View Poll Results: What do you think of Thief: Deadly Shadows?

299. You may not vote on this poll
  • Superb

    168 56.19%
  • Good

    103 34.45%
  • Mediocre

    16 5.35%
  • Abysmal

    12 4.01%
Page 2 of 3 First First 123 Last

Thread: Deadly Shadows

Deadly Shadows

  1. #26
    Thief 3 is a good game. Maybe not as good as we would like it to be, but still good. I'd go so far as to say great. It's like DX2. It wasn't that bad, just compared to the original. How else would it get such good reviews (well, generally).

    Okay, the reason the game had been 'consolised' is because-guess what- more people have consoles! Consoles, quite frankly, are more popular and therefore console developers get more money. We PC gamers are a minority. It only takes one look at a games shop- about 90% of the games are on consoles.

    But consolising isn't always bad. It CAN work. Look at Splinter Cell, Hitman 2, Morrowind, Halo (which we got better stuff on- hooray!)... all are both PC and X-box games. They work, they had large levels and decent menu screens. So 'dumbing down' for the 'kiddy' X-box gamers doesn't have to happen. Unfortunately in DX2 and Thief 3 it did.

    And now, with consoles becoming more PC-like, we will eventually dwindle away into nothingness...

  2. #27
    The term consolized I use for the twisted idea that developers have in their head thinking that a game has to be changed just because it's being released on a console. Yes, consolized doesn't HAVE to be bad, but often it is.

    Morrowind is a perfect example of people making a GOOD game, and not worrying about what it's being released on. And it's why development strategies do NOT have to change for consoles to be successful on them.

  3. #28
    I made a review for it, if anyone cares. Give you 3 guesses which one is mine, and the first 2 don't count. >.>

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2004

    I hear ya, but....

    First, don't judge the game from the demo. Admittedly, some of the levels are not as great as others, but some are really quite outstanding.

    Second, consoles. I've never owned one (unless you count the 2600) and never will. To me, console games generally lack sophistication and imagination - they're just consumer products. The one exception that I can think of is Halo, which began development for the PC platform and was a good game, though a little repetetive. Still, I guess that PC gamers like me have to accept the fact that it is a console world right now and realize that numerous future PC titles that we want to play are going to be released for multiple platforms.

    After the release of DX2, I thought that this spelled the end of cool games. The multiple-platform design on that title was clearly geared to the console crowd and it was just such a let down. Did the developers even play the first game?

    So, maybe I approached T3 with some lowered expectations - but high hopes. The game has, so far at least, really delivered for me. I can't say how it will play out for the console crowd or people new to the franchise.

    I think the gameplay is right on. The engine looks slick and the sounds are really outstanding. After a bit of relflection, my one real gripe is with some of the character animations - the original two games had some freakishly realistic motion-captured animation. T3's characters sometimes move stiffly, like they were key-frame animated, and the way that guards go down when blackjacked is just plain creepy (maybe more realistic? - I dunno, never actually blackjacked anyone).

    Otherwise, I am really enjoying the game. I should mention that I play on the "expert" dificulty setting and therefore can't comment too much on combat or how the AI responds on lower difficulty settings.

  5. #30
    I voted "good". I wish I could vote superb as I really enjoyed the game, but I just can't. The gameplay was excellent and the story was great and the level artwork was quite good, especially the cradle levels. These things made the game a ton of fun to play and I really enjoyed it. However, I'm interested in and a part of the "modding" scene for video games. I am currently trying to create my own mod for Doom 3 when it comes out. Thus I tend to look at games from a more technical aspect and I'm afraid that while the game of Thief: DS was great, the engine and other aspects fell far short in my opinion. Here's my own pros and cons list:


    -> Excellent gameplay, very fun.

    -> Wonderful story

    -> Fantasitc sound effects

    -> Good overall immersion in the game world

    -> Good (and in the case of the cradle levels, great) level artwork and design

    -> Decent dynamic lighting system

    -> Very good implementation of normal maps for texture detail

    -> Good texture art, both on models and map geometry

    -> For the most part quite good voice acting

    -> Good AI for the most part. Very good in some respects.


    -> Small maps (too many loads in between sections) I can stand this in the missions, but in the city it is annoying as heck and should be unecessary even with a dyanic lighting system.

    -> Bad texture resolution (and yes I had low texture detail off)

    -> Ok animations. Could have been better, especially the standard walking animation. The other actions were alright, but the default walking animation was way too stiff. Did not look like a real person walking at all.Also need to work on lip synching. I've seen equivalent or better lip synching in Half-Life one, 6 years ago.

    -> Poor character modeling. Sorry but the characters were not that well done in my opinion. More research needs to be done into correct anatomy, particularly for the women. Other NPC models weren't that great either. I realize that there are polygon limitations, but come on, the rats looked like they were maybe 20 or 30 poly's. They looked more like walking polygons than an animal. Also the cats were just bad and poorly animated. The end creature, won't name as I don't wish to spoil it, was alright, but from an artistic point of view could have been done better I thought. Oh and last is the player model. I understand the need for it to be low poly but please learn some basic anatomy. To show you what I mean look at his arms and shoulders in particular while climbing. It just looks bad.

    -> No specular mapping. Well, I think I saw one instance of this in the museum floor, although that didn't really look like a spec map, but other than that nothing. I realize that spec maps can be easily overdone, but a moderate use of them can really bring a texture to life.

    -> Bad cut scenes. This I really didn't understand. If your going to bother building pre-rendered cut scenes there should be no in-game limits. (I assume they were pre-rendered and not recorded in game as there were different higher poly models built for them) So if one goes to the trouble to create seperate models for out of game cut scenes why do I still see poly's? For instance on garrets hood. Or no hair modeling for example. If your going to have cut scenes they should be GOOD. I've seen better cut scenes in games that are 5 years old. Take a look at the latest Everquest II trailer. Now THAT is what a pre-rendered cut scene should look like with todays tech. I actually have a feeling that these may have been done in-game somehow with different models and other effects added later as a way to cut corners, but I'm not sure.

