PDA

View Full Version : Which thief game you liked most?



kin
5th Jun 2009, 08:36
I think it would be nice to have it in a poll for the devs.

DarthEnder
5th Jun 2009, 08:43
I'm surprised this poll didn't already exist.

ToMegaTherion
5th Jun 2009, 09:16
This is a really hard question. I liked Dark Project the most but now I like it the least. I think Metal Age is the best, so I'll go with that.

esme
5th Jun 2009, 13:15
it's a shame you can't select multiples, I loved Dark Project because it hooked me into the world of heart pounding, sweaty palmed, stealth and I got to take on a GOD! and win

on the other hand I loved Metal Age for much the same reasons, epic storyline, bad villains and me in an off white hat being a good ..ish guy with light fingers

I quite liked Deadly Shadows too but it lacked consistency with the universe I knew so it jarred

I think it has to be Dark Project

I have to say I play TMA fan missions a lot more than TDP ones

kaekaelyn
5th Jun 2009, 13:39
I'm going to have to go with the Metal Age. I still am in awe of the of the level of detail they put into that game.

HellionKal
5th Jun 2009, 13:55
The Metal Age for me, as well.

It kept everything that made The Dark Project great and expanded upon it, "downplayed" Pagan elements in the game to the extend it was needed, featured incredibly well-designed levels and an awesome villain...

It was just right, anyway.

kabatta
5th Jun 2009, 15:22
I liked TMA because of the mechanized diesel-punk/ victorian style and the children of Karras. I don't know why some think they're creepy. They are as cute as burricks.

AbysmalGale
5th Jun 2009, 15:30
TMA by far :) I like the fact that you get to deal with mostly human opponents, but that zombies, haunts and other creatures also were present in proper environments around in the City and surroundings (I felt they were greatly overrepresented in TDP.) I also liked the greatly thought through missions of the game, and the size of levels like LOTP and Trail of Blood. And the atmosphere was amazing! Though, I have to admit that the atmosphere of Lord Bafford mission in TDP was the thing that really pulled me into the Thief universe.

MasterTaffer
5th Jun 2009, 17:08
I like The Dark Project above the other two.

agrash
5th Jun 2009, 19:41
Thief 2:
-Its my first thief experience. I hasn't got creepy monster's or at least not so much (back in the days i was kinda afraid of the zombies °_°"). You had so much equipment more to choose from.

I liked the first game's story more & i also hated to robot's, but that's a detail to me

BoldEnglishman
5th Jun 2009, 20:08
The Dark Project. Having played Thief II for so many years before I was finally able to acquire the original Thief, I was just unprepared for the masterpiece that is the Dark Project. Thief II was good as it hinted back to the previous game (the presence of Haunts, Zombies, Burrick heads and Crayman heads etc.), so encountering these things was like a glance into Garrett's past.

After hearing so many stories, and reading so many reviews, I was finally able to experience Garrett's past, and the game delievered in every single way. I was tired of robbing banks, robbing mansions, meeting humans, I was ready for the next challenge.

I would agree that I play more TMA FMs than TDP ones, but the only reason for that is because TMA is technically superior, if only slightly.

hellwalker
5th Jun 2009, 20:19
TDP definitely, it was just the most hardcore, if a bit unpolished. Constantine Manor and Haunted Cathedral are classic.

TMA - was the most enjoyable to play. But I missed some of the stuff from TDP, Mad locations and creepy levels.

TDS - I hated it at first but after replaying it after several years I actually enjoyed the game. It was still thief, It had the atmosphere and soul of the series, story was great except for villain, TDS was certainly better sequel to thief series then most other series had lately, [Deus Ex <- epic fail, Oblivion, Kotor 2]

But I'm definitely looking for T1&2 quality in Thi4f.

Neb
5th Jun 2009, 20:37
The Dark Project is easily my favourite, but I can see why so many people would love The Metal Age, although I feel that the plot was not as strong as its predecessor, and even the strong mission design didn't help it live up to being wholly an amazing experience as TDP.

I won't bother listing why TMA deserves to be counted as the best. You already know, and so do I. :whistle:

[OF] Seferg
5th Jun 2009, 20:46
Each game had its plusses
TDP was the best at making sound so much a part
TMA was the best overall though not the best at any one thing
TDS was the visually best, I thought the movement was more restrictive than the first two games, disliked loading between sections

nydusordos
5th Jun 2009, 21:30
I voted for Thief 2, but Thief 1 was also completely AWSOME!

Thief 3 wasn't bad either, but not a serious contender for favourite of the series.

DiegoFloor
6th Jun 2009, 01:58
I was in doubt between DP and MA. Since DP is the game that brought me back to the gaming world, I think it deserves the merit :)

Deadly shadows was very nice too! It had some flaws and definitely less fun than the others. But still lot of fun. And that lock pick system was so awesome! :D

MasterTaffer
6th Jun 2009, 02:48
Heeeey, why aren't the Thief cell phone games on the list?

Necros
6th Jun 2009, 06:18
Thief 2. :cool: Followed closely by Thief 1 & 3. :)

clock12345
6th Jun 2009, 18:08
i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

-Constantine-
6th Jun 2009, 18:33
eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

<utters a long list of Pagan curses and profanities>

Zahr Dalsk
6th Jun 2009, 19:32
The Metal Age, by far.

nydusordos
6th Jun 2009, 23:41
i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

I found the Third Person really ruined DS for me. I found myself switching to it whenever I was in a tense situation and magically being able to see around corners and behind me.

I've just replayed DS with First Person Only, and it was such a better and more immersive experience.

COMPROMISE: activate/deactivate third person ability in the menu! Let the players customize their game experience.

- Ordos

DiegoFloor
7th Jun 2009, 00:46
i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

Danger! Danger! lol

AbysmalGale
7th Jun 2009, 01:17
i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

Hehe, dangerous comment around long time Thief fans. But of course, everyone has the right to their own opinion ;)

Thieffanman
7th Jun 2009, 06:24
I've just replayed DS with First Person Only, and it was such a better and more immersive experience.

Second that. First person made it a better game, all the way around.


COMPROMISE: activate/deactivate third person ability in the menu! Let the players customize their game experience.

Good idea. Hopefully Eidos will do that again to satisfy the first- and third-person gamer camps. :)

--Thieffanman

P.S. Still loving TDS more than the first two. Partially because of the soundtrack and awesome missions like "The House Of The Widow Moira" and "Robbing The Cradle"; partially to see people on this board go into apoplectic fits when I say I love TDS. :D

Captain567
7th Jun 2009, 21:31
I chose Metal Age. Although the story is a bit weaker than the other two, the gameplay and especially the level design is absolute perfection.

MasterTaffer
7th Jun 2009, 21:32
I chose Metal Age. Although the story is a bit weaker than the other two, the gameplay and especially the level design is absolute perfection.

Indeed. LGS chose to design the levels first and then tailor the story to fit them in after the fact with Thief 2, which is why the story is weaker in comparison to the other games. That's why The Dark Project is my favorite, as it is the best all round package.

nydusordos
8th Jun 2009, 00:29
P.S. Still loving TDS more than the first two. Partially because of the soundtrack and awesome missions like "The House Of The Widow Moira" and "Robbing The Cradle"; partially to see people on this board go into apoplectic fits when I say I love TDS. :D

Oh, you just made me realize I forgot to answer the question!

I really can't choose DS because I felt the game was a bit too clausterphobic. I might have overlooked this except I made the MISTAKE of playing Deus Ex II right before.

That game was also clausterphobic but it was blatantly obvious in that game that the engine was the cause of this. Compounds or houses were broken up into 4 to 5 loading points. They did a much better job with DS, but I just got the feeling that designers were forced into the tight cramped levels and that it was hardly a choice they would have made otherwise.

So it is really down to Thief I and 2. I liked the villian better in 2 and the plot took a few more twists and turns, but I think Thief I had a little bit more level diversity. As I've mentioned, I didn't mind the zombie levels.

So I'm going with Thief I...but I might change my mind...they were both amazing!

- NO

Crypto
8th Jun 2009, 00:31
Ya know, I'm tempted to say TDS because it introduced me to the series and because I'm one of those twerps who really liked its plot (honestly, the threads tied together beautifully), but I'm gonna have to go with TDP, because of the WTF CONSTANTINE IS THE TRICKSTER??!?!!!111!11oneone!1eleventyone moment.


i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QyYaPWasos

Zahr Dalsk
8th Jun 2009, 00:33
I did like Deadly Shadows' atmosphere and music (I couldn't actually hear any music in TDP and TMA).

nydusordos
8th Jun 2009, 00:50
I did like Deadly Shadows' atmosphere and music (I couldn't actually hear any music in TDP and TMA).

I think it is important to note that they did do some things better in DS. I also think probably the best level in the entire Thief series is in DS: the insane asylum.

- NO

Crypto
8th Jun 2009, 00:53
The Shalebridge Cradle was probably the best level as far as immersion goes (although I think the Abysmal Gale is also very intriguing and underrated on the atmosphere scale), but I think it could use a little improvement on the design front.

TDS' general atmosphere is a tricky subject. It had the chance to be great, but (for me) was marred by the almost cartoony graphics.

Zahr Dalsk
8th Jun 2009, 01:53
St Edgar's and the Clocktower were, in my opinion, the best areas in Thief DS.

ToMegaTherion
8th Jun 2009, 09:05
The good thing about the clocktower was that the tight and claustrophobic level design really made sense in that level.

nydusordos
8th Jun 2009, 10:11
(although I think the Abysmal Gale is also very intriguing and underrated on the atmosphere scale).

Soooo short though...

I think I must have played it wrong, cause I made it to the manifest in like 15 minutes...

- NO

Alex50
8th Jun 2009, 11:41
Provocative question. It is easier to answer a question "what hand like more, right or left".
All parts very much like me. In everyone there is that that does game unique. But I shall vote for TDS, with all lacks of game. Here there is a potential which will allow "grandfather" to the Thief to look adequately on a background modern steals of game - Assassins Credo, Velvet assassin, Chronicles of Rid****

Moon Hoplite
8th Jun 2009, 12:29
I liked the original thief and thief 3, for the interesting theme and story, with its magic...
Thief 2 had better gameplay though...
Overall i liked thief 1, thief 3 had too many problems for it to be good.

Tushaar
8th Jun 2009, 12:37
I think, that the best level in the thief universe is The haunted cathedral and getting there :P That's why i chose thief 1 ^_^

Platinumoxicity
8th Jun 2009, 12:59
Provocative question. It is easier to answer a question "what hand like more, right or left".
All parts very much like me. In everyone there is that that does game unique. But I shall vote for TDS, with all lacks of game. Here there is a potential which will allow "grandfather" to the Thief to look adequately on a background modern steals of game - Assassins Credo, Velvet assassin, Chronicles of Rid****

You mean Hitman, right? Velvet Assassin is a ripoff, an exact copy of Hitman. They didn't even change the animations.

nydusordos
8th Jun 2009, 22:42
I think, that the best level in the thief universe is The haunted cathedral and getting there :P That's why i chose thief 1 ^_^

I have never replayed that map! It was really fun, but I remember spending HOURS looking for the special loot. One of them was in a really weird spot I seem to remember.

Stupid Stone Eye, I hope Garrett throws it into a volcano in Thief 4.

- NO

MasterTaffer
8th Jun 2009, 22:43
You mean Hitman, right? Velvet Assassin is a ripoff, an exact copy of Hitman. They didn't even change the animations.

