View Poll Results: Will you be buying THIEF?

Voters
127. You may not vote on this poll
  • No. Absolutely not.

    35 27.56%
  • Not likely.

    43 33.86%
  • Probably.

    25 19.69%
  • Yes, absolutely.

    24 18.90%

Thread: From what you have seen so far... Will you be buying THIEF?

From what you have seen so far... Will you be buying THIEF?

  1. #101
    Originally Posted by Viktoria

    DNA appears to mean different things to different people, according to this discussion:
    http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=138018

    Well, personally I find that DNA is a word that should stay in genetics and not become a buzzword, because it sounds absolutely ridicolous.

    But anyway, the inclusion of things such as Garrett, the blackjack, the city and different type of rope arrows doesn't make it a thief game to me. These are all just parts of the major element; gameplay. From what I've seen and heard so far, it doesn't look very much like the old Thief games, and that's what I'm not too happy about. I still have some hope, though.

  2. #102
    Originally Posted by ClassicGamer
    Wait...... are you trolling? Far Cry 3 isn't anything like Call of Duty, it's open world, it has a story past "Terrorists." and you actually see character development over time. Far Cry 3 is the best game in the Far Cry series, I played 1 and 2, they were garbage!

    Far Cry 3 has been getting lots of good reviews, even Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation, one of the most critical people in the industry, admitted to liking Far Cry 3. Were you thinking of a different series? Because otherwise I'm sort of confused as to how it's a "Belly flop"

    Finally, do not say that those of us who are optimistic are "In denial"! Just because you aren't looking forward to a game does not mean that others won't feel differently.
    I have all far cry myself so I know what I'm talking about. The first one is the best. If you were reading what i said about far cry 3 i said the MULTIPLAYER sucks and was a big dissapointment. The campaign mode was alright.

    Master taffer, actually i never threw insults demonized or marginalized anybody so I have no idea what your talking about. Are you throwing your weight around here to make me feel like my opinion means nothing? Yes I think you are. You are not the be all know all end all of thief

  3. #103
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    3,412
    Originally Posted by Fatherwoodsie
    Master taffer, actually i never threw insults demonized or marginalized anybody so I have no idea what your talking about. Are you throwing your weight around here to make me feel like my opinion means nothing? Yes I think you are. You are not the be all know all end all of thief
    Your use of the term "true fan" (which is a marginalizing term) aside, I was generally referring to the behavior of several people over the past four years. Hence why I said so in the post you're referring to.

    I never claimed to be the "be all, know all" of Thief nor claimed your opinion doesn't matter. I simply reminded you insulting others violates the Term of Use for this board since you claimed it's a valid tactic.

    Now this discussion has derailed this thread long enough. If you wish to continue or have any questions about board policy, feel free to send me a private message.
    signature image
    Because boomerangs.

  4. #104
    Originally Posted by Master Taffer
    If you're reliant on insults and word twisting to get your point across, then I guess your point isn't strong enough to stand on its own. People can be mad, but nobody has a right to insult the developers or people on this board. That's not up for debate; you agreed to those terms by signing up here.

    And as for your accusation that I'm in denial:


    (click image to enlarge)

    You don't know me, what I'm thinking, and you're basing the claim of denial on nothing more than preconceived notions about me and a game you unfortunately have limited knowledge on. It's an empty and profoundly false allegation.

    Same reply for your accusations of the developers selling out; just change the pronouns around.
    I love that Atlas shrug picture.
    signature image

  5. #105
    Originally Posted by argan1985
    Well, personally I find that DNA is a word that should stay in genetics and not become a buzzword, because it sounds absolutely ridicolous.

    But anyway, the inclusion of things such as Garrett, the blackjack, the city and different type of rope arrows doesn't make it a thief game to me. These are all just parts of the major element; gameplay. From what I've seen and heard so far, it doesn't look very much like the old Thief games, and that's what I'm not too happy about. I still have some hope, though.
    I'm actually really glad it's not like the old old Thief games too much, lol
    I actually really disliked the first Thief game, and feel that the direction the new one is taking is making it feel more Thief to me (a bit more sneaking and stealing, a bit less monsters and caves)

    But I guess that all just boils down to individual preference. I mean if people like me think that it feels like a Thief game, then probably the people making it truly feel the same way too, it's just that we're all different and interpret the games differently and think of the factors that makes up Thief as different things :b

    But hey, we still barely saw anything yet, so there may be plenty more in the game that's reminiscent of the older games for the people who liked them, so who knows. It may end up being more like the older ones after all c:

  6. #106
    Originally Posted by argan1985
    Well, personally I find that DNA is a word that should stay in genetics and not become a buzzword, because it sounds absolutely ridicolous.
    Haha! It reminds me of when Blizzard was ramping up media coverage for The Burning Crusade, and dev interviewees managed to fit "high-concept" into every single sentence. It was pretty funny to see an entire studio misusing the same term.

