the end of the day, does the light gem need changing? It already does what it says on the tin. Customisation say for example, on how accurate it was would just become frustrating.

ZylonBane
27th Aug 2009, 22:24
"Thirteen Lack Thirteen Ishop"? WTF?

Davehall380
28th Aug 2009, 11:28
"Thirteen Lack Thirteen Ishop"? WTF?

???

ZylonBane
28th Aug 2009, 11:47
???
Exactly!

esme
28th Aug 2009, 11:59
"Thirteen Lack Thirteen Ishop"? WTF?

please tell me you don't need this explaining and that you are being ironic

but just in case you do, the 13 looks a bit like a B so he's used 13 instead of a B because he prefers the way it looks, so 13lack13ishop reads as BlackBishop

now can we get back to topic please

Hamadriyad
28th Aug 2009, 16:23
Yes.
I prefer light gem. No need to change it.

Davehall380
28th Aug 2009, 16:54
Yes.
I prefer light gem. No need to change it.

Agreed. No need to fix what isnt broken.

Flashart
28th Aug 2009, 17:10
I've mentioned this elsewhere but I like the idea of a "directional" light gem, even if it was 4 quadrants. This could show which direction the light is coming from. Now, this may seem pointless but I thought it may help with the silhouette in doorways etc.

Davehall380
28th Aug 2009, 17:19
I've mentioned this elsewhere but I like the idea of a "directional" light gem, even if it was 4 quadrants. This could show which direction the light is coming from. Now, this may seem pointless but I thought it may help with the silhouette in doorways etc.

This assumes (and this isnt meant as a personal attack) that the game takes into account the player shadow. This draws up the idea of 3rd person etc. They seem to have abandoned the idea in TDS (although the developers put the code in for guards to react to player shadows). With the 3rd person perspective, it is easier to take into the player shadow (this is hard in 1st person). A 'quad' light gem would help the 1st person view take into account where the light is coming from, but in 3rd person it might become redundant

ZylonBane
28th Aug 2009, 18:29
...so 13lack13ishop reads as BlackBishop
...in an extraordinarily retarded way. I realize the IQ standards are pretty low over here, but there's no reason to plunge headlong into the abyss.

On topic, a directional light gem would be a terrible idea. The only possible reason to implement it would be as the basis for a half-assed AI silhouette detection algorithm, and that would lead directly to player cognitive overload. It's just not possible, let alone fun, for the average player to hold in their head the position and relative visibility to multiple moving guards simultaneously.

13LACK13ISHOP
28th Aug 2009, 19:26
Agreed. No need to fix what isnt broken.

That was not what I was getting at. I dont mean change it gameplay wise just customise the light gem in things like shape and colour ect. However you dont have to change it but some people can if they want to with their gold just for the sake of fun. Thats why I thought it was a "everyone wins" idea. I cant imagine it wouldnt take to long to implement either.

Oh and gee thanks Zylonbane. (My IQ is 120)

Davehall380
28th Aug 2009, 19:43
That was not what I was getting at. I dont mean change it gameplay wise just customise the light gem in things like shape and colour ect. However you dont have to change it but some people can if they want to with their gold just for the sake of fun. Thats why I thought it was a "everyone wins" idea. I cant imagine it wouldnt take to long to implement either.

Oh and gee thanks Zylonbane. (My IQ is 120)

I could see why some people would want to customise the light gem - maybe this could be an option in the menu system and not one that requires need for speed style 'pimpin' of Garretts tools.

esme
28th Aug 2009, 22:14
...in an extraordinarily retarded way. I realize the IQ standards are pretty low over here, but there's no reason to plunge headlong into the abyss...people are free to pick whatever username they like for whatever reason they like as long as it gets past the rude word censor

you picked ZylonBane for reasons that are good and sufficient to you

like all the other names on the forum it's as good a name as any you could have chosen

there is no reason or need to be insulting to people because you personally don't like the name they chose

all you achieve with these insults is a similar response and then we jump merrily into several pages of vitriol before the thread gets back on track again

is this what you are trying for ?

if this is what you are trying to do then I am asking you politely to stop

xDarknessFallsx
28th Aug 2009, 22:22
I like the gem the way it was in T1/T2. Simple and minimalistic. Performance-wise, I think I like The Dark Mod's better -- it seems more sensitive and reactive.

Hamadriyad
29th Aug 2009, 09:09
...in an extraordinarily retarded way. I realize the IQ standards are pretty low over here, but there's no reason to plunge headlong into the abyss.


Who do you think you are? You can't insult people. Besides, you couldn't recognize that 13lack 13ishop is Black Bishop. Hmm... Whose IQ is pretty low here?

kabatta
29th Aug 2009, 09:18
Classic light gem for me.

ZylonBane
29th Aug 2009, 15:42
Hmm... Whose IQ is pretty low here?
Yours.

Davehall380
29th Aug 2009, 16:27
These arguements are pointless - does it really matter whos IQ is what? Does this win the arguement, making you feel good? anyone who reads contributions like this take a negative view on your profile, regardless of who started what. Stick to the thread.

Agreed. Classic lightgem :-)

Secondary
29th Aug 2009, 19:23
there has been alot of chatter about the heads-up-display in thief

the problem i have with this is people get so technical about what the light gem is and how it works (i heard some people talk about fiber optics)

the point im trying to raise is, the light gem is part of the games atmosphere, its workings are never explained and garrett never talks about it, its not visible on his outfit or in his inventory or anyhting

the programmers and artists behind thief never told us exactly what it is and i see no reason why they should




that being said i dont know why the light gem needs replacing and i dont think a noise meter is necessary. its very simple to tell how much noise you are making because you too can hear it. and like i said about people being too technical, how do you explain a noise meter, unless you want to throw in a different colored gem that works for noise like the light gem works for light. really though, i dont think any of that needs to happen

Hamadriyad
30th Aug 2009, 08:00
I agree with you Davehall. I am sorry because I involved such an argument.

midna1
30th Sep 2009, 19:02
ok, a quick rant about the light gem indicator in deadly shadows

This was soooooo annoying

1. Aethetically it ruined the visual frame & colour range. U want to let ur eyes adjust to the darkness & night. But this is difficult when u have a bloomin lightbulb on at the bottom of the screen that u cant turn off - spazz :nut:
2. In real life you would never use a stupid light gem for ur sneaking action
3. The game plays better without the gem For example if u cut out a bit of cardboard & stick it over the light gem. U dont need some spazzy visual cue for ur sneaking when u can do it off the dynamic lighting

Please can you include the option to TURN IT OFF in Thief 4

Herr_Garrett
30th Sep 2009, 19:28
wtf x2

Platinumoxicity
30th Sep 2009, 19:36
wtf seconded

ZylonBane
30th Sep 2009, 19:41
Please can you include the option to TURN IT OFF in Thief 4
Hey, you accidentlly spelled out "you" here. Let's not have any more of that!