It's Hitman done badly, agreed.

Kyle2k
19th Jun 2009, 18:13
I totally agree with Neb: TDP is the best, easily.

The environment, the 3-D level design and the SOUNDS/Soundtrack are unmatched so far (I thought TMA very good, but slightly 'squared'). Just take a look at Down at the Bonehoard, Lost City and The Haunted Cathedral level designs.

TDS? visually, the best, but w/ a crappy gameplay, bad storyline, loading zones...no way (except the Cradle mission, one of the best I ever played in my game life!)

CaptainObvious
21st Jun 2009, 14:08
I liked T1 the best, and despite it's flaws I enjoyed TDS more than T2. I liked some of the changes, and overally it felt more close to the first Thief to me.

ToMegaTherion
21st Jun 2009, 14:32
That's interesting, I can't remember ever seeing a 1 > 3 > 2 ordering before.

Herr_Garrett
21st Jun 2009, 14:48
i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

You shouldn't advertise any part of that sentence. I mean it.

ToMegaTherion
21st Jun 2009, 15:41
I bet he's really heartbroken to have your disapproval.

Herr_Garrett
21st Jun 2009, 15:53
I especially meant the "download" part.

LordGervasius
21st Jun 2009, 17:09
i liked thief 3 it was my first playing of thief games i currently downloaded thief 2 i aint enjoy it much thief 3 was awsome little note: eidos please dont remove the 3rd person

lord have mercy

TMA > TDP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TDS distant last

Honestly the first 2 were epic. If 4 is anywhere near as good i'll be happy.

KaiserJohan
21st Jun 2009, 17:10
TDP: (First)
+The story(more mystic, the amount of supernatural things reflected well upon the story)
+The setting(more creepy levels, CRAGSCLEFT, etc)
+The sound(the horn of quintus was EPIC, overall more 'creepy' sound)



TMA: (Second)
+The gameplay(for a pure thieving experience, it's the best)
+The design(more refined, much more detailed, whereas in TDP you could find almost empty rooms not having any purpose)
+Good balance betwen the undead/creepy stuff and the normal thieveing -- the scary stuff was always there.
+The graphics(imo notably better then TDP, yet same engine)
- Bad beastiary(Ape beasts, no craymen/bugmen, can't remember any burricks :( )
- Pagans less mystified and alot more 'lame', I prefered the evil-type pagans instead of these ones.
- The 'Maw' looked too little like the chaotic flux of elements I loved in TDP

TDS:
+The cradle
+Some good thieving levels(Museum, the mansion)
+NO NEAR-IMPENETRABLE DARKNESS; I can finally playing a thief game without having to pull down the windows, let out every lightsource within a kilometre and play at 10pm and forwards.
+Physics to objects
+Shadows
-Shadows sometimes too easy to see through
- Physics to NPCs
- Cheap replacement for ropearrow
- Load zones
- Keepers made much less mysterious, now portrayed as total garbage imo
- The pagans are horrible in every way.
- Bad city-hub
- No sword(used as a tool in previous games, like bashing doors, slash at metal objects to attract attention, etc)
- Broadhead cannot be used to distract guards
- Player collision is bad and annoying
- 3rd-person view made many previous things impossible, like rope arrows
- Console-like menu and style
- Console restricted the game technically and diverted time that could've been used polishing it
- NPCS LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE MADE OF PLASTIC/CLAY
- Animation of blackjacked NPCs are wierd
- Hammer/Hammer haunts carry too small hammers
- Wands to NPCs
- FACTION ALLIANCE; garrett is a loner, dosn't team up with others. Fanatics like the Hammers would never acept it anyway
- RPG elements like side-quests involving gaining faction points and upgrades

UPDATE 1:
- Kurshok... self-explanatory
- Too easy to run away from guards

That's all I can think of right now, will update as I get more horrible memories from TDS :)

CaptainObvious
22nd Jun 2009, 08:08
I actually liked the climbing gloves in TDS. They make about as much/more sense than magical ropesprouting arrows, and were implemented pretty well. They weren't any worse or better than the rope arrows, just a different mean to reach otherwise unreachable spots. I wouldn't mind seeing them again. Cool would be to have rope arrows and climbing gloves supplementing each other, as with one you can reach some places you can't with the other.

jtr7
22nd Jun 2009, 08:50
Strongly disagree with the comparison. There's a big difference between the two. The rope/vine arrows gave the player control where to climb with a bit of wood or earth, and climbing didn't block almost half the view in front of the camera, and the entire back view, forcing 3rd-person view to look around one's self. View with the rope arrow was 360-degrees in all directions, except for the degrees up above where the rope at the arrow's base and the shaft blocked a sliver of the view. A clear shot meant no window-sill, joist, or corner impeded movement. No hidden impedance wasted the player's time. Climbing was faster, and sideways movement wasn't usually needed since the rope placement could put the player where needed or close enough, and rotating could decrease distance, or allow a jump to a ledge or another rope. A person could cross the center of rooms on only rope arrows, or allow infiltration in ways the devs may not have known about.

Why the rope arrow magic gets crapped on harder than most of the other multitude of fantastical fantasy elements of a fantasy game is truly perplexing, and the continued exaggerated claims against them are baffling.

Having both seems to be a necessary compromise, but they need to make the gloves work much better, allow for a better view of the world, and for access to much more, yet not force the glove vs. rope situation in obvious ways.

FriendlyStranger
22nd Jun 2009, 10:09
My Favourite definitely is Thief: The Metal Age. Closely followed by Thief: The Dark Project.

I sincerely hate TDS. It broke with so many aspects of the series, that it still makes me angry sometimes that it bears the "Thief" brand/name.

I think the climbing gloves are inferior to the rope arrows in terms of gameplay. But that also manly comes because they were badly implemented into the game.

Platinumoxicity
22nd Jun 2009, 10:14
My Favourite definitely is Thief: The Metal Age. Closely followed by Thief: The Dark Project.

I sincerely hate TDS. It broke with so many aspects of the series, that it still makes me angry sometimes that it bears the "Thief" brand/name.

I think the climbing gloves are inferior to the rope arrows in terms of gameplay. But that also manly comes because they were badly implemented into the game.

I don't think that it's shameful for it to bear the "Thief" -brand. I think it's adequate that it didn't deserve to be called Thief 3. Thief 2 was better than Thief, so Thief 2 got the bigger number on the end. TDS was worse than Thief, so they didn't give it a number 3 and they even changed the "E", to make it stand out, for punishment. :nut:

CaptainObvious
22nd Jun 2009, 10:41
@jtr7

Well I didn't say that rope arrows make any less sense than climbing gloves, it was just that some people claim the gloves were stupid and didn't make any sense, when you think about it realistically(which you shouldn't since it's a fantasy game) they both don't make much sense. And sure they had flaws(or didn't do things which people want them to be able to do -which is or is not a flaw depending on your viewpoint) but rope arrows had them as well, you couldn't swing IIRC, for example.

I guess if it was vice versa and we had climbing gloves first and rope arrows in TDS people would whine how stupid and flawed those new arrows are.:rasp:

Anyway, back to topic. I preferred TDs to T2 because it felt a bit too advanced to me, T1 and TDS felt more medieval and older. And the Mechanists always kinda felt to me like a Hammerite knockoff that just wasn't as cool as the original. Sure the gameplay was more flawed in the third game, but for me the setting and atmosphere worked better.

jtr7
22nd Jun 2009, 18:33
Thanks for the clarification! :) It wasn't the lesser sense but the reason the rope arrows are superior for their increased freedom of movement and view of the environment.


Thief isn't medieval, and is supposed to have a mix of eras--just like a real European city--with castles next to Victorian/Tudor buildings, Industrial Age office and apartment buildings, and the games (until TDS buried a lot of it) borrowed from every century, from medieval times onward, but far less than people care to notice. I think the guards' armor clouds perceptions of the actual City around them. TDS is a departure from the previous two games, and it was supposed to be the final part of a planned trilogy, and I wish it was only the engine that made it different.


If the gloves had been made first, I'd bet they would be made superior to TDS's, since they were a band-aid fix for the undoable rope arrows, with so much time wasted trying to get the ropes and water in, and then having to redesign levels around the new vertical tool. Without that huge development time loss, the gloves could've been so much better. In the new game, Garrett's elbows need to come off the wall, and his spine needs to be able to twist, and his eyeballs need to rotate in their sockets to bring back a near 360-degree view.

Pieter888
22nd Jun 2009, 19:11
I liked T3 the best.
The first 2 games are good too! But T3 was the best experience for me.

Flashart
22nd Jun 2009, 19:11
Isn't it the case that it's not the gear that's the problem, it's the level design that lets you take advantage of them? The climbing gloves weren't given the best chance to really shine. That said in T1/T2 I often thought there were walls that any thief should have been able to climb. You can only deal with what you're given.

Pieter888
22nd Jun 2009, 19:14
Isn't it the case that it's not the gear that's the problem, it's the level design that lets you take advantage of them? The climbing gloves weren't given the best chance to really shine. That said in T1/T2 I often thought there were walls that any thief should have been able to climb. You can only deal with what you're given.

I agree, the gloves in T3 COULD have been a great idea if they just implemented the gloves into the level design. I don't recall ANY mission in which you've had to use them to finish it. So it was a good idea, but it just didn't work out so well...:scratch:

jtr7
22nd Jun 2009, 19:18
Like I said, the devs needed more time. I think those responsible for the animation and movement could've made the biggest improvements that would've alleviated a lot of frustration.

Harem scarem
22nd Jun 2009, 21:09
Is my pic for the best plus is my favorite game of all time.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
22nd Jun 2009, 21:30
This was tough for me as I love both of the first two games, so it was hard to decide.
After much hestitation, I finally opted for TMA. :)

ToMegaTherion
22nd Jun 2009, 22:25
The level design in Metal Age is vastly superior to either of the other games.

jtr7
22nd Jun 2009, 22:36
It would've been fantastic if the Siege Engine (DromEd's even more powerful child) and LGS could've been around to finish the trilogy. TMA was the gateway drug, and TDP blew me away in a different way.

Myth
23rd Jun 2009, 14:15
It would've been fantastic if the Siege Engine (DromEd's even more powerful child) and LGS could've been around to finish the trilogy. Siege Engine? Care to enlighten me? Has this ever been released?

On the side note, what i really *really* want is the Dark Engine source code. A Thief 3.5 could be made with that, and what a game it would be.. I'm sure it's collecting dust on an old LGS CD somewhere. Maybe one of you American Taffers can go and "redistribute" said CD from wherever it's being stored? "Shipping.. And Receiving - the Dark Engine source code"

crazy_bex
23rd Jun 2009, 16:42
Metal age is def my favourite! It has the best missions, story and creativitiy. Thief Dark Project is second best also with great missions, story and creativity, however it is somewhat limited compared to TMA and there are too many zombie missions.

DS is my least fave because everything except the graphics is not quite as good as the others, however I really liked the city in between missions thing.

Yaphy
23rd Jun 2009, 20:57
I'm a little surprised that T3 isnt to far behind. :scratch:

Platinumoxicity
23rd Jun 2009, 21:37
I'm a little surprised that T3 isnt to far behind. :scratch:

There are many people here that somehow like TDS more than the rest, but they're non-posting observers and they know that if they start overly appraising TDS here, all the oldtaffers would assault them. :D

Those people who have liked TDS the best always vote TDS in this poll and those who have only played TDS vote in other polls for things that were added in TDS rather than things that used to be in the earlier games.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
24th Jun 2009, 02:00
I imagine that perhaps a certain number of voters opting for TDS may only have played the third game, and not the first two? That would be a significant factor as far as the vote count is concerned.

