Page 1 of 20 1234511 ... Last

Thread: How many old-school fans are actually optimistic?

How many old-school fans are actually optimistic?

  1. #1

    How many old-school fans are actually optimistic?

    Now, no one I know was more cynical about this game than me. I was outright dreading what I would see once gameplay footage was released. However, after seeing the footage, I actually find myself very optimistic about the game. Now, that isn't to say I don't still have some concerns. I still worry about the levels being small, what changes will be made to the lore, and of course if the writing, namely Garrett's wit, will match the originals.

    However, honestly, the gameplay footage I've seen makes it look like EM is on the right track. Yes, there are going to be changes, and yes, there will be elements that make it more accessible, but EM has, almost excessively, emphasized that these elements are completely optional.

    Also, I knew right away that no matter how much of a stealth game it is, the marketing is still going to show it as more action-y than it really is. Let's be realistic, here, the game needs to sell, and a trailer showing nothing but Garrett quietly and slowly sneaking about, stealing his loot, and quietly leaving isn't going to grab a lot of attention, even if that is indeed what the game is going to mostly be like. Hell, just look at the marketing for Thief 3. The tagline was "I have the power to take everything from you. Including your life." Frankly, "What's yours is mine" sounds like a better tagline for a stealth game than that.

    So really, I just feel as though people are jumping to conclusions to fast about it, and are too clingy to the original games. Don't get me wrong, I love them to death. Thief II is my 2nd all time favorite game. But, realistically, they could not just remake Thief II with better graphics (Besides, that already exists, it's called The Dark Mod), and the last game came out almost a decade ago so, changes ARE going to be made. From what I've seen, however, the changes made do not veer as far from the Thief games as I feared they would.

    Course, maybe I'm just being a dumb, overly optimistic fool.

  2. #2
    Change just for the sake of changing something does not mean it's inherently good. I find just about every thing I have seen and heard about this game questionable.

  3. #3
    Very little of what I have seen has made me think they are "on the right track". That, however, is mostly due to my definition of "right track" which is more 1998 than 2013. But who knows. A brand new HUD and UI would go a long way to setting things right, and these things are very feasible if the devs are willing. So I would say that I am hopeful more so than optimistic.

  4. #4
    I'm not sure Square Enix can afford for this to suck, so I'm hopeful that they'll do what needs to be done to make it good. The demo had lots of issues, but I'm still keeping my fingers crossed on this one.

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by Buccura
    The tagline was "I have the power to take everything from you. Including your life." Frankly, "What's yours is mine" sounds like a better tagline for a stealth game than that.
    What I love about the first quote is that it's mysterious. He has the power, but will he do it? Eh maybe, maybe not. Having mystery is the key!! "What's yours is mine" does that mean he will take my toilet paper too? The new tagline makes Garrett sound like a spoiled brat. This line still makes me cringe from the E3 trailer: "When I want something, I always get it!"

    I'm not very optimistic. It will probably be an alright game, but it will be one of those games you only play once. The narrative and style of the old games carried so much weight. I think that's where EM misses the mark when they claim to be all about "immersion."

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Popemaster
    What I love about the first quote is that it's mysterious. He has the power, but will he do it? Eh maybe, maybe not. Having mystery is the key!! "What's yours is mine" does that mean he will take my toilet paper too? The new tagline makes Garrett sound like a spoiled brat. This line still makes me cringe from the E3 trailer: "When I want something, I always get it!"

    I'm not very optimistic. It will probably be an alright game, but it will be one of those games you only play once. The narrative and style of the old games carried so much weight. I think that's where EM misses the mark when they claim to be all about "immersion."
    Well said.
    "Why isn’t the game designed as a Thief game first, but with a casual mode option if you think its too difficult?"

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Buccura
    Yes, there are going to be changes, and yes, there will be elements that make it more accessible, but EM has, almost excessively, emphasized that these elements are completely optional.
    Did you see the gameplay video that had all the contextual interaction displays turned on? Showing you can't lean unless you're next to an object that the devs say you can lean against, and even then you essentially have to enter into a cover mode first before you can lean? Rope arrows can only go into hot spots. Garrett has to re-position himself in front of doors, etc. Are you looking forward to losing control flexibility like this? These things are not optional. I'm not personally looking forward to changes for the worse rather than better, but the game has good potential, nonetheless.