Hamadriyad
30th Sep 2009, 19:43
Do you really think you can play without a lightgem?

Platinumoxicity
30th Sep 2009, 19:52
Without a light gem, how exactly do you know if the shadow you're in is dark enough to hide you completely? It's not like you can see your character from the outside in a Thief-game, now can you?

midna1
30th Sep 2009, 19:58
The dynamic lighting is good enough to show when u are hidden. & if Garratt was running around with a light gem the enemies would see u & slap u down.

I hate the light gem I hate it. Just let me turn the bastard off.

midna1
30th Sep 2009, 19:59
Without a light gem, how exactly do you know if the shadow you're in is dark enough to hide you completely? It's not like you can see your character from the outside in a Thief-game, now can you?

er have u played deadly shadows. U play in third person

Herr_Garrett
30th Sep 2009, 20:00
Oh, good. I thought you were prattering about Thief here, but I think it's Icewind Dale you mean. I seem to recall that there's a guy called Garratt in Easthaven.

However, there's no lightgem in IWD...

Platinumoxicity
30th Sep 2009, 20:02
er have u played deadly shadows. U play in third person

No, U "play" in third person.

I don't "play" in third person.

I "Play" in first person.

I unmapped the "switch perspective"-key off my keymappings so that I could never even accidentally change to 3rd.

Hamadriyad
30th Sep 2009, 20:32
if Garratt was running around with a light gem the enemies would see u & slap u down.


Garrett doesn't have a light gem, we have a light gem.

jtr7
30th Sep 2009, 20:47
It's rarely understood, but the INI/CFG files can be adjusted to take the light gem off the screen (dropped down off of it, really). I have it disabled for all my Thief games so I can take cleaner full screenshots. I like the light gem, but as a Master Thief, I know my way around The City enough to not need the light gem unless I'm really taking a different route (not possible in TDS, all streets are traversed repeatedly).

xDarknessFallsx
30th Sep 2009, 21:24
I like the gem... & it has never really bothered me. Your post reminds me, though, that I want the option to make the gem -- and ALL -- H.U.D. icons semi-transparent to a level we desire. No game should launch without this anymore. The bright health shield icons in T2 were too bright, imo. What harm is there in allowing semi-transparency for all HUD elements .

jtr7
30th Sep 2009, 21:29
If it's a slider or something then it's not harmless, as with adding slider option after slider option. But again, these things can be adjusted in the INI/CFG files. Although, a transparent light gem means a darker light gem, so it would have to be more colour-coded, else the darker shades won't be discernible. Without colour-coding all the way down to one level above full dark, the invisible shades could include those that tell you you're visible enough. The health icons have been made transparent or darker in many FMs for the very reason you state. All moddable, and less coding for the devs. All the little things add up, and playtesters have to like it, so take it out of their hands. Playtesters and focus groups have led to gutting of intelligent gameplay, so the less they have to meddle with that we can do on our own, the better. But this would leave out the console-players for longer than the PC-players.:hmm:

Pyronox
30th Sep 2009, 23:19
In Splinter Cell: Conviction, they showed how they desaturate the colours on the screen--except enemies and interactive items--to show you are hidden, and in the shadows.

How 'bout that? Personally though, I'd just snap the light gem to the compass, so you can check it when need be.

xDarknessFallsx
30th Sep 2009, 23:30
I'm going to play Th4f at launch. I don't want to play through it once with things I wish were different, waiting for fans to figure out how and where to tweak the files, when EM could just deliver a few extra options at launch in a menu.

If TDS had done the same, it would've saved me some heartache. Instead, we had to tweak things on our own and/or wait for New Horizon's awesome minimalist project. I didn't know how to tweak on my own so my first playthrough had a cumulative effect of "this sucks" as I endured light trails, bad frob highlight color, loot glint and many other anomalies few people like.

For TDS, menu options should have allowed us to play more like a T2 style. For Thi4f, I'm hoping and assuming the shipped game will be more like T2 already, so now the menu could allow us to tweak just a few extra things to customize just a few things how we want to make the experience that much more better.

Yes, many people have many things they want in the menus. I'm not saying accommodate all. Just pick a few easy things and go with it. Semi-transparent HUD controls are in several games. It's not a stretch to desire it in the shipped Thi4f game.

xDarknessFallsx
30th Sep 2009, 23:41
As a side note, it could be argued that every menu option could or should be done through a CFG/INI file. However, it's a given that T4 will need to give us some menu options. I simply vote for a few more than what T2 provides.

ZylonBane
1st Oct 2009, 00:43
As a side note, it could be argued that every menu option could or should be done through a CFG/INI file.
You do realize that all in-game menu options have to be stored somewhere, right? Otherwise you'd have to set them every single time you started the game. So no, it's not something that can be argued, it's just a fact.

jtr7
1st Oct 2009, 01:06
Yes. And all we are asking for in menu items are the basics, the most important on page one, and no long Options trees full of extraneous and truly unimportant niggling things that are actually available without all that extra work for the devs to do. The CFG/INI files can be backed up, so no resetting it all manually in the menus is necessary should a glitch, corruption, or reinstall force it. Those files make it possible to do much more than a menu will ever have. It's superior in more ways and all you would be missing is a colourful, animated collection of limited variable inputs that won't ever do all you guys want, instead of boring-yet-powerful Notepad text. It's too much and the devs will know it already.

xDarknessFallsx
1st Oct 2009, 01:39
You do realize that all in-game menu options have to be stored somewhere, right? Otherwise you'd have to set them every single time you started the game. So no, it's not something that can be argued, it's just a fact.
Interesting. And all this time I thought the menu options were stored in my monitor.
What I was trying to say is that it could be argued that players could or should be forced to go to the CFG/INI file to change or set all their options.

If you guys want to argue the addition of one or two menu items, I say we just get rid of the in-game menu options altogether and force players to go to the CFG/INI file to change everything. It'd be an inconvenience, sure... but if it means EM can use this dev time to make the gameplay better, then we should all vote for it. I want us forced to go to CFG/INI to customize the keyboard layout; invert the Y-Axis; toggle the 'jump to ladder' setting; adjust the game brightness; adjust the sound and music volumes; change video resolution; change levels of detail; etc. Leave those settings for us to customize in the CFG/INI and let EM do the thing they need every ounce of time for: making a great Thi4f game.