Still, TMA is by far the winner of this poll... so far. :)

Araco
24th Jun 2009, 02:24
Thief: The dark project. A wonderful story, and not much English ..

LordGervasius
24th Jun 2009, 03:06
I am surprised when people say that TMA had a weak storyline. I thought it was very creative and twisted.

CaptainObvious
24th Jun 2009, 10:52
Well, it wasn't so much the story, but to me T2 always felt like "Agent Garrett saves the day", at least for me. I felt more like actually being a Thief in T1 and TDS, for some reason.

Flashart
24th Jun 2009, 11:51
I've nearly finished TDS again, new plus points for me were the lightning effect in "Moira's", and "Keeper Compound" mission wish was better than I remembered. "Cradle" lost some of the initial scariness but was still great.
Before this I just finished TMA, and fell in love with "Masks" more than I had before. I'd already voted TMA and wouldn't change my mind. But have to say, (I'll include T2X in this) that each game has it's own merits.

ToMegaTherion
24th Jun 2009, 13:44
C'mon guys! Metal Age might slip under 50% popularity; get voting, noble Metal Age fans, we can't let inferior games win!

InGroove2
24th Jun 2009, 14:30
Well, it wasn't so much the story, but to me T2 always felt like "Agent Garrett saves the day", at least for me. I felt more like actually being a Thief in T1 and TDS, for some reason.

totally agreed. i've been playing TDP lately...err TGold. and, i find it a bit tedious and repetative. The creepy trickster creatures... are really really creepy, but kind of just annoying to me...though the haunted cathedral is probably the best haunt mission that they've done. The mage tower is a good level, but i just thought a little weak that you basically had to find your way to all of the towers in a very repetitous manner, then you have a few more missions of just finding the other talismans before the story really can progress. not that it's bad, it's just not TMA

TMA was so varied and the missions were so much richer. The bank robbery, the eavesdropping, the blackmail, the follow the courier i know they had the follow the assasins... but that was slightly anti climactic... the courier following ended with you watching a fight and really seeing something go down from afar), the LOtP... it's unstoppable.

$.02

PJMaybe
25th Jun 2009, 05:24
I'm a little surprised that T3 isnt to far behind. :scratch:

Maybe its changed since you posted but 21 out of 118 votes wouldn't reflect 'close' for me. Still more than it should be. This is one of the problems (or marvels, depending how you look at it) about democracy - all the uneducated taffers get a vote too :lmao:

CaptainObvious
25th Jun 2009, 14:35
Or maybe TDS is better than some people here want to admit. Sure it had shortcomings, but it was in no way a bad game.

PJMaybe
25th Jun 2009, 15:08
Or maybe TDS is better than some people here want to admit. Sure it had shortcomings, but it was in no way a bad game.

True, it is a good game in its own right, but a poor addition to the Thief series.

FriendlyStranger
27th Jun 2009, 13:22
True, it is a good game in its own right, but a poor addition to the Thief series.

true true

Dragonera
27th Jun 2009, 14:07
Thief The Dark Project. The best. The king of all games, amen.

CaptainObvious
27th Jun 2009, 14:11
TDS is not even a bad Thief game, it had all the core elements that make a good Thief game, story, characterization, visual and sound design. It had more rough edges, but it was a true Thief game.

FriendlyStranger
27th Jun 2009, 15:40
I would say TDS was an average game. In my opinion the storytelling in TDP and TMA, their mission design etc. was far superior to most things seen (even up to today). The missions were the biggest flaw in TDS, among other often discussed things (mission briefings, water...)

I don't say TDS is bad, but it didn't provide the experience which makes games like T1,2 , SS or DX great.

Lozza86-UK
27th Jun 2009, 16:19
The Dark Project for me.

LordGervasius
27th Jun 2009, 17:12
I'm playing TDS through again. Its not bad but its just so far behind the other two its a clear step backwards.

deathshadow
27th Jun 2009, 17:13
Ok, what ******* are actually voting for TDS?

jtr7
27th Jun 2009, 20:15
............................

AbysmalGale
29th Jun 2009, 08:26
Most likely those kind taffers that still haven't purchased copies of the older titles.

No doubt. I haven't read about a single person who played the series from the beginning and actually liked TDS more than the previous titles. The poll should go something like "IF you played ALL three games, which one did you like the most".

However, looking at it from the bright side, TDP and TMA added together have like 83% of the votes, while TDS is down on 16.54%. Not really a threat.

kalrhael
29th Jun 2009, 13:45
I just beat thief 2 a couple of hours ago, whilst I do feel that the first 2 games are better gameplay wise. I have to say I enjoyed deadly shadows the most, maybe it's just that ambience that I miss so much but I generally feel the experience was better. I guess it's cause I approach games from a more artistic standpoint (Oblivion is my favorite game EVER even though I think the gameplay is not the greatest thing in the world.) But yea, I really miss the cradle, the first experience i had in that level was so magical. I was completely immersed.

ToMegaTherion
29th Jun 2009, 14:03
There are a couple of other people on the forum that have played all three and like Deadly Shadows the best. Of course, you have to bear in mind that this is a forum for Thief, and chances are it's going to attract only the people who really really like a game. Add to that the fact that, when looking at a group of related but not quite the same things, people seem to have a tendency to be biased towards the first thing they experience.

So it's not so surprising that the people who played Dark Project or Metal Age first prefer one or the other (it's also not unreasonable that if you play Dark Project first you like Metal Age more, because they're really similar). So the people who like Deadly Shadows the most are most likely going to be those who played Deadly Shadows first, and there's a fair chance they won't have gone back and played the earlier games, so we shouldn't be too surprised if the people who like Deadly Shadows the best tend to not have played the original games (on the other hand, the poll for which games everyone has played suggests that most people have played all three games, so either different people are answering the different polls or our intuition is not so accurate).

I've certainly experienced this in music. When I find a new band I tend to hear and buy their most recent stuff, and if there's been a non-trivial change in the band's style over the years I will tend to prefer the new style while the people who were there from the beginning prefer the old style. This sort of preference seems entirely natural.

Having said that, I'd still rather play Deadly Shadows than Dark Project these days, and Dark Project was the first one I played.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
29th Jun 2009, 14:16
I should imagine that EM will compromise and mix the old and the new together and make improvements in areas where each game failed. I assume we will see some innovation, but this doesn't worry me as I believe they still wish to recapture the essence of the original two games. This sounds very promising.

lyssyder
29th Jun 2009, 14:47
I voted for The Dark Project.
It kept me glued to the pc for days.

The sounds, the incredible plot, the places, the characters but shadowing all these....
the ATMOSPHERE !! That game had an atmosphere so unique.

The second one was also great but it lacked the primeval darkness of its predecessor.
I undoubtedly loved it anyway !

The last one....was very nice graphics-wise but it lacked the atmosphere. I cannot explain it well.
Loved this one too but I cannot compare it to the emotions that TDP gave to me.

I hope they will return to the ORIGINS, we don't want a Play Station game !!!
We want the DARK PROJECT ; )

Just watching the cut scenes of the Dark Project I get goose bumps.....love it love it love it !!!

"Mr. Garret....."

Grumpy Old Man
30th Jun 2009, 13:50
First of all; I played Deadly Shadows before I played the other 2 games.

The first thing that comes to mind was that the graphics of the previous games were of course not up to par with the third installment in the series. That said; I enjoyed the abundance of missions in the first two. I just didn't seem to stop.

On the other hand I find that the Shalebridge Cradle was the best level of all of the games. Sound, plot, information, twists, the sheer feel of terror. It was all there. That said; The overall quality of the missions and the actual gameplay fitted the previous installments more than the third.

The thing I liked the most about the third game was the soundtrack, the plot and atmosphere. The other two didn't do the exact same thing for me. Maybe it was because of the graphics. I don't know, but that is definetely something the last game did better than the other two. Granted; the first one was more of a surprise at the time, but when I compare the first to the third, the third sort of builded upon that legacy whilst retaining essential elements of the first two.

What all three have and what I actually love the most about the series is the animated cut-scenes. Immersive, looking great (the first two ones evoke the same kinds of feelings now to newcomers nowadays) and somewhat mature.

As I said, build upon the atmosphere more and more, whilst tweaking the actual gameplay and all will be well. They have plenty enough of time, and I think that most of the things about gameplay, what should and should not be, have been mentioned one too many times already.

FriendlyStranger
30th Jun 2009, 16:42
On the other hand I find that the Shalebridge Cradle was the best level of all of the games. Sound, plot, information, twists, the sheer feel of terror. It was all there. That said; The overall quality of the missions and the actual gameplay fitted the previous installments more than the third.



I can not say that I agree with this. If you compare the achievement which was made in the late 90s with missions like assassins, return to the cathedral, life at a party / then I have to say: No Sir the Cradle produced in 2004 with much more input, much more possibilities in means of programming and level creation, is utter cr** compared to the earlier installments. It was just another level, as already seen on so many other games. It is a horror cliche, and it is in no tems as revolutionary as the things seen in T1,2 (for the time these games were released).

Grumpy Old Man
3rd Jul 2009, 16:23
I can not say that I agree with this. If you compare the achievement which was made in the late 90s with missions like assassins, return to the cathedral, life at a party / then I have to say: No Sir the Cradle produced in 2004 with much more input, much more possibilities in means of programming and level creation, is utter cr** compared to the earlier installments. It was just another level, as already seen on so many other games. It is a horror cliche, and it is in no tems as revolutionary as the things seen in T1,2 (for the time these games were released).

If you read my post thoroughly I said that T3 build upon the other games. Which automatically takes the revolutionary feel out of the argument.

The one thing you people seem to get worked up on about is the fact that those first two games were revolutionary and the latter one wasn't. "In the old days everything was better". That's what it sounds like. Silly metaphore (please don't take this too seriously); When (color) tv was invented; it was revolutionary. But I bet anyone has a new model in their homes...

And I would like to see something new, well executed, as much as anyone on this forum. No question.

FriendlyStranger
3rd Jul 2009, 17:25
If you read my post thoroughly I said that T3 build upon the other games. Which automatically takes the revolutionary feel out of the argument.

The one thing you people seem to get worked up on about is the fact that those first two games were revolutionary and the latter one wasn't. "In the old days everything was better". That's what it sounds like. Silly metaphore (please don't take this too seriously); When (color) tv was invented; it was revolutionary. But I bet anyone has a new model in their homes...

And I would like to see something new, well executed, as much as anyone on this forum. No question.

No "we people" didn't say that. I said for me cradle isn't "great" - because to be great it would have to be more of a revolutionary experience. Thats why T1,2 are GREAT and TDS is a GOOD game at best. To be great you have to achieve something almost nobody else has done to that point... sry the cradle was maybe done good - but it ain't GREAT.

We might have different uses for the term great. (But if you call the cradle great, how do you call T1,2 - legendary?)

One of the reasons the people who liked TDS better are in the clear minority is that T3 did NOT build upon the first two games. That's obvious in level size, level design, cutscenes, atmo and a complete lack of design continuity (See changed Hammer design, see missing machines on streets, narrative ghost appearances...)

---

Let me tell you something about you people: You people don't get over it that you can't talk the first day fans of this series into liking T3 better than T1,2. It makes your hair go gray, its the only reason why 20% voted for T3 in the best liked poll, and its the only reason people claim they like T3 better - to upset us "people". ^^

jtr7
3rd Jul 2009, 20:58
...........................