    Maybe they will give players flexibility eventually, but I have a feeling they are fine with this stuff since every other modern game has contextual interactions (modern gamers apparently expect it; maybe because they don't know what they're missing) and the vast majority of games don't even have leaning. So these controls probably look average or good next to modern games, but pale in comparison to classic Thief.

    If I could enable in the options menu rope arrows to work in any wooden surface, or allow leaning any time I want while still being able to zoom or shoot, or hands and 3P animations that don't take control away from me, that'd be awesome.

  8. #8
    I'm still optimistic for this game.
    signature image
    I am the shadow on the wall.

  9. #9
    I'm not an old school fan (I first started the trilogy three years ago) and I'm absolutely positive that it's going to be pretty bollocks. I've seen nothing good about this game, just a few things that could be okay.

  10. #10
    I am a sceptic. Everything I have read has seemed to move T4 further and further away from THIEF. It may turn out to be a playable game, but even with the "We played this game and love it!' claims of the designers, I see departures that, in my never humble opinion, seem to make this a reboot of the (in my opinion) fiasco that was TDS.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The highest ground...
    Posts
    23,047
    Originally Posted by Buccura
    Course, maybe I'm just being a dumb, overly optimistic fool.

    Personally speaking, I would rather be an overly optimistic fool than an overly negative fool.
    I am indeed an old school fan who adores the game (and fan missions) but I'm not the clingy type you describe. I have looked forward to the new game since day one and have remained confident that EM can deliver. I prefer to remain supportive and allow them the freedom to be creative. I will judge them after I've played the game; which is the fairest way, imo.



    Originally Posted by Popemaster
    It will probably be an alright game, but it will be one of those games you only play once. "
    This is how I felt about Deadly Shadows, I never wanted to play it again.
    I think Thief will have good replay value... choosing/using different tools and taking different paths is one way.
    signature image
    You are only minimally modified. Omar can help you correct this...

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Viktoria

    Personally speaking, I would rather be an overly optimistic fool than an overly negative fool.
    I am indeed an old school fan who adores the game (and fan missions) but I'm not the clingy type you describe. I have looked forward to the new game since day one and have remained confident that EM can deliver. I prefer to remain supportive and allow them the freedom to be creative. I will judge them after I've played the game; which is the fairest way, imo.




    This is how I felt about Deadly Shadows, I never wanted to play it again.
    I think Thief will have good replay value... choosing/using different tools and taking different paths is one way.

    Like you I hope that the end result will be better. But I get the feeling that the $$ is more the target than the essence of the game itself!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,540
    To me, everything that has been revealed so far is simply screaming that Eidos Montréal doesn't actually want to make a Thief game at all. They want to make some thing completely of their own, but they also need to implement stuff from the IP that they have rights for. They want to have a character who isn't Garrett, but he has to be called that. They want a world that isn't the Thief world, but it has to resemble it. And they want gameplay that isn't Thief, but it has to look like it. They want to please the fans of Thief, but they also want to prioritize aspects that the fans don't want, even in the expense of things that they would want. They want to "be true to the roots of Thief" but they also want billion dollar graphics and thus need to compromise everything to make a profit.

    It's almost like a Thief skin on a different game. A bunch of familiar names plastered on foreign objects. It's a reverse Dark Mod, because where The Dark Mod is trying its hardest to be Thief but is not allowed to admit it publicly due to IP laws, Thief is desperately trying to convince you that it has something to do with the actual IP. Like Assassin's Creed desperately trying with its title to get people to believe that its protagonists can be called assassins with a straight face, while another game humbly calls itself Hitman instead.

    I'm not saying it's entirely different. I am saying that EM is way too committed to doing exactly what they want and disregarding the majority of the source material at a whim, whenever it suits them. When they talk about making a new story so that they wouldn't be constrained, they weren't kidding. They set almost no boundaries to themselves based on the established IP. They change everything the way they like, and just barely tie it in with the IP by distantly referencing some name.