Jtr7, since I can tweak everything through CFG/INI files, please tell me how I can decrease the volume of ambient music in T2 without decreasing the volume of the nature sounds like crickets and such. At the same time, I'd also like to lower the volume of Garrett's "internal voice" and the in-game fight sounds (swords clanging and guards yelling)... all without decreasing the volume of footsteps and NPC mumblings and conversations. The game isn't equalized very well for my system, and the in-game menus don't provide me enough customization choices. Also, what numbers do I tweak in the CFG/INI to make the health shields semi-transparent as they're too bright? I'd like to try semi-transparent light gem and inventory items in the HUD, what numbers should I adjust? And when trying to get off the bottom rung of ladders, I'm often forced to jump off and cause a loud sound. Is there something I can tweak in CFG/INI that lets me tell the game when I push a direction while on the bottom rung, I should detach from the ladder?

ZylonBane
1st Oct 2009, 01:41
Yes. And all we are asking for in menu items are the basics, the most important on page one, and no long Options trees full of extraneous and truly unimportant niggling things that are actually available without all that extra work for the devs to do. The CFG/INI files can be backed up, so no resetting it all manually in the menus is necessary should a glitch, corruption, or reinstall force it. Those files make it possible to do much more than a menu will ever have. It's superior in more ways and all you would be missing is a colourful, animated collection of limited variable inputs that won't ever do all you guys want, instead of boring-yet-powerful Notepad text. It's too much and the devs will know it already.
See, this is exactly the sort of incoherent rambling that you need to stop doing forever.

jtr7
1st Oct 2009, 01:53
So "no" then?



As soon as the docs get my brain drugs mixed at the right proportions, maybe it'll change.

LightningSS
1st Oct 2009, 07:41
I've always found it odd that PC only games of yesteryear had many options and multi-plat games of today have less and less. Wouldn't it make sense that current titles should have plenty of options to suit the different platforms? Just about every game i play nowadays i have to immediately go head first into the cfg files to try to produce a semi-decent pc experience. But i can only fiddle so much and then i have to rely on skilled modders. Most of the consolization problems pc users face today could be alleviated by some simple options. I just can't see any great effort on the devs part to implement some options and i also can't see any reason why not to have them, other than they might get the game out one day earlier.

xDarknessFallsx
1st Oct 2009, 13:49
Yeah, I've also found that a bit odd, but I guess with games costing million$ these days, and how every game needs to be a multimedia extravaganzaa of cinema-like sights and sounds, they probably don't want to spend the resources doing that.

I recognize it's a balancing act when devoting dev and testing time for creating in-game menu options, but I'm okay with EM dedicating whatever it takes to making a few menu options in addition to T2's.

There... EM has my thoughts; jtr7 they have yours :) Life is good!

Ice1019
2nd Oct 2009, 01:21
I liked the light gem, and I wouldn't mind seeing it come back. With that said, I think there are other ways to do the same thing without an icon. Somebody mentioned Splinter Cell: Conviction, which I think is a great example.

Actually, I think something maybe like Dead Space, where all the menus were ingame, might be cool too. Maybe the light gem is around one wrist, while the compass is around another. Now this could present some difficulties with things like real-time arrow selection, but hotkeys would probably take care of that, and the whole thing requires a little suspension of disbelief anyway, unless Garrett has the world's most organized quiver.

xDarknessFallsx
2nd Oct 2009, 02:28
Your Dead Space idea would require 3rd person POV... yuck! :) ... otherwise from 1st person POV, you'd be constantly lifting your arms to look at your wrists.

Dead Space, from a production standpoint, though, was a very good quality game, I must say. And for making all the menus in-game, I give them mad props. My main (only?) gripes were: Bad AI (as seems to be the case with any game other than Thief), Short Game, and Not Enough Variety with enemy characters and gameplay.

Ice1019
2nd Oct 2009, 03:06
Oh yeah, believe me, I don't want third person for Thief 4. Bringing up Dead Space was just an example of the ingame menus, I wasn't suggesting Thief actually be like that.

Yeah, you would have to look at your wrists if you weren't holding a weapon or tool, but if you think about it, how does Garrett look at his Light Gem, from a realistic standpoint? It sure isn't balanced on the end of his nose. If your body was rendered like they did in Thief: DS (one of the only good ideas they had), when you held something in your hands, you could easily see your arms, so it might not be as out of the way as you might think.

But, on the other hand, the Light Gem didn't take me out of the experience being in the middle of the screen, and I would have no problem if they kept it the same.

xDarknessFallsx
2nd Oct 2009, 05:33
In the end, I just want the light gem as T2 has it: an icon on my HUD.

In looking at Splinter Cell: Conviction, I hope T4 is nothing like it. I hope the SC:C ideas of "desaturation of colors" and "leave a ghost where enemy last saw you" are not at all remotely incorporated in T4. Those gimmicks might be okay for one game (SC:C) and one game in time only, but I fear developers will start adopting those things as "the next cool thing in stealth gaming" where they all need to do it. Please no. I really want EM to steer way clear of any such things for the more sophisticated and less gimmicky Thief franchise.

Minimalistic light gem all the way.

ToMegaTherion
2nd Oct 2009, 10:35
Yeah, you would have to look at your wrists if you weren't holding a weapon or tool, but if you think about it, how does Garrett look at his Light Gem, from a realistic standpoint? It sure isn't balanced on the end of his nose.

Garrett doesn't have a light gem, it's just an abstraction to render unto the players the information that Garrett would instantly know. So no question of realism is necessary. The goal is to provide the information to the player in the most efficient way possible, without being unnecessarily intrusive.

LightningSS
2nd Oct 2009, 10:47
Minimalistic light gem all the way.


Garrett doesn't have a light gem, it's just an abstraction to render unto the players the information that Garrett would instantly know. So no question of realism is necessary. The goal is to provide the information to the player in the most efficient way possible, without being unnecessarily intrusive.

This is the best way, period. Then they can just have a simple option to size the gem, small, medium or semi-truck large for the consolers.

jtr7
2nd Oct 2009, 11:00
Garrett would only know how visible he is instantly by having a full natural range of vision and with flicks of the eyes. The player doesn't have either. The light gems can be removed from the screen on the PC.

xDarknessFallsx
12th Oct 2009, 08:05
I wiped my hard drive clean and had to re-install Thief 2. In the helpful tips Looking Glass gives you while the game installs, they call it a "Visibility Gem." I just found that interesting, since we often call it a "Light Gem."

Pieter888
12th Oct 2009, 08:23
In Splinter Cell: Conviction, they showed how they desaturate the colours on the screen--except enemies and interactive items--to show you are hidden, and in the shadows.

How 'bout that? Personally though, I'd just snap the light gem to the compass, so you can check it when need be.

I remember playing penumbra, when you where invisible there the screen would turn blue-ish and will give you a wider point of view of the area, the transparent blue haze also doubled as night vision :cool:

But I don't think it would fit into Thief though

jtr7
12th Oct 2009, 08:25
Yeah, that's turning just about the whole screen into meter, instead of a small spot at the bottom center of the screen.