Fatherwoodsie
3rd Jul 2009, 22:08
but i tell you i bought a 32 inch lcd screen and it is great for gaming. i dont the converters to hook up my pc to the tv but i have TDS for xbox360 so i play it on that and its awesome. i have the non glare screen so even when the sun is shining through and all the curtains open, it doesnt have a bad reflective glare

jtr7
3rd Jul 2009, 22:38
...........................

Fatherwoodsie
4th Jul 2009, 00:17
even better having a job

jtr7
4th Jul 2009, 00:27
...........................

Fatherwoodsie
4th Jul 2009, 02:47
buying a tv to replace an old one that will last years to come isnt a big spend when you save for it.

jtr7
4th Jul 2009, 02:59
...........................

Fatherwoodsie
4th Jul 2009, 04:15
yeah posting on a forum lookin at a computer screen isnt a priority either but its a hobby i guess

jtr7
4th Jul 2009, 04:43
...........................

Fatherwoodsie
4th Jul 2009, 05:18
thats what im saying. if i can play my 360, computer, and watch yankee baseball in high definition im happy

jtr7
4th Jul 2009, 05:49
...........................

Fatherwoodsie
4th Jul 2009, 07:33
anywayss...i cannot tell you which one i liked best, or worst. they all have great moments.... well id say TDS comes in last place but not by far, it wasnt a BAD game

jtr7
4th Jul 2009, 08:03
...........................

TheEye
4th Jul 2009, 10:04
TDS was good but nothing compared to TDP-Gold

PJMaybe
7th Jul 2009, 07:53
The one thing you people seem to get worked up on about is the fact that those first two games were revolutionary and the latter one wasn't.

No, what works me up is I felt they removed too many of those revolutionary ideas in TDS, or at least tried to implement them in an inferior way.

To use your TV analogy, it would be like getting the latest HD digi TV with a screen so big you could not enjoy watching it and a remote control that was so awkward and complicated to use that you dispised ever changing channels.

FriendlyStranger
7th Jul 2009, 10:29
No, what works me up is I felt they removed too many of those revolutionary ideas in TDS, or at least tried to implement them in an inferior way.

To use your TV analogy, it would be like getting the latest HD digi TV with a screen so big you could not enjoy watching it and a remote control that was so awkward and complicated to use that you dispised ever changing channels.

For me its a combination of

- removing features
- don't adding anything really good / don't beeing revolutionary. (Altough the oil flasks were a try.)

Burrick
11th Jul 2009, 12:52
I choose this thread to be my first 1 to post in, I never played the old Thief 1, only 2 a little, so I voted for Deadly Shadows - a blow of a game!!!

jtr7
12th Jul 2009, 00:35
...........................

KaiserJohan
12th Jul 2009, 00:38
That's why TDS is more popular then people expect -- many havn't played the previous titels so they cannot compare them.

jtr7
12th Jul 2009, 00:41
...........................

ToMegaTherion
12th Jul 2009, 07:57
So Burrick has never met a Burrick!

Burrick
12th Jul 2009, 09:01
So Burrick has never met a Burrick!

Sadly not, I only heard/read about them.:(

ElizabethSterling
12th Jul 2009, 15:30
Thief 2 easily. Best level design, best challenge, best most things actually. Taking nothing away from the other two Thief 3 was drab and over-simplified for the most part and plainly incomplete and Thief 1 was very rough around the edges and level design was rather sloppy. They're all fantastic, mind, I've ghosted them all to death.

Headache
12th Jul 2009, 16:07
Thief 2 easily. Best level design, best challenge, best most things actually.
Agreed.

It irks me how the older 'original' games can never seem to be rekindled in this newer, more advanced age of technology.

FriendlyStranger
12th Jul 2009, 18:00
I'm still surprised the majority likes TMA best - like myself. I always thought people would like TDP better for some reason.

Pieter888
10th Aug 2009, 20:39
I feel that TDS isn't getting the appreciation it deserved.

Of course we all agree it failed as a sequel of the 2 original games, even I admit that. But as a game in itself it was pretty damn good.

Most of us hardcore thief fans used part 1&2 to compare the (back then) new thief game. And we where all disappointed.
But it we look at the neutral players, as in people who haven't played 1&2 yet so they couldn't compare it with the previous parts, TDS scored pretty high.

When I look back at TDS, it wasn't a good game that fitted the Thief series, but it WAS a good game in itself.

I've been here on this forum for quite a while now and if theres one thing in here that stands out from the rest, it's the hostility against TDS. But then again there are some thing TDS did right.

Before you read the following list I wan't you to know that I've played all thief games in order in which they came out. I'm trying to avoid reply's like: "Go and play the first 2 parts you taffer!"

Things I'd like to see in thief 4 that came from TDS:

The city hub (of course with more variation and it has to be bigger.
The optional "Quests" that could be done in the city hub.
Beautifull cutscenes (accept the mid-mission ones...)
The good balance between zombies and people missions.
The "Shalebridge cradle" experience. (you know what I mean)
Dynamic shadows.
Nice look. (graphics, models etc.)
Smarter AI.
Selling your loot through fences.


We don't want the game to be like TDS, but I don't want a game the same as the first two parts either, I like new things, only Ion storm overdid it. I hope EM is a bit more careful on the next part.

Thief 1&2 weren't the same either, there where improvements/changes but they where way more subtle that the change from TMA to TDS.

I'm not saying TDS was a successful sequel, but I sure as hell liked it, and after I've finished it the first time I have played through the game dozens of more times because I liked it so much anyways.

We all know TDS did many things wrong, but my question to you all is:
What do you believe TDS did right?

ToMegaTherion
10th Aug 2009, 20:55
If I didn't think that saying "X is a worthy installment of the Y series" was incredibly silly, I'd say that Deadly Shadows is a worthy installment of the Thief series.

I liked pretty much everything in general terms. There are specific elements of the general areas that I think are pretty stinky (silent crouching, small levels, wallhug, tiresome lootrequirement on Expert are the most outstanding ones).

the_fish
10th Aug 2009, 21:01
TDS had a much better interface than the previous games.

The inventory only had useful items in: the compass was omnipresent and unobtrusive, lockpicks and keys were applied automatically to doors instead of you having to search for them, and the loot count was available in the HUD and the ESC menu.

Also, I liked loot glint, as it saved me running around trying to grab everything like I did in T1&2. A thief should know which items are valuable before he picks them up. (I accept that lots of people didn't like glint - this is one feature that deserves a toggle in the options menu.)

PJMaybe
10th Aug 2009, 21:35
Pieter, I think TDS was a good game. I think there are lots of good games out there but none of them are sequels to Thief. If you are going to make a sequel I think it should be a law that the sequel must stick to the core values of the originals. Especially if the original was so good. If you are not going to stick to the core values why bother making a sequel at all? Why not just make another game?

Now I know there were many issues which were caused by poor decisions made too early in the process to change when they realised how crappy they were, and there were other issues that blind sided the devs and they didn't have the time to sort them out. I completely agree with you that there were some aspects of TDS that were good improvements. The problem with TDS is that quite a few of the good the things were implemented badly so they turned out to be not so good after all. And in addition to that, the negatives far outweigh the positives (my opinion, of course). The worse thing of all for me was the change in Garrett's personality and that stupid frob highlight that I had to put up with for the whole game.

Looking at your list of things you liked about TDS, there is only the dynamic shadows that I could not find a fault with. That is not to say they were not good ideas, just that they didn't implement them well.

I don't want a clone of T1 and T2 either. Everyone wants (and expects) improvements to audio and visual elements but change and improvement to the game play has to be subtle and stick to the original values.

How would you like to see a sequel to Batman - but hey, now its new and improved and he can turn himself into a flying robot and shoot lasers from his eyes.

PJMaybe
10th Aug 2009, 21:41
TDS had a much better interface than the previous games.

The inventory only had useful items in: the compass was omnipresent and unobtrusive, lockpicks and keys were applied automatically to doors instead of you having to search for them, and the loot count was available in the HUD and the ESC menu.

Also, I liked loot glint, as it saved me running around trying to grab everything like I did in T1&2. A thief should know which items are valuable before he picks them up.

I thought the interface was better but with the compass it became just a little too obtrusive. I would have preferred it smaller (or even better, a resizing UI option).

As for the inventory, I do believe you could drop anything you wanted from your inventory in T1 and 2. Except the compass.

I think the biggest complaint about loot glint was that you didn't have to search at all. You could see a loot bag hanging on someones waist down the other end of the street. What a load of crud that was! I had the same problem as you in the originals but I found that through playing I became experienced at knowing which loot was valuable and which was not by its appearance. But, I'd agree, optional glint would be the best thing for those that want to know where the loot is as soon as they enter the room.

jtr7
10th Aug 2009, 21:41
Thread-merge! :p


The summary that's been stated is this:

It had good elements... poorly implemented. The fact that it's a vast majority that think so, with the extreme views that it was perfect and it had no redeeming qualities are part of the Bell Curve of fandom. Some of the poor execution and decision-making was not the devs' fault, but some of it was.

Vae
10th Aug 2009, 21:50
Pieter, I think TDS was a good game. I think there are lots of good games out there but none of them are sequels to Thief. If you are going to make a sequel I think it should be a law that the sequel must stick to the core values of the originals. Especially if the original was so good. If you are not going to stick to the core values why bother making a sequel at all? Why not just make another game?

Now I know there were many issues which were caused by poor decisions made too early in the process to change when they realised how crappy they were, and there were other issues that blind sided the devs and they didn't have the time to sort them out. I completely agree with you that there were some aspects of TDS that were good improvements. The problem with TDS is that quite a few of the good the things were implemented badly so they turned out to be not so good after all. And in addition to that, the negatives far outweigh the positives (my opinion, of course). The worse thing of all for me was the change in Garrett's personality and that stupid frob highlight that I had to put up with for the whole game.

Looking at your list of things you liked about TDS, there is only the dynamic shadows that I could not find a fault with. That is not to say they were not good ideas, just that they didn't implement them well.

I don't want a clone of T1 and T2 either. Everyone wants (and expects) improvements to audio and visual elements but change and improvement to the game play has to be subtle and stick to the original values.

How would you like to see a sequel to Batman - but hey, now its new and improved and he can turn himself into a flying robot and shoot lasers from his eyes.

Well said PJMaybe :thumb:


Thread-merge! :p


The summary that's been stated is this:

It had good elements... poorly implemented. The fact that it's a vast majority that think so, with the extreme views that it was perfect and it had no redeeming qualities are part of the Bell Curve of fandom. Some of the poor execution and decision-making was not the devs' fault, but some of it was.

Yep. That pretty much sums it up.

ⓣⓐⓕⓕⓔⓡ
10th Aug 2009, 22:00
You've got to understand the people who attached Thief and Thief 2 to their own ego's are insignificant. Deadly Shadows was a worthy sequel and had Thief 2 been in a new engine, the zealots would have shat all over that as well.

Deadly Shadows was an absolutely brilliant game which stayed faithful to the series and added more. The free-roaming City area was a great new addition, a little too small for my liking but otherwise great. Was not a big fan of the loading zones either and I think that could have been fixed, if you take a look at Morrowind on the Xbox the towns and villages you roam through are massive (the 360 effected the PC version in the loading department).