    I say that if someone really wanted to make a Thief game, they would be working the other way around. Trying and often failing to reconcile their new ideas and stories with the core principles and lore of Thief. Trying to hold onto Thief as hard as they could while also implementing new stuff. Eidos Montréal looks exactly like the opposite. Trying to hold onto their own ideas as hard as they can while also kinda relating it with what has been established in Thief.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity
    To me, everything that has been revealed so far is simply screaming that Eidos Montréal doesn't actually want to make a Thief game at all. They want to make some thing completely of their own, but they also need to implement stuff from the IP that they have rights for. They want to have a character who isn't Garrett, but he has to be called that. They want a world that isn't the Thief world, but it has to resemble it. And they want gameplay that isn't Thief, but it has to look like it. They want to please the fans of Thief, but they also want to prioritize aspects that the fans don't want, even in the expense of things that they would want. They want to "be true to the roots of Thief" but they also want billion dollar graphics and thus need to compromise everything to make a profit.

    It's almost like a Thief skin on a different game. A bunch of familiar names plastered on foreign objects. It's a reverse Dark Mod, because where The Dark Mod is trying its hardest to be Thief but is not allowed to admit it publicly due to IP laws, Thief is desperately trying to convince you that it has something to do with the actual IP. Like Assassin's Creed desperately trying with its title to get people to believe that its protagonists can be called assassins with a straight face, while another game humbly calls itself Hitman instead.

    I'm not saying it's entirely different. I am saying that EM is way too committed to doing exactly what they want and disregarding the majority of the source material at a whim, whenever it suits them. When they talk about making a new story so that they wouldn't be constrained, they weren't kidding. They set almost no boundaries to themselves based on the established IP. They change everything the way they like, and just barely tie it in with the IP by distantly referencing some name.

    I say that if someone really wanted to make a Thief game, they would be working the other way around. Trying and often failing to reconcile their new ideas and stories with the core principles and lore of Thief. Trying to hold onto Thief as hard as they could while also implementing new stuff. Eidos Montréal looks exactly like the opposite. Trying to hold onto their own ideas as hard as they can while also kinda relating it with what has been established in Thief.
    Yeah. ::sigh::

    It would be really hard for me to play the new game even if they get the mechanics right. It sounds like there's going to be just enough old content(ostensibly put in there to please the old school fans) to keep reminding me it's not the game I wanted made. Seeing a statue of a Hammerite will not be a cool moment for me.

  15. #15
    It was always going to be different from the classic LGS games, even Deadly Shadows was and that didn't turn out too bad in the end. That said DS had a the Thief vibe though just fine, this new incarnation doesn't seem to have it as much. That said it was only some scant alpha gameplay we have seen so things can change, though things like fog in a ui is much easier than the "interesting" AI.

    The one thing I really, really dislike about what I have seen so far is the ridiculous fog that hampers you if you choose to use stealth and even worse, QTE's. That sort of thing feels exactly like the boss battles in DX:HR - completely out of place and jarring that brings nothing to the game except whack-a-mole gameplay in a FPS stealth title.

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity
    To me, everything that has been revealed so far is simply screaming that Eidos Montréal doesn't actually want to make a Thief game at all. They want to make some thing completely of their own, but they also need to implement stuff from the IP that they have rights for. They want to have a character who isn't Garrett, but he has to be called that. They want a world that isn't the Thief world, but it has to resemble it. And they want gameplay that isn't Thief, but it has to look like it. They want to please the fans of Thief, but they also want to prioritize aspects that the fans don't want, even in the expense of things that they would want. They want to "be true to the roots of Thief" but they also want billion dollar graphics and thus need to compromise everything to make a profit.

    It's almost like a Thief skin on a different game. A bunch of familiar names plastered on foreign objects. It's a reverse Dark Mod, because where The Dark Mod is trying its hardest to be Thief but is not allowed to admit it publicly due to IP laws, Thief is desperately trying to convince you that it has something to do with the actual IP. Like Assassin's Creed desperately trying with its title to get people to believe that its protagonists can be called assassins with a straight face, while another game humbly calls itself Hitman instead.
    It
    I'm not saying it's entirely different. I am saying that EM is way too committed to doing exactly what they want and disregarding the majority of the source material at a whim, whenever it suits them. When they talk about making a new story so that they wouldn't be constrained, they weren't kidding. They set almost no boundaries to themselves based on the established IP. They change everything the way they like, and just barely tie it in with the IP by distantly referencing some name.