Vae
12th Oct 2009, 11:22
In the helpful tips Looking Glass gives you while the game installs, they call it a "Visibility Gem." I just found that interesting, since we often call it a "Light Gem."

That's because it is a "visibility gem" and not just a "light gem". Although light is the primary cause that makes one relatively visible, drawing your sword, bow, fire arrow, standing up, etc... all make you more visible under the same lighting conditions. Hence, the correct and proper name "Visibility Gem".

Psychomorph
12th Oct 2009, 11:38
You mean Vaebility Gem? :D


Hey, what about if the gem, is a stone, that changes colour based on what level of light it absorbs? Orange for full light, red for less, brownish for little, black for extremely low light (which you won't see anyway, because it's to dark), while "extremely dark" doesn't mean pitch black, you can still eventually be spotted, so you always will need to check the location for yourself.
It adjusts the colour based on the light that hits it and it alone, not your shoulder or bow, so holding a bow won't change the colour, you have to think for yourself that you're more exposed now.

It would be great if it was an actually real 3D ingame object, a necklace. You could look down your chest to see the colour, or select it via the inventory menue (key binding if needed) to grab it with your left hand and hold it before your face.

It would be great if the "light stone" had a second function, namely (weak) illumination, you somehow activate it and it glows, the range of light is VERY limited though, so it would be just enough to see the wall before your nose (and read books). Light would be orange.

Vae
12th Oct 2009, 12:29
It would be great if it was an actually real 3D ingame object, a necklace. You could look down your chest to see the colour, or select it via the inventory menue (key binding if needed) to grab it with your left hand and hold it before your face.
So let get this straight...no "visibility gem", serving as an gauged abstraction for the player. You want a "light stone" that Garrett would wear on a necklace, so half the time he would be looking down at it to see what color it was, instead paying attention to his environment. This would cause a constant unnecessary distraction for the player and would interfere with fluid game-play.



It would be great if the "light stone" had a second function, namely (weak) illumination, you somehow activate it and it glows, the range of light is VERY limited though, so it would be just enough to see the wall before your nose (and read books). Light would be orange.
So basically you would have a permanent orange "flare" function for the "light stone". It would be convenient...but then again, this may make things too easy, and may interfere with level design when the intention is to have the player in darkness, without having any resource to light.

Psychomorph
12th Oct 2009, 13:26
So let get this straight...no "visibility gem", serving as an gauged abstraction for the player. You want a "light stone" that Garrett would wear on a necklace, so half the time he would be looking down at it to see what color it was, instead paying attention to his environment. This would cause a constant unnecessary distraction for the player and would interfere with fluid game-play.
You know what, you're right, the light gem was an abstract solution to give the player more physical awareness, T3 introduced a visible 3D body which is enough to give you an idea of how lit you are, I hope T4 will keep that feature and allow the deactivation of the light gem (I don't need it). Wall flattening is also a very nice T3 feature that can minimize your silhouette.


So basically you would have a permanent orange "flare" function for the "light stone". It would be convenient...but then again, this may make things too easy, and may interfere with level design when the intention is to have the player in darkness, without having any resource to light.
I agree, but then I hope you can't read in dark, but have to move to a brighter place to do so.

Hypevosa
12th Oct 2009, 21:19
I always imagined that the light gem was ingrained in the wrist on the underside of a glove/bracer... that way it wasn't blatantly visible for everyone else to go "WTF is that glowing dot in the corner?) and that way garrett could always just glance at his wrist momentarily if he needed a gauge. Having to draw your eyes down to your chest is a bad idea, as opposed to slightly twisting your right hand and glancing from your peripheral.

I do agree with vae though, the light gem is probably just an abstract for the player... I enjoy the idea of a physical manifestation better though. If we can turn off the hud, or at least the light gem in T4, I would like to see this physical manifestation in the wrist of my glove/bracer. Maybe the compass could be somehow integrated into Garrett's normal attire as well (maybe on the outer wrist of the same glove, that way he can flatten it (so that it can reorient itself) by just moving twisting his arm a little, since if it was on the underside he would have to flatten his wrist upwards, a slightly more awkward movement).

thinking about the compass gave me a fun idea for a level where your compass just goes bonkers, so those who actually use it for navigation instead must rely on their observations.

Vae
12th Oct 2009, 22:28
Hype, it's not a "light gem", it's a "visibility gem" that is an abstraction of Garrett's own internal sense of visibility. Light is the dominant factor which makes one more visible to others, but is not the only factor...crouching makes one smaller, pulling out the bow makes one larger and more distinctive, pulling out a shiny object reflects light, etc...these factors make one more or less "visible" under the same relative "light", and this is aptly demonstrated by the "visibility gem".

Hypevosa
13th Oct 2009, 18:01
Again, while I realize you're probably right in believing it's simply an abstract, I find the idea of an actual stone somewhere that magically detects the visibility of the wearer and translates it into the visibility of the gem, alot more... fantastic an idea. "Visibility" vs "light gem" I don't really care, that's semantics, all I'm implying is that I enjoy the idea of a physical manifestation alot more :P

kin
13th Oct 2009, 18:47
Penumbra games inspired from thief 1 and 2 had another way of showing how visible you are. It was functional but I like the gem because I am used to it.

Ardanna
6th May 2010, 02:21
If their is no light gem I WILL HANG SOMEONE.

Rieknor
6th May 2010, 03:53
If their is no light gem I WILL HANG SOMEONE.

I would like no light gem, becouse it like im the one who has to know how visible i am and be ware and all that, but sometimes in all the Thiefs, when you find a dark spot and it turns out that is not "so dark".

jtr7
6th May 2010, 04:30
Turn off your light gems and see how well you can judge your visibility. Your game eyes are not very much like real eyes.

Make a backup copy of the specified files and then...

For TDP/Gold and TMA, go to the main install folder, open your USER.CFG files with Notepad, open the Format menu on the toolbar, uncheck Word Wrap, and add these lines and Save:

;To remove the HUD from the screen:
inv_status_height 0

For TDS, inside the System folder within your main install folder, open your T3UI.ini file with Notepad, open the Format menu on the toolbar, uncheck Word Wrap, and make this change: Search for the section labeled:

[LightGem]

...and set:

Active=VISIBLE

...to...

Active=NOT

xDarknessFallsx
6th May 2010, 06:38
I would like no light gem, becouse it like im the one who has to know how visible i am and be ware and all that, but sometimes in all the Thiefs, when you find a dark spot and it turns out that is not "so dark".
...In which case you'd probably want a light gem :scratch:

bambini
6th May 2010, 13:13
How can anyone be arguing for no light gem? Surely it's a fundamental part of Thief? It's the thing that makes visibility according to background light such an important part of the gameplay and that makes the game stand out from others.