But otherwise the idiots shouting about how Thief 4 should be Thief or Thief 2 need to get a life and move with the industry. I can pretty much bet you've already made your minds up about how Thief 4 is going to suck before you've even seen it. But you'll still fork out the £40 to buy it the week it comes out, and then circle-jerk each other about how crap it is on an Internet forum to make yourselves feel somehow important.

Just my two cents/euros. :)

PJMaybe
10th Aug 2009, 22:16
Does that mean you liked the no-lean function?
You liked the fact that Garrett' became a different person?
You liked the frob changing everything you touch to bright blue?
You liked the easy escape load zones?
You liked the easy escape gloves?
You liked seeing where all the loot was form 40 yards away?
You liked being dragged into the light when you picked a lock?
You liked dying when you paddle into water?

Ahh.. I can't be bothered... it's all been said before. As jtr says, this thread needs merging.

But I don't expect T4 to suck. I think it all depends on how they are going to try and make their money from it.

ⓣⓐⓕⓕⓔⓡ
10th Aug 2009, 22:25
Does that mean you liked the no-lean function?
You liked the fact that Garrett' became a different person?
You liked the frob changing everything you touch to bright blue?
You liked the easy escape load zones?
You liked the easy escape gloves?
You liked seeing where all the loot was form 40 yards away?
You liked being dragged into the light when you picked a lock?
You liked dying when you paddle into water?

Ahh.. I can't be bothered... it's all been said before. As jtr says, this thread needs merging.

But I don't expect T4 to suck. I think it all depends on how they are going to try and make their money from it.

Well done, out of all the features, the plot, the levels, the mechanics, you chose to pick on the smallest parts on the game to differ from the originals.

Well done that man. :lmao:

Necros
10th Aug 2009, 22:27
I feel that TDS isn't getting the appreciation it deserved.

Of course we all agree it failed as a sequel of the 2 original games, even I admit that. But as a game in itself it was pretty damn good.
I think failed is harsh word, came close but didn't live up to the first two is how I'd put it. Yes, I liked T3 a lot too.

Things I'd like to see in thief 4 that came from TDS:

The city hub (of course with more variation and it has to be bigger.
The optional "Quests" that could be done in the city hub.
The "Shalebridge cradle" experience. (you know what I mean)
Dynamic shadows.
Nice look. (graphics, models etc.)
Selling your loot through fences.

These are good, I took out the cutscenes because I'd like them to resemble the first two games' cutscenes more.

And I think we talked about stuff like this before, so I'm not gonna go into details agin. And I feel a merge coming. :D

jtr7
10th Aug 2009, 23:05
Well done, out of all the features, the plot, the levels, the mechanics, you chose to pick on the smallest parts on the game to differ from the originals.

Well done that man. :lmao:

How many small parts would it take to equal one big one, ToolFan? ⓣⓐⓕⓕⓔⓡ?

ⓣⓐⓕⓕⓔⓡ
10th Aug 2009, 23:09
ToolFan?

Wow, you are that angry you are now resorting to insults? How come you are this sensitive on a forum? We are only discussing the game.

I don't see what your posts have even got to do with the topic since you are trolling me.


I thought the interface was better but with the compass it became just a little too obtrusive. I would have preferred it smaller (or even better, a resizing UI option)..

I agree the HUD and inventory were way better in TDS.

PJMaybe
11th Aug 2009, 05:08
Well done, out of all the features, the plot, the levels, the mechanics, you chose to pick on the smallest parts on the game to differ from the originals.


For a game that is primarily about sneaking, avoiding detection and evading capture, I would say anything that makes escaping a piece of cake (and it wasn't just isolated, it was on any mission or in any part of the city hub) is certainly no small change to the game. Same goes for finding the loot - it made it too easy and it was an integral part of the game.

As I said already, the game was good, just not as good - which was disappointing. For me it was hard to appreciate the levels as well as they should have been because of the reasons I have given and the plot was not without fault - like I said, I hated that they had changed Garrett's behaviour/personality. It didn't affect the gameplay but it left me feeling like it just wasn't right.

Finally, I wasn't pointing out the parts that differ from the original, I was pointing out the parts that were not as good or took something away from the experience of Thief.

the_fish
11th Aug 2009, 09:42
Does that mean you liked the no-lean function?
You liked the fact that Garrett' became a different person?
You liked the frob changing everything you touch to bright blue?
You liked the easy escape load zones?
You liked the easy escape gloves?
You liked seeing where all the loot was form 40 yards away?
You liked being dragged into the light when you picked a lock?
You liked dying when you paddle into water?

Ahh.. I can't be bothered... it's all been said before. As jtr says, this thread needs merging.

But I don't expect T4 to suck. I think it all depends on how they are going to try and make their money from it.

I liked being dragged into the light when picking a lock. IMO, it made lockpicking a lot more tense, especially as the lockpicking mechanic itself was variable (sometimes you couldn't remember how to pick some complicated locks, and all the while you're hearing footsteps getting closer...). Lockpicking from safety all the time is just dull.

Garrett's personality, the frob colour, and the no swimming really didn't affect the game for me. Swimming was obviously avoided as part of the level design, which was fine - it's unnecessary, and removing it is a good way of having a docks area with actual docks as it confines the player. The frob colour was annoying at first, but as it's purely cosmetic (along with Garrett's personality) I don't think it's anything wrong with the game.

I agree with you about the rest, though. Small levels / load zones was an engine limitation, on an engine that gave you the dynamic shadows and good graphics that you approved of - perhaps at first they didn't realise how much of an obstacle this would be. This is the one thing they absolutely must not have in T4, as it did very nearly wreck the game.


For a game that is primarily about sneaking, avoiding detection and evading capture, I would say anything that makes escaping a piece of cake (and it wasn't just isolated, it was on any mission or in any part of the city hub) is certainly no small change to the game.

You are aware that you could do exactly the same thing with ladders, ledges and rope arrows in the earlier games, right? Sure, climbing gloves were infinite rope arrows, but you didn't have persistent equipment back then either so you got more rope arrows at the start of most missions. I've recently replayed the "Ambush!" mission in T2 by just running past everyone until I can find a safe point.


Same goes for finding the loot - it made it too easy and it was an integral part of the game.

Perhaps - I can see what they were trying to do, but the long range evaluation thing was a bit of a mistake. I'd like to see a HUD message when you've got something highlighted to tell you if it's valuable or not - before you pick it up but not at range. Fair compromise?

Other improvements I liked, while we're debating minutia:

- nerfed blackjack (it was waaay too powerful before)
- being able to pinch out small light sources

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 09:58
Being dragged into the light is better and more reasonable than stepping into the light?

A great Thief GAME is much more about that world, and the characters, so that the game-mechanics are secondary. This is refreshingly different, and much more immersive for most players.

Swimming couldn't be implemented due to a botched engine the devs were stuck with. The City is a coastal city with a huge river and an ocean, as well as many tributaries, wells, sewers, mountain run-off, aqueducts, waterfalls, pools, rooftop water tanks, more steam, water wheels for generating electricity, fountains, and on and on. Water is important for any civilization, and the TDS devs had to CUT the water out when they found their designs couldn't work anymore. The LGS devs made a complete world and that is not trivial. You rob yourself of the depth of the experience by reducing it to puzzles and automated movements, so you'll have to put up with us who are into the complete Thief package, not just less than half of it. The City is considered another main character and has inspired many hundreds of fan projects, more than Garret himself has, but Garrett is a close second. Again, this is not trivial and is your loss, but hey, that's normal, too.

Small levels / load zones were NOT an ENGINE limitation. They were an XBOX MEMORY limitation.

Any NEW ideas for ADDING even MORE ways to make the game EASIER is what we are saying we DON'T want. NEW ways of evasion are TRULY unnecessary for a game like Thief.

Climbing gloves were extremely restricted compared to rope arrows, so it's touchy to put them closer to equal footing or infer gloves were better.

How is the TDS blackjack less powerful than before? Or are you confusing the lack of body zones and Flashbomb+BJ combo for a powerful weapon? :p

the_fish
11th Aug 2009, 10:31
Being dragged into the light is better and more reasonable than stepping into the light?

Sure, because it only gives one position in which to pick the lock. In the earlier games you could easily pick locks from shadow. Making you have to step into the correct position before you can pick would be incredibly frustrating.


A great Thief GAME is much more about that world, and the characters, so that the game-mechanics are secondary. This is refreshingly different, and much more immersive for most players.

Game mechanics are never secondary to a game, else you'd be playing an interactive film/movie. Immersion is important, sure, but never at the cost of gameplay, else everything would be a hyper-realistic mess. I don't even get what was wrong with Garrett's personality in TDS, other than being slightly different from the previous games.


Swimming couldn't be implemented due to a botched engine the devs were stuck with. The City is a coastal city with a huge river and an ocean, as well as many tributaries, wells, sewers, mountain run-off, aqueducts, waterfalls, pools, rooftop water tanks, more steam, water wheels for generating electricity, fountains, and on and on. Water is important for any civilization, and the TDS devs had to CUT the water out when they found their designs couldn't work anymore.

Swimming wasn't needed. You complained earlier about the easy escape gloves - well, guards can't swim either. You only want it because other games have it and the earlier thief games had it. There is no evidence of water being CUT from their designs - the levels are water free except where it is used as a natural barrier. It's not even unrealistic: go outside in an average city and count the bodies of open water. If you find any, try swimming in them carrying as much equipment as Garrett.


The LGS devs. made a complete world and that is not trivial. You rob yourself of the depth of the experience by reducing it to puzzles and automated movements. The City is considered another main character and has inspired many hundreds of fan projects, more than Garret himself has, but Garrett is a close second. Again, this is not trivial and is your loss, but hey, that's normal, too.

They...didn't make a complete world? They made a world, with lots of unanswered questions, which got continued in TDS. I really don't get this paragraph.


Small levels / load zones were NOT an ENGINE limitation. They were an XBOX MEMORY limitation.

Well, a consequence of both, but I see your point. A different engine (with the same graphical capability) could have much larger levels on the XBox's memory. I'm not sure if any of them were available for 3rd party use at the time, though.


Any NEW ideas for ADDING even MORE ways to make the game EASIER is what we are saying we DON'T want. NEW ways of evasion are TRULY unnecessary for a game like Thief.

Are you referring to the climbing gloves? In which case, they were a blatant replacement for the rope arrow - that's not really new. Also, I don't think you can slap a conservative "don't change anything" sticker on any game - there could easily be ideas out there that you haven't thought of which can improve the game drastically. Improving that which already works is what separates us from the apes (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17499-apes-may-imitate-but-they-struggle-to-innovate.html) :p (final paragraph).


How is the TDS blackjack less powerful than before? Or are you confusing the lack of body zones and Flashbomb+BJ combo for a powerful weapon? :p

In TDS, you can only blackjack a guard if he is unaware of you and you are striking him on the head, from behind.

In T2, you can blackjack a guard if they're looking for you but facing the other way, which typically means you lure them out and run up behind them. Flashbombs turn into large area gas bombs. It's not just stealth weapon here, which is important for a stealth game.

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 11:08
What "correct position" for lockpicking"? It was made the way it was in TDS because the body awareness forced the devs to keep the body from struggling against terrain. That's also why the lock is in the center of the door--for room for Garrett's model to pick freely, and the game has to ensure the player is locked into place, doing it for the player, so the pre-made animations would work. Also... light can be placed wherever the devs want to make a challenge and can make it inextinguishable. It's a non-argument.