  7. #107
    Originally Posted by argan1985
    Well, personally I find that DNA is a word that should stay in genetics and not become a buzzword, because it sounds absolutely ridicolous.
    On the plus side they are easy to mock. You just have to use "Thief DNA", "reinvention", "you can disable this", "more mature", "dry" and "motion capture" a lot.
    I'd also throw in a mention of magpie.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The highest ground...
    Posts
    23,047
    Originally Posted by argan1985
    But anyway, the inclusion of things such as Garrett, the blackjack, the city and different type of rope arrows doesn't make it a thief game to me. These are all just parts of the major element; gameplay.
    Indeed. As I think we can all agree.. its subjective.
    signature image
    You are only minimally modified. Omar can help you correct this...

  9. #109
    Originally Posted by Morgan Wight
    Haha! It reminds me of when Blizzard was ramping up media coverage for The Burning Crusade, and dev interviewees managed to fit "high-concept" into every single sentence. It was pretty funny to see an entire studio misusing the same term.
    Or "Verisimilitude" (Bioware, I think). All these buzzwords just make it easier to ridicule a game and its developers.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The highest ground...
    Posts
    23,047

    You can substitute any word you like really to describe the fundamental and distinctive characteristics of someone like Garrett, or something like Thief.
    What word would you prefer?
    signature image
    You are only minimally modified. Omar can help you correct this...

  11. #111
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    I disagree that there's no room to be creative if they kept 100% true to the existing canon. It was already a setting ripe with endless possibilities and new stories if you use a little imagination, without any need of changing the particulars. Otherwise how do people come up with fan-fiction, while being meticulously consistent in tone and setting to what came before? If amateurs can do it, so can professionals.

    Also never understood what is meant by "bring to a modern audience" as far as character design and setting goes. If they had presented us with an unchanged design from Thief 1 nobody who hasn't seen Thief before is going to look at Garrett/the city/factions and go 'that's so 1998.' Rather I imagine what they would think is "this is awesome, really cool, I've never seen anything like it." What, am I wrong?

    I sense they don't put the old Thiefs quite on high a pedestal as I do. I'll proudly admit that I think Thief 1 is more a 'work of art' than any other game I've ever played (which may change one day-- in fact I hope so). This is just this one man's opinion of course. I believe these guys think they can top the old stuff; they say they're 'updating' it-- implying there's some inadequacy of the old games where it has (artistically) aged poorly. Is there something I'm not seeing and it really has? Tell me if you think so.

    It would be nice if they had hired people who had gone "You know what, there's nothing I can do to improve this aspect of Thief; let's leave it alone". I would respect someone for thinking that way. Not because I just want more of the same because it's the same, but because it really is that good. Steven Gallagher refers to his work as "more mature". What does that say about his view of the old games?

    Gameplay-wise, though, this Thief could still be the best yet, even with the stuff I have misgivings about. I'm looking forward to it.
    I think it's the gameplay that makes a Thief experience, more than anything else. I'm putting the Thief games on the highest pedestal; they are my favourite games. Lore and canon have always been the most uninteresting/unimportant bit for me, though.

    It's surely interesting, not trying to deny that. The most interesting thing about the lore is however, that it was never that deeply written, was it? Burricks, hammerites and elemental crystals were never explained, almost at all; they just were there (just like Garrett and The City). I think partly because of that approach we can have "meticulously consistent" fan missions. I'm guessing that's a huge contributor in getting people this rabid about the lore, too - they have their own interpretation of the lore at stake (which, imo, even isn't the case since the previous games don't cease to exist when the new Thief launches).

    Because Thief has such a devoted (hardcore) fan-base, the lore actually might not allow for that much of a freedom to the current developers. The fan mission creators likely check back at the forums and wiki for their interpretation of the lore. That's the beauty and the horror of Thief's lore. The current approach doesn't invade fans' preset interpretations and really does allow for more freedom if looked this way. That's why I think it's prefectly OK and understandable per se to have a reboot of Thief - and every nod to the previous lore is of course a nice injection of nostalgia for us.