Most other games rely on a bar or other indicator that tells the player how much other people can see you (presumably by some sort of telepathic connection with every enemy in the game). This is based entirely on line of sight - if the bad guy is looking at you, the bar is full, if not the bar is empty. It ignores the effect of lighting. Thief revolutionised the way we think about light in games, and the light gem was the key feature of this.

To those who say that they can rely on just looking down to see how well lit they are, I agree with jtr7. Your eyes are just different from game eyes. Also, in the real world, if you're in the dark you know it. You don't need to just consciously check if you are in a pitch black shadow or not, it's a level of unconscious awareness. While this isn't possible when vieiwng the world through a small screen, the light gem is a perfect substitute.

Rieknor
6th May 2010, 22:06
...In which case you'd probably want a light gem :scratch:

If the dark spots are practicly easy to tell "how dark is it", then, yeah, in expert mode, No light gem.

anyway, i dont mind the lightgem so its your call guys ;)

Nephthys
6th May 2010, 22:45
I like the light gem, I see no problem in it.

It is, as Bambini said, an essential part of Thief. I liked the design of it and the weapon menus in DS, and I can't imagine the game without it, since knowing how dark the shadows are is essential to actually you know.. hiding. But taking it out as a choice would be fine, I think.

xDarknessFallsx
7th May 2010, 06:56
I love the light gem

Rieknor
7th May 2010, 15:35
I like it too, and i also think it is an escencial part, but what ever it makes the game more "realistic" and harder...

dsung
7th May 2010, 18:28
Somehow I like the way how Splinter Cell Convtion tells the player whether he is visible or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rZkKi_D174 (Walkthrough from the tutorial)

Well, this solution is not realizable in T4. I mean without colors all the time...

Psychomorph
7th May 2010, 20:00
Somehow I like the way how Splinter Cell Convtion tells the player whether he is visible or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rZkKi_D174 (Walkthrough from the tutorial)

Well, this solution is not realizable in T4. I mean without colors all the time...
Not this! As a Thief you're lurking around in the shadows, you would then experience half of the entire game in black and white.

Nephthys
7th May 2010, 21:22
Turn off your light gems and see how well you can judge your visibility. Your game eyes are not very much like real eyes.

Make a backup copy of the specified files and then...

For TDP/Gold and TMA, go to the main install folder, open your USER.CFG files with Notepad, open the Format menu on the toolbar, uncheck Word Wrap, and add these lines and Save:

;To remove the HUD from the screen:
inv_status_height 0

For TDS, inside the System folder within your main install folder, open your T3UI.ini file with Notepad, open the Format menu on the toolbar, uncheck Word Wrap, and make this change: Search for the section labeled:

[LightGem]

...and set:

Active=VISIBLE

...to...

Active=NOT

or put a sticky note over your screen where the light gem is :P


Not this! As a Thief you're lurking around in the shadows, you would then experience half of the entire game in black and white.

agreed!
It looks cool for Splinter Cell, but not Thief. And they better not have shaky camera syndrome, like in what I see so far of these cutscenes.

xDarknessFallsx
8th May 2010, 06:49
Good 'ole Ubisoft. I wish people would stop buying their games so they would learn how to bump up the quality of their AI and gameplay. They only focus on trying to make games look cool and cinematic, caring little about gameplay and replayability and it really bothers me. After getting burned by Assassin's Creed, and getting bored out of my mind while playing Prince of Persia (along with other games (did they do Far Cry 2, too? boring), I don't plan to buy any Ubisoft game until they figure some things out.

Aside from the gameplay issues I see in Splinter Cell, that 3rd person POV camera, with its constant spinning all around, drives me nuts. And, yeah, that annoying shaky cam effect better not be in T4.

Yaphy
8th May 2010, 09:50
Good 'ole Ubisoft. I wish people would stop buying their games so they would learn how to bump up the quality of their AI and gameplay. They only focus on trying to make games look cool and cinematic, caring little about gameplay and replayability and it really bothers me. After getting burned by Assassin's Creed, and getting bored out of my mind while playing Prince of Persia (along with other games (did they do Far Cry 2, too? boring), I don't plan to buy any Ubisoft game until they figure some things out.

Aside from the gameplay issues I see in Splinter Cell, that 3rd person POV camera, with its constant spinning all around, drives me nuts. And, yeah, that annoying shaky cam effect better not be in T4.
Have you played Rayman 1 and 2? You should, they are really great games.

BigCole
21st May 2010, 10:48
I'm for the light gem. There are a surprising number of areas in the first two games where you think you're in complete darkness and you move forward a millimeter only to be in red warning gem mode, maybe that says more about the lighting system than the whole gem concept but I know that without serious tweaking I'd get caught all the time without it.

Hamadriyad
17th Jul 2011, 10:58
Light gem is a very helpful thing in Thief series. Because we can't tell exactly how dark it is, so gem tells us. But what If we can tell?
In Amnesia, we enderstand how dark it is, monsters can see us or not. Because we can't see anything at all too. -in a distance- But when we get in this dark spot, our eyes adjusts to darkness and we can see in the dark. It feels very Thiefy.
If they can make it for Thief, maybe we won't need the Light Gem. What do you think? Maybe Light Gem is not a necessity after all.

jtr7
17th Jul 2011, 11:31
The AIs in Amnesia aren't as smart as in Thief regarding light, and we want T4's AIs the best of all Thief games, meaning, the way Thief AIs see the player-character is too complex, should be more complex, and the Amnesia AIs are simpler, and Thief uses light as a mechanic in a way that makes it more important for the player to pay close attention in ways Amnesia doesn't. :p

How do movement, speed, crouching, and drawn weapons affect visibility in Amnesia?

Hamadriyad
17th Jul 2011, 13:46
Well, you are right. :) But I still think shadows in Thief can be more darker, and adjusting eyes would be a good implement. - I remember such a discussion, actually. But I don't remember which thread it is.-
Hmm, running is wrong thing to do If there is a monster nearby. You need to find a dark spot, and you should go there slowly, while crouching. Or you can run If you think you can hide before monster catch you. And you shouldn't light up your gas lamp -naturally- As for weapons, you don't have one. :D
I always find entertaining one thing in Amnesia: Game is too dark, and you need to keep your matches and oils for torches and lamps. You should use them carefully, like water arrows in Thief. :)
I wish we could extinguish torches in Amnesia too. Because you couldn't know a monster can show up or not. -which is the most frightening thing in Amnesia. -

Platinumoxicity
17th Jul 2011, 13:54
In Thief, only after a short time of playing, you are perfectly aware of how well a guard in a certain distance can spot you in the particular light you're standing in. In Amnesia you can never be quite certain where the line between being spotted and not being spotted lies. And in Amnesia the stealth is binary. You can't really stand in a half-shadow where you can't be spotted that easily. The half-shadow you're standing in can either hide you completely, or not at all and it's impossible to tell.