For a game that is primarily about sneaking, avoiding detection and evading capture, I would say anything that makes escaping a piece of cake (and it wasn't just isolated, it was on any mission or in any part of the city hub) is certainly no small change to the game.

You are aware that you could do exactly the same thing with ladders, ledges and rope arrows in the earlier games, right? Sure, climbing gloves were infinite rope arrows, but you didn't have persistent equipment back then either so you got more rope arrows at the start of most missions. I've recently replayed the "Ambush!" mission in T2 by just running past everyone until I can find a safe point.
That's the quote and your response I responded to in turn, saying: "Any NEW ideas for ADDING even MORE ways to make the game EASIER is what we are saying we DON'T want. NEW ways of evasion are TRULY unnecessary for a game like Thief."


Game mechanics are never secondary to a game, else you'd be playing an interactive film/movie.
You're so close to understanding! All that writing and fiction and world-building wasn't just for flavor. You disrespect the devs to imply all that fiction and world-building was not important or essential. In the games, you ARE, in effect, playing through a three-part novel. Most of the greatest fun from playing Thief comes from inhabiting that world fully. This is seen in the testimonials of players over the last decade, and in the fan projects. There's more call for good story and good architecture than there is for a dressed-up obstacle course and improved movement overall.


Immersion is important, sure, but never at the cost of gameplay, else everything would be a hyper-realistic mess.
The older titles were significantly more layered and fleshed-out behind the low-polys and low-res veneer. An entire infrastructure to sustain a City was there. They were not at all hyper-realistic. TDS was lesser than the older games with a fancier appearance. Immersion is what makes the Thief fans passionate--atmosphere, and just inhabiting Garrett's boots.

Garrett was more than "slightly" different from the previous games, but you've created a strong impression you don't care much about character or the story, so I'm not sure your opinion is informed.

No engine at that time could've made TDS a cohesive game world. There are fans who've stitched separated parts of the missions back together, though the parts could not be aligned properly due to many difficult discrepancies and the fact that many city sections are really at quite a distance from each other, even though the game makes it feel adjacent sections are just on the other side of the gates.


"Complete". Sorry, I had no idea this would cause bafflement. I'm not at all sure you aren't playing with semantics, though. How about "more fully fleshed-out but in the sense of life-sustaining." You live here, in this complete real world, and there are many unanswered questions and you don't know 99.99999999% of what can be discovered, even in your own hometown, unless your hometown is a small village. You live in this "world" but really only a tiny speck of it. If I misunderstood, I apologize again.


Do you subscribe to the idea that alertness changes the effect of a leather bag filled with lead shot mashing onto one's skull if the AI doesn't see it coming or have time to react? I'm not against that, but with past debates it got down to splitting hairs over realism with gameplay thrown in.




There is no evidence of water being CUT.
You haven't read the devs' discussions, then. They came to us and told us when rope arrows (and ropes in general, really) and water weren't going to happen due to the botched code they were surprised to discover the hard way, that wasted weeks of game development, and the levels had to be REDESIGNED because of it. They apologized and told us they had other ideas, which left us with less water than most single older missions, gave us some deadly water, and the climbing glove workaround--which could also be greatly improved. There used to be water in the fountains and bathtubs and pools. TDS is a very stripped down world. Very little steampunk overall. The world of TDS was not as fleshed-out and was seriously gutted and monochromatic. Quality and richness of experience that speaks to players on many levels trump puzzles. The levels were designed around the problem of NOT having water to put in! Water that was initially going to be there because it makes sense for that established world to HAVE water. It wasn't needed for gameplay because they had to build a gameworld without it. The devs wanted it, always wanted it, and it was right for them to want water. It was the third part of ONE story--of course it should be reminiscent of the earlier titles--especially with most of the Thief devs from LGS working for ISA and in leadership roles! They put the water in the older games to begin with!:lmao:


Also, I don't think you can slap a conservative "don't change anything" sticker on any game - there could easily be ideas out there that you haven't thought of which can improve the game drastically.

:mad2:

No one's saying that! Keep pushing that MYTH, or pay attention. There's a pattern that those who don't care for the character or story also don't pick up on lengthy discussions to the contrary of what they claim is being said, nor understand what's being said, nor why. It's been explained and we'd like to move forward from that lie, which probably sounds ironic, but isn't if you've got the facts.

the_fish
11th Aug 2009, 11:50
What "correct position" for lockpicking"? It was made the way it was in TDS because the body awareness forced the devs to keep the body from struggling against terrain. That's also why the lock is in the center of the door--for room for Garrett's model to pick freely, and the game has to ensure the player is locked into place, doing it for the player, so the pre-made animations would work. Also... light can be placed wherever the devs want to make a challenge and can make it inextinguishable. It's a non-argument.

Sure, body awareness makes the game look and feel a LOT better (except in 3rd person, which suffered like all 3rd person games by the limited expression of the character model). Compare with the earlier games, where I could pick a lock standing a couple of metres away using the just the power of my mind.


Correct. All that writing and fiction and world-building wasn't just for flavor. You are, in effect, playing through a three-part novel. Most of the greatest fun from playing Thief comes from inhabiting that world fully. This is seen in the testimonials of players over the last decade, and in the fan projects. There's more call for good story and good architecture than is for just an obstacle course.

Garrett was more than "slightly" different from the previous games, but you've created a strong impression you don't care much about character or the story.

People play games for different reasons. As a designer, you're attempting to please as many people as possible. You care about story more than gameplay. I care about gameplay more than story. A compromise is needed.

In all seriousness, what exactly is wrong with Garrett in TDS?


No engine at that time could've made TDS a cohesive game world. There are fans who've stitched separated parts of the missions back together, though the parts could not be aligned properly due to many difficult discrepancies and the fact that many city sections are really at a great distance from each other, even though the game makes it feel adjacent sections are just on the other side of the gates.

Wrong - perhaps no commercial engine at that time could have made TDS a cohesive game world, but the technology was certainly present to do so if developed in-house. Of course, that might have added years to the development and been well over budget.

I can see why you're annoyed at the game being nerfed because of the XBox, but without the extra sales from the XBox version Thief 4 may never have been greenlit. PC only games just can't compete any more.


"Complete". Sorry, I had no idea this would cause bafflement. I'm not at all sure you aren't playing with semantics, though. How about "more fully fleshed-out but in the sense of life-sustaining." You live here, in this complete real world, and there are many unanswered questions and you don't know 99.99999999% of what can be discovered, even in your own hometown, unless your hometown is a small village. You live in this "world" but really only a tiny speck of it. If I misunderstood, I apologize again.

It caused bafflement because I'm not sure how TDS didn't do these things, other than use a world someone else had created (which is irrelevant to the discussion, as you didn't want them to use a different world). You implied there was some sort of difference.


Do you subscribe to the idea that alertness changes the effect of a leather bag filled with lead shot mashing onto one's skull if the AI doesn't see it coming or have time to react? I'm not against that, but with past debates it got down to splitting hairs over realism with gameplay thrown in.

Gameplay trumps realism. Always. (Gameplay over story is a different matter, as story is actually a constraint) The intent of the game is not to let you roleplay being a thief. Don't complain because your apple doesn't taste like a peach.


"There is no evidence of water being CUT". You haven't read the devs' discussions, then. They came to us and told us when rope arrows (and ropes in general, really) and water weren't going to happen due to the botched code they were surprised to discover the hard way, that wasted weeks of game development, and the levels had to be REDESIGNED because of it. They apologized and told us they had other ideas, which left us with less water than most single older missions, deadly water, and the climbing gloves, which could also be greatly improved. There used to be water in the fountains and bathtubs and pools. A very stripped down world. Very little steampunk overall. The world of TDS was not as fleshed-out and was seriously gutted and monochromatic. Quality and richness of experience trump puzzles.

Don't mistake a complaint for a matter-of-fact statement.

Fair enough, as I wasn't aware of that. I meant there was no evidence in-game, so they did a good job of covering their tracks, as water was never crucial to the missions. (Dried up fountains would be the biggest hint, but I interpreted that as bad city infrastructure)

I don't get what's so amazing about swimmable water, and how it contributes so much to this quality and richness of experience you speak of. There's no realistic wind or weather effects too, was that a problem? You appear to be complaining solely because something we had previously was removed, and it didn't even affect the game.


:mad2:

No one's saying that! Keep pushing that MYTH, or pay attention. There's a pattern that those who don't care for the character or story also don't pick up on lengthy discussions to the contrary of what they claim is being said, nor understand what's being said, nor why. It's been explained and we'd like to move forward from that lie, which probably sounds ironic, but isn't if you've got the facts.


"Any NEW ideas for ADDING even MORE ways to make the game EASIER is what we are saying we DON'T want. NEW ways of evasion are TRULY unnecessary for a game like Thief."
:rolleyes:

The only way that differs from my accusation is that it specifically applies to two areas of change (which is my fault, as I assumed my intent would come from context).

The Deadly Shadow
11th Aug 2009, 11:56
Deadly Shadows by far. A huge leap in terms of the game engine and the best storyline yet. It was boring doing the same old break-and-entering thing in the original two games.

Please keep the third person in I think there should be an option for both.

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 11:59
I can't believe you two played the first games to make such claims. :nut:


I mean, I don't know how it's possible, but there it is. It's never broken down for this side to see how such conclusions were drawn for an understanding to develop. Also, saying a game is good doesn't tell the DEVS why, either.



the_fish: I edited my post a lot while you were composing yours, if you hadn't noticed.

esme
11th Aug 2009, 12:07
...It was boring doing the same old break-and-entering thing in the original two games..... what happened to defeating a god or saving the world from a madman wanting to destroy all organic life except himself

besides breaking and entering is basically what thieves do and this is still what you did in DS, while at the same time saving the city from the hag

if you find breaking and entering boring are you sure you want to play this game ?

the_fish
11th Aug 2009, 12:36
I can't believe you two played the first games to make such claims. :nut:


I mean, I don't know how it's possible, but there it is. It's never broken down for this side to see how such conclusions were drawn for an understanding to develop. Also, saying a game is good doesn't tell the DEVS why, either.

Can't speak for everyone else who likes TDS, but I did. Before playing TDS, as well (though I played T2 before T1).

The pro-TDS camp has listed in what respects it was better than the first two offerings (while acknowledging the flaws). The anti-TDS camp seems to blow these flaws way out of proportion and let them tarnish everything about the game, without thinking this through.

What's worse is that you then try to evangelise your view at us, assuming we're misguided sheep who can't see why we're so obviously wrong, without listening to our counterarguments.

(The last sentence applies to a lot of things in this world, and accounts for a large part of why it sucks.)

PJMaybe
11th Aug 2009, 13:04
Sure, body awareness makes the game look and feel a LOT better (except in 3rd person, which suffered like all 3rd person games by the limited expression of the character model). Compare with the earlier games, where I could pick a lock standing a couple of metres away using the just the power of my mind.

personally, I liked the lockpicking skill needed - I just didn't like the way I was pulled from where I was standing. And there were many times in the original games that lock picking was not 'safe'. Often you would have to move from a shadow down to the door and get picking before the guard turned around/returned or whatever.



In all seriousness, what exactly is wrong with Garrett in TDS?

Its not that there's anything 'wrong' with him, its just that he behaves differently from the first games. It doesn't affect the gameplay but I just don't get why they had to do it. Previously Garrett would only do anything if it was for his own gain or to save his life, he wouldn't team up with anyone unless he had to or he stood to gain from it and the Keepers were mysterious and seemed quite intelligent. All that changed in TDS.