    I say that if someone really wanted to make a Thief game, they would be working the other way around. Trying and often failing to reconcile their new ideas and stories with the core principles and lore of Thief. Trying to hold onto Thief as hard as they could while also implementing new stuff. Eidos Montréal looks exactly like the opposite. Trying to hold onto their own ideas as hard as they can while also kinda relating it with what has been established in Thief.
    Hear hear. The devs need to read and understand this

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    The feeling I get from observing this game's progress is that there are forces at work from two sides: one seeking to preserve the Thief essence and give us a game that we'll enjoy, and the other seeking to sell-out and give the game what they think is mass appeal by kowtowing to every popular trend.

    I think both forces will win in the end, and the game that I get my hands on will have the terms "could have been so much better" and "could have been so much worse" applicable to it in equal measure.

    I think i'll enjoy it.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    Funny you'd say that. Prior to reading your post, I was going to say this game to me feels more and more like a bridge between two worlds.

    My problem is not with this title in particular. My problem is when I played Thief, Deus Ex, No One Lives Forever, or Half Life, I conceived a future for gaming, imagined where the next generation could possibly take us. When I played those titles, I did not think "I want to play those exact same games for the rest of my life", but rather "man I can't wait to see where this will take us next". To me Deus Ex was a blueprint for a whole new generation of games, which would all innovate the title in amazing directions.

    Every time a franchise is revived, I'm painfully reminded how games have taken an entirely different direction. I'm not sad for what we lost. Those games still exist, and the memories are very real. I'm sad for what could have been. Every new year brings us further away in the "wrong" direction, wrong from where I am standing, of course. You might say I failed to adapt or evolve, or grow up, even. But 1999 Frank really did not think 2013 would turn out like this. I feel like I'm living in my very own paralel universe, half expecting to come across myself one sunny day.
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by FrankCSIS
    Funny you'd say that. Prior to reading your post, I was going to say this game to me feels more and more like a bridge between two worlds.

    My problem is not with this title in particular. My problem is when I played Thief, Deus Ex, No One Lives Forever, or Half Life, I conceived a future for gaming, imagined where the next generation could possibly take us. When I played those titles, I did not think "I want to play those exact same games for the rest of my life", but rather "man I can't wait to see where this will take us next".

    Every time a franchise is revived, I'm painfully reminded how games have taken an entirely different direction. I'm not sad for what we lost, I'm sad for what could have been. Every new year brings us further away in the "wrong" direction, wrong from where I am standing, of course. You might say I failed to adapt or evolve, or grow up, even. But 1999 Frank really did not think 2013 would turn out like this. I feel like I'm living in my very own paralel universe, half expecting to come across myself one sunny day.
    Exactly. Remember when there were new game announcements that set your imagination on fire, and then lived up to their seeming impossible promises? (or at least failed spectacularly like Daikatana)

    Part of the problem is just that most of the low-hanging fruit has already been picked, but I also think that publishers and developers are just afraid to dream big anymore.

    Remember when fully-simulated, AI-driven procedural animation was just around the corner, ready to open up the next chapter in emergent gameplay? This will come as a shocker to people, but at least two games shipped with that technology in the 90's. Neither was a financial success, so developers just planted their butts firmly on their laurels and got back to aping Quake and Doom. And there are a million other potential gameplay breathroughs that are just sitting around waiting for someone to grow a pair and tackle them. But there are no takers.

    So, in answer to anyone who thinks that fans of Looking Glass just want Thief made again with better graphics: you've got it all wrong. We'd like to see someone move gaming forward with the same skill and foresight that those guys had. When we harp negatively on some of these new features, it's not just because they are different than the Thief of old, it's because they're retreading ground that was broken by a million other games.

    Sorry, that turned into kind of a rant. But it's true.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    Exactly. Remember when there were new game announcements that set your imagination on fire
    I never stopped to dwell on this, but I realise just now I'm never surprised by any news released or leaked today.

    From 1990 to 2003 or so, there was this amazing sense of progress with every new screenshot or demo released. Of course there were truckloads of crap, but things always move forward. Graphically, yes, but gameplay-wise as well, and this is where it truly counts. Even the big duds like Kingpin showed unforeseen progress. The thing is, it was impossible to completely guess where the next game would take us. In the mind of a child, and later a teenager, this did set my imagination on fire.