    As I've said elsewhere earlier: if Thief wasn't such an unique game by gameplay, I might not be that enthusiastic about it to begin with. There are couple odd things that are questionable gameplay-wise - like XP, but most of what I've seen is definitely Thief and nothing else.

    Regarding the "maturity" of Thief reboot, though. Explicit content rarely translates to maturity, and in my opinion, more often than not serves to undermine it rather than enhance the maturity. That said, this new Thief being described as more mature doesn't mean that the developers would necessarily belittle the originals - or that they would actually be more mature. Nolan's Batmans may be described "more mature", but I think Burton's Batmans are definitely mature, too.
    ~You reap what you sow~

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by Nightwynd
    I think it's the gameplay that makes a Thief experience, more than anything else. I'm putting the Thief games on the highest pedestal; they are my favourite games. Lore and canon have always been the most uninteresting/unimportant bit for me, though.
    I differ. For me it is the whole package coming together perfectly. I agree that gameplay is first, but the rest is only slightly behind.

    It's surely interesting, not trying to deny that. The most interesting thing about the lore is however, that it was never that deeply written, was it?
    No, but that wasn't a bad thing. You take Thief at face value. Imagine if the defiance of physics in Constantine's mansion was 'explained'. It would diminish it.

    Burricks, hammerites and elemental crystals were never explained, almost at all; they just were there (just like Garrett and The City).
    Things in the real world are 'just there'. They're facts of nature. What's to explain?

    I think partly because of that approach we can have "meticulously consistent" fan missions. I'm guessing that's a huge contributor in getting people this rabid about the lore, too - they have their own interpretation of the lore at stake (which, imo, even isn't the case since the previous games don't cease to exist when the new Thief launches).
    I don't think there is any 'interpreting'. If you ask yourself "What would Garrett do?" or "What would a Hammerite do?" you can usually find an answer. It might not be someone elses answer, but it's a hard target to miss completely.

    Because Thief has such a devoted (hardcore) fan-base, the lore actually might not allow for that much of a freedom to the current developers. The fan mission creators likely check back at the forums and wiki for their interpretation of the lore. That's the beauty and the horror of Thief's lore. The current approach doesn't invade fans' preset interpretations and really does allow for more freedom if looked this way.
    I'm not understanding this 'interpretation' line of thinking. You can speculate on what goes on in the world that the game doesn't show you, but what is shown right in front of your nose is potently stated.

    I think the building blocks are there and if you use them, you'll arrive at your own 'take' on the universe. You can exercise freedom in how you use the building blocks, without needing to change the blocks themselves or flout the established cannon. I don't think it was ever an issue of whether they were capable of doing this, rather coming down to that they didn't want to.

    That's why I think it's prefectly OK and understandable per se to have a reboot of Thief - and every nod to the previous lore is of course a nice injection of nostalgia for us.
    I don't agree with the premise that having it a reboot leaves our memories intact, and that a direct sequel or spin-off would mean goose-stepping around other people's 'interpretations'. I think it's exactly the other way around. Reboot is a bull in a china shop to memories. It demands that you compartmentalize what came before. If you don't have as strong an attachment to the fiction then I can see why this wouldn't bother you so much.

    EDIT: In fact I take 'reboot' as a forewarning to brace yourself for having your memories stepped on. How much that hurts or makes no difference to you depends on your connection with what came before.

    Maybe they just can't win whichever way they do it. I'd have to have seen the sequel they decided not to make to really know. Believe me, I'm trying to be adult about it, and see the 'why' behind the decision. I still think it's going to twist the knife though no matter what, and I still think it wasn't completely necessary.

    I don't know how I'll feel about 'nods' to the old games, it could depend on the execution of them.

    As I've said elsewhere earlier: if Thief wasn't such an unique game by gameplay, I might not be that enthusiastic about it to begin with. There are couple odd things that are questionable gameplay-wise - like XP, but most of what I've seen is definitely Thief and nothing else.