I can see why you're annoyed at the game being nerfed because of the XBox, but without the extra sales from the XBox version Thief 4 may never have been greenlit. PC only games just can't compete any more.

They dont have to make it PC only - just make it for PC first.


You appear to be complaining solely because something we had previously was removed, and it didn't even affect the game.

I wouldn't mind if water was excluded from T4 (but I would much prefer it to be in), what I don't want is water that kills you if you go paddling in it.


You are aware that you could do exactly the same thing with ladders, ledges and rope arrows in the earlier games, right?

Yes, and I didn't like it at all and I was hoping they would have sorted it out for TDS. However, instead of fixing the problem they just compounded it by making more ways to escape easily!

This is my beef with TDS - they removed lots of good stuff from the previous games (some of which I have no idea why - like the perfectly good frob highlight) and they fixed hardly anything that actually needed fixing. Maybe my expectations were too high but I was thinking we would have got a game that at least had all the features of the previous games and hopefully some more added. Of course the added features may have turned out to be good or bad and that is to be expected. But I never expected such changes to what didn't need changing as well as different style of game with factions and really badly implemented fences and so on and so on... etc. etc..

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 13:12
If Thief 4 was never going to be made, I would not miss it. I'm not aching for a new game called Thief, let alone a game about being a thief. It remains to be seen if I will even purchase a new game that happens to have the name "Thief" on the label. I'm not a consumerist, nor a gamer, and a game that is really good but does not have the heart and soul of a Thief game--especially if it has increased violence and confrontation, less intelligence, and less story and character--is simply uninteresting to me.




Some DEV quotes. In no particular chronological order:


First of all, hello everyone, this is my first post. I'm a former Ion Storm Austin designer. I saw on Blue's news that the T-DS editor was released and thought I'd drop in here. I never expected that editor to go out to the public, so this is pretty cool. Now you all can feel our pain Seriously though, I'm sure the fans will be able to make some awesome stuff with it since you won't have to work under the restrictions we had to when developing the game.
-----------------
The engine and tools were rushed, poorly planned and poorly executed in most aspects. Flesh [Engine] has some cool features and some things it does well, but it's a mess on the whole.
------------
We originally licensed the Unreal engine with the intent of using it, but ended up stripping almost everything out besides the editor and making a new engine built from a bare skeleton of Unreal.
------------
It's sort of a funny story how that happened really. The creation of the Flesh engine wasn't really planned. Early on in the development of DX2 and T3 we bandied about the idea of using dynamic shadows for gameplay. A certain programmer who will remain nameless was given the task of adding this into the Unreal engine. He went off on his own for a couple weeks and programmed an entirely new per-pixel lighting renderer. No one really asked him to make a completely new engine, but we didn't mind at first because it looked pretty cool. This was before we discovered the crippling limitations it would put on us.

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

DX2 suffered the most from this because it was our first try in the engine and we were under a lot of pressure to ship the game for Christmas. T3 fared better because we had more experience on how to get a game working and didn't have to make quite so many comprimises. Still, if we had stuck with Unreal we could have made both games a lot better, I think.
-------------
On 3 or 4 occasions during the development of DX2 and T3 we hired new programmers specifically to work on tools, but they always got pulled off to work on something else within a few weeks, leaving the tools unsupported. There was too much firefighting needed just to get the game working, which is another result of poor technical management. Everyone knew the editor sucked including the programmers, but in a development environment like we had, that's what you end up with.
-------------
We did actually change and add a lot of stuff to the editor, though in a piecemeal fashion by many different programmers working independently on their own stuff. The slowness and the bugs mainly come from the new features and whatever under-the-hood stuff the programmers put in. Poor tools support, again.
-------------
The main thing we had to cut back on due to memory and/or schedule were the total numbers of maps and the size of each individual map, as well as the numbers of characters and textures in a given map. The original city sections were ridiculously enormous, probably 10 times the size of most of the ones that made it into the game. It was good in a way that we had to cut them down somewhat because chances are that maps that huge would be easy to get lost in and have a lot of dead space. We wouldn't have had time to fill all that space up with polished content for sure. It would have been nice to not be forced to make them smaller when the design would have benefited from more space though, of course.

The only "story" that would have been cut would have been mostly side-story that related to cut maps. The only ones I can remember were a couple in the docks. There was going to be a shipping/receiving warehouse type of map where the Pagan sapling was being kept under lock and key. Garrett would have broken in through a high window and creeped through storage rooms around patrolling guards until finding the sapling in a secure area reserved for special cargo. There was some side-story involving the manager of the warehouse, but I can't recall what it was. When the map was cut the sapling ended up just sitting out on the docks. That quest was cut when the map was actually, and I was barely able to convince the higher-ups to save it by transplanting it into the docks and scripting it together on my own time. There was also going to be an extended sewer section under the docks crawling with undead that you had to fight before you could get to the Kurshok citadel. That was what the whole quarantine was about, but if I recall correctly no zombies ever actually appeared in the map and the sewer was just a really small little thing that led right to the mission entry glyph.

It's too bad we had to cut stuff, but if there's one thing I've learned about game development, it's that it pretty much never goes smoothly. There's always some sort of problems that prevent you from making exactly the game you wanted. More often you find that your original design doesn't work in practice and something else would be better. You either need to have a good team to work around the problems and make the game as good or better even though it's a bit different from the original vision, or you need infinite time to redo work and hone it to perfection (like Valve or Blizzard). At Ion we had more of the former for T-DS.
-----------
Frank Teran is amazingly talented. I wish we could have gotten in-game models for the Kurshok that looked like Frank's concept art. I'm not sure if that concept ever got onto the web or not. It was a horrifying, stunted, gilled Lovecraftian beast that looked really amazing. Then we ended up having to use a human skeleton to save on animations, and the Kurshok became the "sea orcs" with giant swords you see in the game.http://www.ttlg.com/forums/images/smilies/shake.gif
------------
On the Hand-Drawn maps:
Haha. The statement that they look like childish pictures is accurate in a funny way. I was a little disappointed with how the maps turned out too, and don't think they ended up being particularly useful to gameplay.

One day all the designers were asked to draw up a quick sketch of the maps to give the artists an idea of the map layouts. So that was what we did, under the assumption the artists would redo them and make them look much better than our crude drawings. Once the maps finally got into the game we were surprised to find that they were the exact temp images we had drawn ourselves, with a "wrinkled old paper" filter overlay and a couple icons added in for landmarks. At least they redid the crude little sailboat picture (meant to represent the Abysmal Gale) in the docks map I drew :joke: I should have gotten an art credit for that!

So essentially what you're looking at are maps drawn by non-artist Designers who were under the assumption the images would be temporary.
--------------
The jerky movement was a result of the player's view being attached to Garrett's model and therefore was limited by the speed of his animations. For example, turning was slow because it had to wait for Garrett to shuffle his feet around and visibly turn. This would have been the same even if there were no 3rd person view, because the body awareness feature was planned for first person and the view would remain attached to the player model regardless. I personally would have preferred less precise-looking animations in favor of more responsive controls, but that wasn't my call.
-------------
The first person movement wasn't really a design decision, per se. The design decision was to have the ability to switch back and forth between 3rd and 1st person on the fly in the game, and 1st person controls ending up how they are was an unintended result of that. Since we had the body awareness thing anyway, the programmers handling this decided to make 1st person the same as 3rd person, except the camera moves to where your eyes would be. This ended up making the 1st person handling a little wonky because your view follows Garrett's animations and you have to wait for his actual body to turn when doing a 180 and so on. I personally never liked the body awareness thing very much. I think responsive controls are more important than the ability to look down and see Garrett's feet. I agree with you all that it would have been better to create a custom control mechanism for 1st person that is closer to standard FPS movement.
-------------
No, we fully intended to have water in both DX:IW and T-DS in the initial designs. I suppose maybe someone will get mad at me for saying this, but we had a LOT of problems with implementing the Havok physics in our engine. There were a lot of things we just couldn't get working to our satisfaction and still keep up with our development schedule, and water was one of the big ones. We cut water because of the amount of development time it would have required for the physics programming and all of the art effects and extra animations and such. We decided the amount of time and resources it would take to put water in wasn't worth the gameplay benefit. Rope arrows were also intended to be in T-DS, but were cut because of the problems with implementing them. I wasn't on the Thief team yet when rope arrows were cut so I don't know the details, but I believe it was pretty much entirely for technical/schedule reasons. Everyone was pretty sad when they had to go.
-------------
We wanted rope physics, but we never got that feature. It was another physics thing we couldn't get working in the engine. I'm pretty sure that was one of the contributing factors to cutting the rope arrows. Even with a straight rope there was a host of other problems, though.
-------------
I'm pretty sure water wouldn't be possible without some kind of EXTREMELY elaborate hack. The water in T-DS was a hack itself anyway, it wasn't really water at all, just a thin static mesh sheet with no collision, a water texture on it and a kill zone under it.
-------------
The Flesh engine is a completely different engine from Unreal. It only uses the same editor; the renderer, physics and about everything else are proprietary. So none of the Unreal engine capabilities to create water exist in Flesh, and ISA didn't code our own as we cut water from the games long before anyone started programming it.
-------------
Rope arrows had a lot of work put into them before they were cut due to the difficulty of implementation, whereas climbing gloves were already working at that point. As I said, no one wanted to cut them. We got in a tough situation where something had to be cut and we had two features with overlapping functionality, one of which was already working ok and the other bordering on impossible to implement in our engine. The choice, while difficult, was the only practical one to be made at that time.
--------------
...Xbox memory is EXACTLY why the maps are small Most of the maps were originally much larger...
--------------
It was definitely RAM. When we tried to run a massive map on the Xbox, it would crash and spit out a bunch of error messages in the log. After chopping out big chunks and making it smaller, it would run.
--------------
Just for reference, it was mostly before Flesh was actually implemented that we had maps [multiple times bigger]. We were still running them in the Unreal engine. At the time they had no textures, no characters, way fewer static meshes and no scripting. You can't really make a direct comparison between our maps from early in the development to the final maps.
--------------
The big one was getting a map to fit into the 64mb of memory on xbox. That is the reason why all the maps are fairly small. Since the fans will only be making maps on PC, there are no memory restrictions and you should be able to make much larger spaces with higher res textures, more unique static meshes, more different characters, etc. Also we had to really limit the number of lights and amount of detail in any given scene in the map so the xbox framerate would be decent. Fans should be able to add a lot more detail and do prettier lighting because PCs run the game faster.


...there is no question that we had lots of challenges in the technical department. In particular what you are saying about levels is true - the underlying technology didn't settle down enough for us to come to a firm understanding of the limits we were working with. Hence we had to take some guesses about what would make a good level, and then later realized that they wouldn't fit in memory, at which point we had to modify the design, to no one's happiness.
-----
Jonathan: Interpersonal issues?

Randy: No, I think for the most part everyone at ISA was talented and well-intentioned. The problems were more classic development problems: we didn't follow a strict development cycle, we didn't coordinate development well between 2 very similar projects, we didn't have a good budget and schedule, we didn't have great alignment with the publisher, the tech development wasn't well planned and took a bunch of wrong turns, the design was too ambitious, the direction was unfocused.

Jonathan: That’s quite a mouth full.

Randy: It was kind of some of everything, and it was hard to pull anything good out of the situation. Towards the end when all of this was really hitting hard with a deadline looming, interpersonal issues were more prominent, but I attribute them mostly to the stress of the situation.