    It's so ironic the coming of age of gaming came around the same time as ours, and hit it as brutally as it generally hits teenagers.

    It's as if, like many adults, gaming has lost track of its own dreams, out of necessity.

    I think that's it, right there. Gaming no longer allows itself to dream.
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

  21. #21
    Platinumoxicity worded it right. Unfortunately, even if the devs read what he said, I seriously doubt they will listen. They seem to be determined to do what they want, and with each recent interview, it shows me that they aren't really listening.

    FrankCSIS: you're right about the dreaming part. In the 1990s (even though I was an adult) I'd look at the games shelves like a little kid at Christmas. What games were out there and what kind of ideas were in them was a big interest. There was a wide range of games, and they didn't really resemble each other much. Now I look at the shelves with no joy and think "what games are actually significantly different" and I'm not very happy.

    There may be time for EM to change, but I don't think it will happen.

  22. #22
    Originally Posted by Buccura
    How many old-school fans are actually optimistic?
    Q&A thread gives me optimism, but who cares what I think? Reading what old-school fans think, I've made a conclusion that I'm not an old-school fan. A long time ago Thief 2 made me a big fan of the stealth genre, but I'm not as extreme as they are. Moreover, I think that Thief 3 was the best part of the series.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by KenTWOu
    Q&A thread gives me optimism, but who cares what I think? Reading what old-school fans think, I've made a conclusion that I'm not an old-school fan. A long time ago Thief 2 made me a big fan of the stealth genre, but I'm not as extreme as they are.
    You seem to be confusing "old-school" with "hard-core".

  24. #24
    I'm certainly an old-school fan and in my opinion, pretty hard-core fan, too. I've been playing since '98 or '99, wrote some of my own fan-fiction and drew some fan-art and built a couple of levels (haven't released any of the fore mentioned, sadly) and I've got the Trickster Glyph tattoo on my arm(). My favourite is currently The Dark Project (not Gold), but I like every title very much.

    That said, I'm not a purist fan. I'm still very optimistic for the new Thief. I think it's a bold title with the current triple-A titles and certainly goes for the right direction with many things. I am very open for most creative choices - not a fan of narrow views.
    ~You reap what you sow~

  25. #25
    Hate me. Ban me from the forums. Find my adress and kill me. But the truth is much more simple. Oldschool guys can't accept this as easily because it's a console game at heart.

    When you look around with a mouse, the motion is fluid,natural, it's really as if you are looking around. When you look around with a controller, most of the movement is in main angles, there are no small alterations to your heads movement. At best you are like robocop. You can almost hear the whizz of servo motors... Small detail? Yes. But it's in the pillar.

    Moving through the doors Garrett have to reposition himself, a-la Skyrim. Imagine a really complex layout of boxes, crates, pipes through which you have to find the right path by jumping, crawling, moving a box and jumping on top and do this without noise and before the guard comes back. You can't do this as easily with a controller as you could with a mouse + keyboard. So they have to find ways to make it easier. Like hotspots for the box you can place once you pick it up. Like the focus power which shows these hotspots.

    It's not fault of developers. The world has changed. We are called oldschool because of that. I am pretty sure most of are hopeless romantics that start every game on hardest difficulty and be proud with it... Dumb? Yes. Trying to squeeze maximum amount of satisfaction through your successes... Not the modern understanding. You gotta have quick rewards within your half an hour gameplay.

    Why the hell am I telling this? We all know this and yet there is nothing we can do about it but to accept it.

    HAHHAA NO WAY!

    I will resist till the last drop of blood of my gets squeezed off my body by the hand of my giant enemy and even after that my dead body will comeback and haunt their ass. My endless rants will find place in 1/1000000 of youngsters who will join my army of dead in this eternal struggle! MWAWWAHAWHWUAWHUHA!

    As a result... Thief will be a good, nice and tidy modern game... It will even resemble thief. Lets put it like this: Thief 2 is Jander Sunstar and the new Thief is Edward Cullen. Ok Ok. Not that bad. Maybe Buffy-ish.

Page 1 of 20 1234511 ... Last