    Regarding the "maturity" of Thief reboot, though. Explicit content rarely translates to maturity, and in my opinion, more often than not serves to undermine it rather than enhance the maturity. That said, this new Thief being described as more mature doesn't mean that the developers would necessarily belittle the originals - or that they would actually be more mature. Nolan's Batmans may be described "more mature", but I think Burton's Batmans are definitely mature, too.
    Explicit content wasn't on my mind. I don't know what was meant by 'maturity', I just went with the default connotation.

  13. #113
    Originally Posted by Viktoria

    You can substitute any word you like really to describe the fundamental and distinctive characteristics of someone like Garrett, or something like Thief.
    What word would you prefer?
    I would really prefer them to just say "We have attempted to keep as much of the appeal of the original games as we can" or something similar. I absolutely hate buzzwords.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The highest ground...
    Posts
    23,047
    Woah. Bit of a mouthful though!
    I would prefer to hear a single buzzword.
    signature image
    You are only minimally modified. Omar can help you correct this...

  15. #115
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    I differ. For me it is the whole package coming together perfectly. I agree that gameplay is first, but the rest is only slightly behind.



    No, but that wasn't a bad thing. You take Thief at face value. Imagine if the defiance of physics in Constantine's mansion was 'explained'. It would diminish it.



    Things in the real world are 'just there'. They're facts of nature. What's to explain?



    I don't think there is any 'interpreting'. If you ask yourself "What would Garrett do?" or "What would a Hammerite do?" you can usually find an answer. It might not be someone elses answer, but it's a hard target to miss completely.

    I'm a bit confused if you think you're disagreeing with me here, but I'm prone to think that you think so since you're addressing my post almost line-to-line. No: I actually agree with everything you say above, save for the importance of the lore, which I tried to imply by summing up "That's the beauty and horror of Thief's lore" and by stating what's "the most interesting [about Thief's lore]". I'm not sure if you just didn't comprehend what I wrote or if I just wrote it so badly that my intention couldn't be clear (which I can say from my experience, I do a lot ).


    I'm not understanding this 'interpretation' line of thinking. You can speculate on what goes on in the world that the game doesn't show you, but what is shown right in front of your nose is potently stated.

    I think the building blocks are there and if you use them, you'll arrive at your own 'take' on the universe. You can exercise freedom in how you use the building blocks, without needing to change the blocks themselves or flout the established cannon. I don't think it was ever an issue of whether they were capable of doing this, rather coming down to that they didn't want to.



    I don't agree with the premise that having it a reboot leaves our memories intact, and that a direct sequel or spin-off would mean goose-stepping around other people's 'interpretations'. I think it's exactly the other way around. Reboot is a bull in a china shop to memories. It demands that you compartmentalize what came before. If you don't have as strong an attachment to the fiction then I can see why this wouldn't bother you so much.

    EDIT: In fact I take 'reboot' as a forewarning to brace yourself for having your memories stepped on. How much that hurts or makes no difference to you depends on your connection with what came before.

    Maybe they just can't win whichever way they do it. I'd have to have seen the sequel they decided not to make to really know. Believe me, I'm trying to be adult about it, and see the 'why' behind the decision. I still think it's going to twist the knife though no matter what, and I still think it wasn't completely necessary.

    I don't know how I'll feel about 'nods' to the old games, it could depend on the execution of them.



    Explicit content wasn't on my mind. I don't know what was meant by 'maturity', I just went with the default connotation.
    By interpretation I mean the stuff that the Thief community has come up with lore-wise during the past decade. There is little actual explicit resource to the lore (as we seem to agree), it mostly relies on interpretation - and as you said, speculation. If there were only a couple of years in between the last Thief and this, the existing lore might be easier to approach.

    Besides, I think it's more interesting to leave things open to interpretation; explaining them further might ruin them or be unsatisfying.

    I would say that I'm emotionally attached to the Thief's fantasy. Personally, I don't see how an entirely separate instalment or a "side-thing" would be able to step on the established fantasy of the previous trilogy, however. Would you feel the same way if they rebooted it the ISA way and Thief would be set on modern day?
    ~You reap what you sow~

  16. #116
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Montrealing all over this place
    Posts
    3,041
    In an exotic universe, such as Thief's, you stand to win a lot by explaining as little as possible, and simply going with the flow. Time wasted on explanations is rarely constructive, goes against the fundamental principle of interaction, and often destroys the entire myth, reminding us it is, after all, just a story.