I wish we could extinguish torches in Amnesia too. Because you couldn't know a monster can show up or not. -which is the most frightening thing in Amnesia. -

That is actually a lie. Everything in Amnesia is entirely scripted, and everything happens the same way each time you play. The most frightening thing in Amnesia is the first time you play it, and that is the only frightening thing in the game. And it will never come back when you've used it once. ...unless you get amnesia and then play again. :)

Hamadriyad
17th Jul 2011, 14:06
That is actually a lie. Everything in Amnesia is entirely scripted, and everything happens the same way each time you play. The most frightening thing in Amnesia is the first time you play it, and that is the only frightening thing in the game. And it will never come back when you've used it once. ...unless you get amnesia and then play again. :)

Is that so? Because I remember that a place where there is monster, but later, in the same place -I died I guess - monster was not there. Of course this can be scripted, oh wait , I remember! -have I amnesia?- You are right, when you die, Amnesia makes the area easier , and If you die again it becomes more easier.
But I remember one more thing: Sometimes I played with walkthrough. Guy who wrote this sometimes said "be careful, there may be a monster here" And sometimes there was, but sometimes there wasn't. What about that?

Platinumoxicity
17th Jul 2011, 16:10
I thought it was a bug that when a monster killed you, the next time the monster wasn't there.


But I remember one more thing: Sometimes I played with walkthrough. Guy who wrote this sometimes said "be careful, there may be a monster here" And sometimes there was, but sometimes there wasn't. What about that?

Never happened to me. The monsters are always in the same places.

Davehall380
20th Jul 2011, 17:11
In Thief, only after a short time of playing, you are perfectly aware of how well a guard in a certain distance can spot you in the particular light you're standing in.

Important to have game mechanics that can be predicted and results that a repeatable so that you can plan difficult approaches etc without resorting to blind luck

Psychomorph
8th Apr 2013, 18:25
Okay, they say the light gem will be there on the left bottom side of the screen. Will it be there with the black screen corners, or are both optional?

I beg for making both optional, because I don't want to have either. I'm hardcore sneak, I don't need this stuff (my definition of immersion).

In Thief 4 we will see Garrett's hands, I wonder if we will see his body (legs [feet only for console, lmao])? If so, than I would like to use the actual body, lit by the environmental lighting, to get a clear clue if I'm really hard to see.
Now I see that it may be unpleasant for console gamers, with their narrow field of view and thumbsticks, to quickly look down and back up, but for a PC gamers such as myself, using a wide field of view and a mouse, it's a pleasure and a matter of immersion.

I vote for customizable/optional HUD.

SneaksieManfool
9th Apr 2013, 12:08
I don't believe that the Keepers' ability to become and remain unseen was magical - yes granted they used the door glyphs and all but there are more ways to "vanish in plain sight" and none of them magic.
There is this thing called dissimulation - the breaking down of the so called "natural shapes" and "natural movements".
Simple exercise : draw a bunch of irregular shapes (go wild, doodle!) on a piece of paper then draw among them, wherever u want the shape of a car, a square, a triangle or a generic human form.
Your eyes will be automatically attracted to these "natural forms" because the brain can make an association to them with one of your stored memories. The irregular shapes are just "noise" for the brain.
In order for you to become invisible within a specific scenery you will need to blend with it. And the Keepers knew the tricks.

Dissimulation by use of color - adopting the same colors as the targeted scene or population (this includes the use of camouflage). Imagine walking through a slum in The City - if you want to be "invisible" you will stick to tattered capes and neutral colors not sport a noble's robe with hot colors.

Dissimulation by use of shape and form - breaking down the recognizable pattern of the "natural shapes". See examples of ninjas being attributed magical powers of turning into a stone - they achieved this simply by contorting their bodies into a form that resembles more a stone than a human body ( tucked legs and arms firmly beneath body ) and cannot be recognized as human.
I don't imagine Garrett hiding in the shadows by just standing there. More likely he will attempt an irregular form, kneel, stick to the wall or mold to objects in proximity, in order to decrease his natural pattern and along with the cover provided by the shadow, increase his "invisibility". If you are standing next to a let's say dresser close to a wall, in the shadow, a person looking at the dresser will eventually distinguish that there is "something" next to the dresser - however if u crouch and adjust your height to the height of the dresser you form will be integrated into the dresser's while the shadow will provide you with near invisibility.

Dissimulation by use of movement - your basic person-vanishing-behind-crowd-or-passing-vehicle trick.
Your eyes tend to follow the flow and natural sequence of movement. Usually the followed person will change direction at the breaking point of the LoS in accordance with his initial movement (if the bus goes right you go left) giving him enough time to "vanish" - the stalker will generally follow the movement of the bus for a while until the brain kicks in and goes like "maybe he went the other way" . Also the followed person could pass into proximity, get closer to the stalker after the LoS breaking point, as the stalker will naturally tend to search for him in the distance and will not pay attention to things close to him (think of it like focusing a camera on a distant object, the objects close to the camera become blurry.).
Another exercise - try to remember the last time you were running in a dream - you may have been able to switch direction left or right but only extremely rarely you are able to immediately stop and run in the opposite direction, if you could stop at all. That's why this general kind of dream usually ends by waking you up due to an unavoidable collision. That's how fixed the brain is with "natural flow".

The statement "especially one that does not wish to be seen" doesn't necessarily imply that Garrett saw through an invisibility spell - more likely implies that he was able to discern through the Keeper's dissimulation attempt, maybe he saw a small detail that indicated that this regular guy is actually being "sneaksie". The people "passed him by like he wasn't there" not because he was invisible but because he did a marvelous job by blending with the crowd and the environment - he did not attract or deserve attention.
Granted they used the door glyphs but those needed to be inscribed - not much use when someone is running after you - so they could access these in special parts of the districts and thus "vanish" from pursuers.
Knowledge of these techniques combine with glyph doorways would indeed make them into super-humans to the untrained. However Garrett most likely simply had a preternatural ability to sense and see small details an discern through irregular shapes faster than a normal man, ability that was only accentuated by the Keepers' training.

Psychomorph
10th Apr 2013, 07:00
I don't believe that the Keepers' ability to become and remain unseen was magical.

I think there is definitely a magic aspect to the Keepers. It is not much some sort of stealth magic that they used to become visually invisible, but a more subtle way of becoming "less perceivable".
That means a keeper that does not wish to be seen would walk through the street and people would see him and still not notice and have no memory of them. If they'd be interrogated and asked about whether they have seen some guy walking by in a cloak, they would wonder what the interrogator is talking about, because they don't know they have actually seen.

That is what made Garrett so special, because despite the Keeper tricks, he did see and even managed to approach one of them unnoticed and steal from him. This is why he was so much praised by the Keepers. Man, Garrett is just awesome.