Jonathan: I can guess who fired you.

Randy: Uh-huh.

Jonathan: There was speculation that your ejection from ISA was due to your persistence on retaining classical Thief elements. What do you think?

Randy: No, I’ve heard the "Randy was the martyr for our cause" theory before, but it isn't true. Warren is equally an advocate for maintaining the soul of the thief series in T3.

Jonathan: So what happened?

Randy: Well, I don't really know. Everything was really stressful, and I was pretty pissed off. I wasn't contributing any more positively than anyone else by then, I was being pushed out of a position of authority so that things could get done, and at some point I just sort of gave up. I suppose I pissed off the wrong people with my strong opinions. I regret being so angry at people and the situation, but it was really the most hopeless development situation I have ever seen, so I can forgive myself for feeling that way.

By that time I was clearly only still involved out of loyalty to the team and the project because I thought that leaving the project before the end would look really bad. so I didn't mind being fired, exactly.
----------------
"It was clearly very educational," he says, of his time there, "but there's a lot of learning through failure to be dealt with. Some of it was my own personal failure, but a lot of it was also that the studio was...the entire environment was not the healthiest around. So there were definitely a lot of issues in production, and in our relationship with publisher. The studio was kind of doomed. We did a lot of things really badly, and a lot of that was because a lot of us had never done our jobs before."

In early 2004, Smith was laid off from Ion Storm over, apparently, creative differences with upper management, a few months before the studio itself shut down. "You could say that things weren't working out," he said. "There was just a lot of tension in the studio, between my group and me, and difficulty getting the technology working."

"I have no regrets about my time there," he said. "I had that sense of dedication to the project, but I really wasn't happy anymore at all, and I really wanted to leave. So being fired was cool! It was weird and awful, but at the same time, it was just what I needed. What I was gunning for."


There's more. Should I post it?

esme
11th Aug 2009, 13:48
...There's more. Should I post it?oo yes please

any chance you can find out who the 'unknown developer' was so we can go beat them up ?

the_fish
11th Aug 2009, 13:56
Thanks jtr7, that was really informative. Don't post the rest if you can link to it instead.

Given they ripped out most of the unreal engine anyway I'm not sure why they kept the bits that prevented dynamic loading. I suppose it's due to keeping the same map format, which meant that they could code the engine and map concurrently.

The small map size problem is universally accepted as a flaw, though, as were climbing gloves over rope arrows. The lack of water, while unintentional, wasn't nearly as big a problem. Obviously if they could have added it they would have, but personally I don't think its absence hurt the game to anywhere near the same degree as the map size issue.

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 14:09
It didn't hurt the game as much as it hurt The City, and was one of many things conspicuously absent.

esme
11th Aug 2009, 14:26
unfortunately we'll never know what impact the lack of swimmable water had on the game as as it was cut and the bodge of water that kills on touch was put in, it may have been awesome, it may have been horrendously crap, beyond knowing it was originally intended to be in the game we will never know the effect of it's absence as we don't know how it would have been used

however can we cease the argument that swimmable water should not be in T4 because it wasn't in T3, it was intended to be in T3 and was cut because of one persons incompetence and lack of oversight by management, that does not make swimmable water a bad thing

it depends what the game designer does with it that makes it good or bad

xDarknessFallsx
11th Aug 2009, 14:52
Good quotes, hadn't seen them before. I'm glad you embedded them here, actually. If all you posted was a link, I'm not sure I would've clicked it. Would've just been my loss, though. I can see why others would just want a link.

At any rate, I hope those who don't understand why I like T1/T2 better than TDS can see by the above quotes. As a player, I felt so many of these shortcomings and botched things in TDS; things that the devs themselves admit to having to do. The execution of TDS just seems inferior to me compared to T1/T2. T1/T2 weren't perfect, but they sure seemed a lot more polished in many (almost every?) respects. And were much funner for me to play. I love so many things in T1/T2, and so few things in TDS. Maybe if the devs had a better engine to work with didn't have to make so many shortcuts because of the X360 my feelings would be different.

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 15:05
Just a heads-up: Every block of text between "-----------" lines would be a link you'd have to click.

If you want to browse the old dev quotes yourselves, sometime, here's a list of known usernames of the devs that posted at TTLG. Some of them are the same usernames for the Eidos archives, and the cached ISA forums. It's hard to Google these, but there's usually good stuff in a valid hit.

EvilSpirit = Tim Stellmach
boojum = Laura Baldwin
Randy = Randy Smith
KeeperGarrett = Rob Caminos
aardvark, gratisgamer, RC, zdim = Rich Carlson
sswift = Shawn Swift
Marshall, Harwin = Alex Duran
Katiemonster = Lulu LaMer
Terri, TDB = Terri Brosius
EJB = Eric Brosius
7002, MikeC = Mike Chrzanowski
TomL, Zarathustra = Tom Leonard
buzzard, nothings = Sean Barrett
MAHK = Marc LeBlanc
Fretnoize = David Bax
Thomas M. Blackheart = Thomas M. Blackheart
solus = Mike Ryan
Dan Schmidt = Dan Schmidt
TechMonkey = ? (Customer Support)
jducoeur = Mark "Justin" Waks
AlexxKay = Alexx Kay
Ken Levine, Irrationallevine = Ken Levine
Andrew 'remnant' Chambers = Andrew Chambers
Stork = Eddie Moore
jonchey, Jon C, Shodan's Little Helper = Jon Chey
Xemu, xemu22, DoktorX = Rob Fermier
Skarz = Scott Blinn
MSG, -MSG- = Michael Swiderek
toneboy = Matt Boynton
Ian Vogel = Ian Vogel
Whiskeybee, Holiday = Nate Wells
wspector = Warren Spector
Nick1, Lohan, Lohan2, Lohan-T3Team, EmilPags, Ion-Emil = Emil Pagliarulo
Ramon, BigMike = Mike Steinkrauss
Scott Martin = Scott Martin
witchboy = Harvey Smith
MIS Monkey = Chad Warren
Egg Boy = Paul Tozour
digital-leaf = Rafael "Leaf" Jabulani Brown
Raf = Raphael Colantonio
todd@bethesda = Todd Howard
Krypt = Brian Glines
MysteryDev
Endless Despair = Elan Ruskin
serg = Sergio Rosas
Faceless = Jeremy Graves

esme
11th Aug 2009, 15:09
I wish you'd posted those quotes back when the forum started mate, there's a few arguments on here that just wouldn't have happened if you had

ain't hindsight wonderful heh ;) :thumb:

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 15:22
It didn't occur to me or I would've. I had to look them up individually as I posted, based only on memory of who said what as far as I could recollect, heh. Now we all have to remember that post is in this thread and link to it for every person new to the discussion. :D

PJMaybe
11th Aug 2009, 16:59
I've not seen some of those quotes before, thanks for posting them, very informative!

Its quite laughable that TDS is a game that the Devs themselves think is pretty poor and was not the game they wanted to make - yet there are people saying how great it is!

They are a corporate executive's wet dream. Feed them crap and they lap it up like caviar :nut:

jtr7
11th Aug 2009, 17:06
Consumerist masses rewarding the industry for unhealthy fast-food entertainment.

Secondary
13th Aug 2009, 23:23
the gameplay and level design were undoubtedly at their peak in the Metal Age, but I like TDS more becuase im an artsist and as such, I cant ignore visuals, I really like the third person mechanic (big fan of splinter cell too, same reasons)

ToMegaTherion
14th Aug 2009, 08:48
Hehe, Deadly Shadows is closin' in on Dark Project :p

Come on, folks, Metal Age is now well below 50%, get yourselves voting and make sure the best game is well on top!

jtr7
14th Aug 2009, 09:32
I occurs to me that the more realism is put into a game, the more the demand for realism increases. The closer the experience gets to reality, the more the flaws and incorrectness stand out. We are nowhere near capable of simulating reality in video games. The older titles are more what theater visuals offer, which the mind is pleased to fill in, unlocking the power of the imagination, making them more personal. The newer titles will continue to do more FOR the player, creating less depth and making it less personal, requiring more personalization menus to make up for the compromises with immersion. This is what it will be most of the time. There will be exceptions, but they will be exceptional for doing more with less, critically acclaimed but publicly shunned for not providing more "like the other games do".

ToMegaTherion
14th Aug 2009, 15:28
I occurs to me that the more realism is put into a game, the more the demand for realism increases. The closer the experience gets to reality, the more the flaws and incorrectness stand out. We are nowhere near capable of simulating reality in video games. The older titles are more what theater visuals offer, which the mind is pleased to fill in, unlocking the power of the imagination, making them more personal. The newer titles will continue to do more FOR the player, creating less depth and making it less personal, requiring more personalization menus to make up for the compromises with immersion. This is what it will be most of the time. There will be exceptions, but they will be exceptional for doing more with less, critically acclaimed but publicly shunned for not providing more "like the other games do".

That really is an excellent post, jtr7. I recommend everyone reads it and thinks about it and its implications. Presumably of course if 20 people think about it they will come up with 20 different conclusions, but none the less, we should think about it...

Vae
14th Aug 2009, 15:54
I concur. Excellent post jtr7...:thumb:


The older titles are more what theater visuals offer, which the mind is pleased to fill in, unlocking the power of the imagination, making them more personal.

This is a key statement, and has a lot to do with the magic behind Thief.



This is what it will be most of the time. There will be exceptions, but they will be exceptional for doing more with less, critically acclaimed but publicly shunned for not providing more "like the other games do".

This is where Thief 4 has a chance to really shine. There are ways to artfully apply certain forms of realism (certain enhanced physics, rope burning for example) in a surrealistic manner. Proper artistic application of realism/surrealism can actually stimulate and bring out that imaginary glue in a more dynamic world, as long as those dynamic responses stimulate the imagination further rather that replace it.

jtr7
14th Aug 2009, 16:01
Agreed!


If it were made to resemble an actual historic period, it should also be injected with the surreal and otherworldliness to offset it and take it into familiar Thief territory. Something in the architecture, something about the streets, something to give it real character and slight tension.

Vae
14th Aug 2009, 16:12
Yes. It's about moving forward in the right way. It is all in how it is done. We could have an even better Thief experience than ever, with more to wonder about and to explore, in ways that were not even possible when T1/T2 were created. This can be realized when technology serves art, and not the other way around...:)

Putorski
18th Aug 2009, 11:48
I like TMA best

imperialreign
18th Aug 2009, 22:44
I'd have to say I love them all equally . . .

When I first picked up TDP back when it was released, no less than 6 months later they released TG - and I wasn't about to spend another $50 for 3 missions, so I never got around to checking those out . . . but, TDP was awesome - first in the series, I had to re-train my playing style, and some of the levels were truly creepy . . .

Then, TMA was released - I went in thinking it was going to be better than TDP, and, it was - I loved the huge maps and long missions, there was so much to do . . . but, it didn't have that same "new" feeling that TDP did - TDP holds some immense nostalgia value for me that puts the two on an even field.

TDS - as much as there were things I didn't like, there was a lot I loved - the ability to creep about The City and steal from citizens (even with how small these maps really were), annoy the guards, break into buildings . . . to the graphics and visuals (the Hammerite church was absolutely gorgeous), and the expanded Keeper and Pagan factions . . . add in the Shalebridge misson (which is absolutely brilliant and one of the best missions I've ever played in any game) and I could easily overlook TDS' few shortcomings for it's positive aspects, easily settling it in to a 3-way tie with the previous installments.