    In that sense, it might have been a good idea to simply write another episode. Not a direct sequel, but not a reinterpretation either. Just a new episode, in between, sometimes before, sometimes after. Not picking up where the last ended, but with a storyline that simply fits right in with the known universe. This means reusing some of the previous lore, and adding original new exotic things, which would technically fit into the universe, all the while never having been done before in said universe.

    The reboot could turn out to be very good, or very bad, or somewhere in between. My point is it would be a mistake to think, for anyone attempting something like this, that you have no other choice but to go the reboot way, revisiting the character and the lore.

    I'm still extremely curious to see exactly what it is they meant by "mature". Grim Fandango was mature. Fallout was mature. Little Big Adventure was mature. Normality was somewhat mature. "Realistic" is not a word I'd use for any of them. But they were filled with humanity. That's mature.
    To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness

  17. #117
    I agree. Just for the record, I'd like to say that I think it's a good thing how Thief presents its lore.

    By having a reboot, I'd say, in principle, they have less risk for redundancy (lore-wise). Potentially, this way stands to gain and add more than just an another episode (emphasis: potentially). And yes, it could go horribly wrong with it, too.
    ~You reap what you sow~

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by FrankCSIS
    In that sense, it might have been a good idea to simply write another episode. Not a direct sequel, but not a reinterpretation either. Just a new episode, in between, sometimes before, sometimes after. Not picking up where the last ended, but with a storyline that simply fits right in with the known universe. This means reusing some of the previous lore, and adding original new exotic things, which would technically fit into the universe, all the while never having been done before in said universe.
    It would work, and it's what I thought Thi4f would be, back when it was called that. The whole 'introduce Garrett through his actions' comes into play here. That's how it was always done. This sort of game you could pick up and it would be like the Dark Project-- you don't have to have played anything else, it works by itself and explains itself. No matter what Garrett gets up to, there he is.

    It's funny they emphasise that you needn't have played the previous games to play this one: that was true for the other three as well (least for Thief 2, but it still stands by itself). None of them were reboots.

    Not to think that pointing this out will make a difference. This is a bridge they've long since crossed, it has less chance of being reversed than the choice of voice actor. It's just unfortunate it had to be this way.

  19. #119
    Based on the promotional material so far and the showing at E3 I voted absolutely not. Maybe in a cheap Steam sale a year later, but for the purposes of this poll I don't think that counts. I didn't think things could look any more dodgy with this game, but then at E3 they reveal things like the escape sequence and restrictions on basic movement abilities. I'd rather play an average fan mission for TG/TMA than this new game.

  20. #120
    To be fair, I need to add something.

    I've reached a point in my life where buying video games is not really a matter of "like or dislike". I have rent to pay, I love books and movies as well, I need to upgrade my gaming gear now and then, so I don't have much money to spend on video games. So, even if Thief turns out to be the game of the decade, I probably won't buy it at full price.

    And. In recent months I turned away from blockbuster games - I have more trust in indie titles, especially Kickstarter-projects. I feel my money is better spent on a video game that doesn't need to compromise. Where the developers are actually making the game with and for their core audience.

    From what I have seen and heard and read... "Thief" goes the opposite direction. It doesn't seem authentic or unique. I really can't wait to be proven wrong, but I don't feel anything positive right now. Nothing I see is "cool" or "interesting". I see a generic blockbuster game.

  21. #121
    Errr.... NO

  22. #122
    Most definitely, Collector’s edition if there is one,
    Nine years here and just my 2nd post

  23. #123
    Originally Posted by fbdbh
    From what I have seen and heard and read... "Thief" goes the opposite direction. It doesn't seem authentic or unique. I really can't wait to be proven wrong, but I don't feel anything positive right now. Nothing I see is "cool" or "interesting". I see a generic blockbuster game.
    Exactly. If these developers are trying to appeal to everyone, they only end up appealing to no one. I don't mind the fact that they aren't developing for "the core audience" but they should at least be developing for themselves and make a game they would want to play.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by Jonah47
    I don't mind the fact that they aren't developing for "the core audience" but they should at least be developing for themselves and make a game they would want to play.
    Oh I think they are.

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The highest ground...
    Posts
    23,047
    Originally Posted by LoSt ByTeS
    Most definitely, Collector’s edition if there is one,
    Nine years here and just my 2nd post
    You must be the most silent and patient taffer in history.
    signature image
    You are only minimally modified. Omar can help you correct this...

Page 5 of 8 First First 12345678 Last