Kyle Hyde
10th Apr 2013, 07:31
That means a keeper that does not wish to be seen would walk through the street and people would see him and still not notice and have no memory of them. If they'd be interrogated and asked about whether they have seen some guy walking by in a cloak, they would wonder what the interrogator is talking about, because they don't know they have actually seen.


Sounds quite Jedi to me :)

Fps Sasha
14th Apr 2013, 12:48
I think that the light gem should be at the bottom...middle as opposed to bottom left. One reason I have is that when we play first person games, we usually focus on the middle of the screen. The "bottom-middle" is closer than the bottom-left and easily more viewable with us focusing on the centre of the screen. :lol: this might sound ridiculous to some but the light gem being on the bottom left of the screen ...kind of makes me uncomfortable. My eyes are crying for help :D ;)

zhunt
18th Jun 2013, 07:45
http://s10.postimg.org/5srlcjafd/GARRETT.jpg

Platinumoxicity
18th Jun 2013, 07:59
Putting the light gem in the corner is like the shroud is screaming: "Please, don't mind that thing in the corner, look at my pretty swirly particle effects. A lot of effort went into making them." :(

The Owl
19th Jun 2013, 05:32
Yeah, it's pretty bothersome now that the light gem has been relocated.
More worrying is that there are less degrees of visibility.
You'd think, now that we're approaching the next generation of gaming, we'd actually have larger and more complicated varying mechanics. It couldn't be more of the opposite.

sneaksietaffer
22nd Jun 2013, 09:26
The light gem in the new Thief don't even look like a gemstone but some modern visibility/stealth indicator. And where is the compass?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
22nd Jun 2013, 09:55
FYI, more on the light gem (taken from the E3 Gameplay Q&A thread):



The relationship is like this: The shroud is a quick-reference visual element for understanding whether or not you are in darkness or light, and at what point you enter from one into the other. However it is an approximation, a simplification, a shortcut. Stealth is not binary; the light gem operates as a more comprehensive detection meter and fades through various levels of brightness and darkness, like a gradient. So the light gem is more comprehensive, the shroud is faster. You wouldn't want to disable the light gem in favor of the shroud, but you might want to disable the shroud in favor of the light gem. Hope this helps clear things up a bit!

Jace_Auditore
22nd Jun 2013, 09:58
The light gem in the new Thief don't even look like a gemstone but some modern visibility/stealth indicator. And where is the compass?

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/1700/z7la.png

I think it was mentioned that this compass can be toggled with the Down button on the D-Pad.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
22nd Jun 2013, 10:00
FYI


A light gem is still one of those indicators. It’s tucked down in the bottom left corner of the screen, and exhibits three states: hidden, partially visible and fully visible. In addition to the light gem is the Shroud – a murky vignette that surrounds the edge of the screen, constantly undulating as Garrett remains in shadow. Leaving the safety of darkness causes the Shroud to flash brilliant white; an effect that quickly became distracting. We understand Eidos Montreal’s desire to move players’ attention away from the light gem, but the Shroud was one of the chief elements preventing us from ever feeling immersed in the world.

“This is where our job is really complex,” says Roy. “Why? Because I can understand your point of view. But I receive other comments that this flash, people were really in love with it, because they don’t have to check the gem. Just having that flash, they understand ‘Okay, the situation has changed’. So now, they forget the rest, and when there is that small tick, they understand, ‘Okay, now I should swoop, and come back.’ But, let’s say it’s a jury with yes or no. It could be fifty-fifty. So here, this is where we have to trust our instinct and move forward. It’s impossible to please everybody, so we try to find the best solution.”


http://sneakybastards.net/theobserver/thief-hands-on/

xDarknessFallsx
22nd Jun 2013, 12:31
Sorry, but I don't trust their instinct on this. Shroud HUD, screen flashing and 3-state light gem is distracting, is not immersive, is not advancing gameplay mechanics to some new level of awesome. This is a deal-breaker for me. If this is in the game to any tweaked extent with no option to remove, I will not be buying it until very late in its retail lifecycle (i.e., bargain bin). From what i've seen so far, this is the silliest game mechanic in the game. If there is a 50/50 poll split on whether people like this or not, and they continue to roll with this, I think they're going with the wrong 50. Then again, I'm biased because I don't believe gimmicky stealth tools like this belong in a Thief game, or any game for that matter. This is the best solution, huh? Interesting. I'll be seeing Thief when it's $5 or less. Are the shadow contrasts really that poor that this is needed? Is a HUD overlay vignette that flashes really filling their immersive mandate?

They should take their burrick philosophy (paraphrasing: "You're sneaking around and then *whoa!* what's this? A dinosaur! No no, no -- It just kills the immersion") and apply to the screen flashing. It's what I'll be thinking EVERY time I leave a shadow. "You're sneaking around and then *whoa!* what's this? A screen flash! No no, no -- It just kills the immersion."

Lady_Of_The_Vine
22nd Jun 2013, 12:36
I believe it has already been stated that the shroud and HUD etc are work-in-progress?

xDarknessFallsx
22nd Jun 2013, 12:48
Yes, they did say that, but Stephane doesn't sound too open to tweaking this much or removing when he states the following at the bottom of your post


"But, let’s say it’s a jury with yes or no. It could be fifty-fifty. So here, this is where we have to trust our instinct and move forward. It’s impossible to please everybody, so we try to find the best solution.”

It sounds like he is pretty set in his ways on this. I'm not banking on this being toggleable after a statement like that. I'm dealing with having to put up with other iffy design decisions and concessions, but I just can't do the same with this one. This is one where my $120 (PC + console) is better spent elsewhere.

sneaksietaffer
23rd Jun 2013, 06:31
http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/1700/z7la.png

I think it was mentioned that this compass can be toggled with the Down button on the D-Pad.
Thanks, however it doesn't look like a traditional compass with the four cardinal points but a map with waypoints?. But I do see the letter 'N' for north. This new compass seems rather large and obstructs my view. I prefer the compass in T-1 & T-2 where it is smaller and it sits in the lower right corner where the current item in use is shown.

cofiking
24th Jun 2013, 09:40
Why is the light gem in thief 4 so simplified? It seems it only has three meters for visibility , that is kinda stupid.

NewHorizon
24th Jun 2013, 15:44
Why is the light gem in thief 4 so simplified? It seems it only has three meters for visibility , that is kinda stupid.

Apparently one of the developers, maybe Stephane Roy, said that the original games lightgem was "binary" so off or on, which is completely wrong. It had multiple stages. For theirs to only have 3 is a huge step back.

xDarknessFallsx
24th Jun 2013, 16:12
I believe the shroud vignette is their way of creating the multiple stages. And their 'light gem' merely shows the dim, red or yellow states that the old T1/T2 gem discreetly did. Still, it's a poor and inferior solution, imo.


Thanks, however it doesn't look like a traditional compass with the four cardinal points but a map with waypoints?. But I do see the letter 'N' for north. This new compass seems rather large and obstructs my view. I prefer the compass in T-1 & T-2 where it is smaller and it sits in the lower right corner where the current item in use is shown.
...And where it's not connected to a map overlay, let alone a real-time, gamey map overlay like we're playing Battlefield.

Platinumoxicity
25th Jun 2013, 06:51
I'm going to say it straight. That compass and minimap sucks ass. Compared to the traditional paper map and full 3d model of a compass showing you the cardinal directions, it is horrendous. Especially since picking up maps from enemies automatically adds information into the minimap, showing you exactly where the contrived 3 entry points are. This has to change. There's no way that is appropriate for a Thief game.

You say that glowing objective markers and x-ray vision are completely optional and can be turned off? Well how about letting me turn off a radar that shows me exactly where I am and where the only paths forward are?

Thief is not supposed to reveal you exactly where you are and especially not where the secret entrances are. It shouldn't even conveniently only show you the outside portion of the area when you are on the yard. You should figure that out by yourself. Oh, and by the way... when the map in Thief 4 only shows the yard layout when you're outside, that reminds me alarmingly of the loading zones in TDS, because it would really be a transition from one level to another, when you make your way to the "alternate entrace 1 out of 3" and then the map changes to "indoors". Sure it might load the assets seamlessly, but it sure wouldn't feel seamless. Like in Deus Ex Human Revolution, when curiously the loading icon always shows up when you ride on an elevator or stand in a scanning booth.

xDarknessFallsx
25th Jun 2013, 07:42
Lol to firet two sentences :)

I hope I never accidentally hit the D-pad button for the mini-map.

I need to start living the Contrarian lifestyle by lowering expectations. Slowly transitioning to that happier place; that simpler frame of mind. I've no doubt this game will be a fun casual, sneaker experience. But some missed opportunities and saddening implementations, though, that I need to clear from my mind.

deadoptimist
25th Jun 2013, 08:42
A Thief game with minimap? Oh my God. That is wrong in so many ways. Possibly even experience breaking for me.
The beauty of having a realistic (and often incomplete) map was always an important part of the series.
And please, do not tell me to "just turn it off" - what we see now is a design, which is based on principles fundamentally different from those of the classic Thief games. I find it staggering that EM didn't mention this as one of the cardinal changes made to the tortured Thief "DNA".

xDarknessFallsx
25th Jun 2013, 15:37
Yes, they display the mini-map in some of the E3 gameplay demo vids. It appears briefly in the upper-right corner of screen. It is toggleable by pressing one of the D-pad buttons.

I'm unclear still if the old school maps that show hand-drawn and often vague information are in the new Thief as a matter of course, in the same quantities as before, with no real-time HUDsy showing of guard locations, waypoint markers and secret locations, and if you're encouraged to use them to plan and follow your route for a more true Thief experience.

Astro
25th Jun 2013, 15:47
I'm not too worried about the map, but I am worried about what it implies about the level design. Really open levels don't lend themselves to mini-maps. This is just more evidence than the levels are going to be narrow and dense.

mclusky
25th Jun 2013, 16:25
I don't like what I saw from E3 videos. :( I really wish to have visibility ( :P ) gem back...

Vignette is against spirit of Thief. Magic game is something that I can accept, but some spooky invisibility spell? C'mon ppl!

deadoptimist
25th Jun 2013, 18:45
Yes, they display the mini-map in some of the E3 gameplay demo vids. It appears briefly in the upper-right corner of screen. It is toggleable by pressing one of the D-pad buttons.

I'm unclear still if the old school maps that show hand-drawn and often vague information are in the new Thief as a matter of course, in the same quantities as before, with no real-time HUDsy showing of guard locations, waypoint markers and secret locations, and if you're encouraged to use them to plan and follow your route for a more true Thief experience.

Thanks for clarifications. I noticed the map that was shown at the beginning, in the pause menu, as I thought then, but I somehow missed the minimap. It probable got blocked by my mind for mental safety, or something. :)

I m sorry, but do you really believe, that they'll do two working systems - one with hand-drawn maps and other with the map they've shown? I find it hardly possible.
With the amount of things, that are confirmed for the game and that we want to be able to turn off and replace, EM would have to make two games worth of content for one title, which they can't and won't.

CaptainObvious
26th Jun 2013, 14:28
^
Given the fact that Assassins Creed, which managed to sneak much of it's DNA into Th14f, has exactly that, I think both minimap and map screen are possible.

deadoptimist
26th Jun 2013, 15:50
^
Given the fact that Assassins Creed, which managed to sneak much of it's DNA into Th14f, has exactly that, I think both minimap and map screen are possible.
That's, probably. the only stealth that AC managed. :mad:

Platinumoxicity
26th Jun 2013, 15:56
That's, probably. the only stealth that AC managed. :mad:

It wasn't stealth. It had to be an inside job, because I doubt the employees made a secret of what they had been working on previously. So no, AC didn't even manage that amount of stealth.

deadoptimist
26th Jun 2013, 18:05
It wasn't stealth. It had to be an inside job, because I doubt the employees made a secret of what they had been working on previously. So no, AC didn't even manage that amount of stealth.

To be honest I mostly see how they try to copy Deus Ex Human Revolution with aggressive/non-aggressive approach, experience points, upgrades, occasional third person and monochrome world. Guess they think that relying on the recent DE:HR's sucess is safer than cater to the Thief games fan community. AC is just too different a game for Thief to take from it a lot. But maybe you're right and parcour will feel assassins-creedy. The minimap looks similar too.

Tryst
27th Jun 2013, 08:40
you don't always have a weapon out, and you don't always see your hands (and if you did it would be very annoying). Garrett doesn't become invisible, it's just that he blends in due to the pitch blackness of his attire, otherwise when you moved your gem wouldn't indicate you were more visible. The light gem is a good tool, and I don't see why Garrett would just ditch a good tool.
Black is probably the worst colour you can use. Dark Grey is far better since there is often no such thing as completely black shadows. You stand out as much in shadow wearing black as you would wearing red or green. However, there is also no such thing as a solid coloured shadow, much better to have a grey suit with a variation of grey tones as a camouflage pattern like those used in urban warfare.

Standard Army training: Shape, Shine Shadow Silhouette and movement. All the things that will give you away in a stealth environment.

sneaksietaffer
30th Jun 2013, 10:46
A Keeper who doesn't wish to be seen would probably use a light gem if the conditions permit it but what if he or she is walking on the streets during daytime with lots of pedestrians around? I suppose another kind of magic would be used to prevent unwanted solicitations or harassment from people. How that was done was never revealed so far. Whatever means the Keepers were using, it did not stop Garrett from trying to pickpocket them or that girl from trying to do the same to Garrett.