    -> Poor implementation of physics. This is just ridiculous. This game uses the Havok engine, the engine that powers the physics of such games like
    Max Payne 2, Pain Killer, and Half-Life 2. All these games seem to have no problem with the physics system and demonstrate a high quality use of both standard physics objects as well as ragdolls. Yet Thief: DS somehow managed to rewrite some of the physics engine to actually make it worse. I fail to understand how that was even managed. Take a look at online demos of what Havok is capable of on their website or look at any of the games I mentioned to see what I mean.

    -> Not to great player movement and interactions. This isn't too bad but things like picking up bodies and moving them wasn't done too well. Splinter cell did this kind of thing much better. Also the fact that the player model apparently clips into walls and corners and becomes stuck on them is not too great either. Lastly, when the player hugs a wall the AI does not see him, even if they run into him and become stuck on him.

    -> Either what I assume is poor final optimisation, just a badly written game engine, or a side effect from it being a consolized game. By this I mean that it should run much, much better than it does on today's computer system. There is nothing graphics wise in Thief: DS that justifies such poor performance on mid range to high end systems.

    -> A relatively small thing, is the water. All I ever saw really was a slightly transparent brush. Ever heard of pixel shaders? Take a look at Half-Life 2's and Farcry's water. These are examples of what shaders can do for you. I thought that perhaps shaders were not used to lower the required system specs(though I don't think that it actually would, I'm not entirely clear on this point), but I do not see how this can be as I don't think it would have such an effect and Farcry used them just fine.

    -> Last, is what I can only assume is a severe lack of beta testing. I say this because of things like bad performance on ATI cards, lighting errors with the latest drivers, and overall a very varied performance on different systems. Or perhaps there was beta testing and these things just couldn't be fixed due to the engine or other reason.

    Alright, before people bash me for "nitpicking" please note that I stated that I was looking at things from a more technical perspective. Even after
    listing everything above, I have to say that I loved this game. I was glued to my computer for 20+ hours playing it and enjoyed every minute of it. Good gameplay can really make up for a lot. However, if some of these things were fixed I think it would take the game from "good" to "superb" or even beyond that. I'm just saying that for me personally a lot of these things really stood out and took away from the immersion in the game. I think that perhaps quite a bit of this is due to a poor game engine, though I of course can't know what are engine limitations and what are x-box compromises. Though even the excuse of porting it to an X-box doesn't hold much water anymore after seeing that Doom 3 will be able to run on it too.

    Basically I think that if the same story and gameplay and level designs could have been put on the Doom 3 engine we could have had a truly spectactular game. Something that would have pushed the level of gaming to a new high. But using the current engine it remains just a good game. Quite good, and very fun, I admit, but still not spectacular.

    Well, sorry to write such a long post, but I just felt like writing down everything I thought was both good and bad about the game and its engine.

    As a final rating I would rate the game overall as a 8.0 out of 10. But to be more fair and accurate I'll break it down into 4 categories:

    Gameplay: 9.9/10
    Level art and design plus texture art: 9.0/10
    General game art including models, sprites, and other effects: 5.0/10
    Game engine:4.0/10

    Again sorry for being so long winded. But I just hope that my own and other's feedback can influence future decisions by both Ion Storm and other game companies.

  6. #31
    I agree with just about everything you said. I didn't mind the rendered cutscenes using the game engine though, even while it is a way to cut corners, it's also a way to put more time into the gameplay, which is more important to me, especially when they have such great FMV bink video sequences. The hag in these scenes looked FANTASTIC. I wish they could've come up with something like that for the in-game model.

    It's also another comment to tally up on the, "It's a horrible game, but I love it" contradictory posts list. I believe the reason there are so many of these posts is because the things that are lacking are the things people wanted the most. These are the things that utterly dissapoint people, despite the fact that they do enjoy the game despite it, and it makes them angry.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    does this game start off slow? coz ive been playing the demo which only seems to be the first two missions, and im not sure weather to make a judgment on the demo or the full game?
    DoNt be aFraId of tHe DaRk
    bE AfrAid of WHaT iT hIdEs!

  8. #33
    Join Date
    May 2004


    I think the single most important thing is that Thief3 has highly likely secured games of its type to follow this lead.

    I loved Thief1 and Thief2. The concept of a game of this type has almost infinite possibilities. Anyone I know, both male and female, loves the aspect of sneaking about in the dark and doing things in a, er, naughty way. It's a kids wet dream and an adults release from everyday restrictions. To take possession of things that are obviously, not yours and to move about as if invisible. It's an incredible draw that I am surprised few other game developers don't latch on to. It's like cheating online and being rewarded for it.

    But where Thief3 goes with those possibilities is a little too low in my opinion.

    Still, I think and I hope, that when I say, I really do like what they have done with it -knowing of its level of failure in many areas -that Eidos continues development on it.
    They're only scratching the surface.

    I also detect the subtle feeling in the game that the developers started to realise that this game wasn't good enough to the normal games player, never mind the fan base.

    I hope they quickly realise, they're wrong.


  9. #34
    The stealth genre that Thief created is just now exploding with the success of such games as Splinter Cell (even moreso with SC:PT) and the Hitman series. I don't think it's even close to reaching its peak yet, and by the time it does, I think the stealth genre will be just as valid as the RPG, action, and adventure genres.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Been playing this series for 6 years now, have never played a game like thief ever, nothing as every kept me so inthralled. I have played deadly shadows for about 13 hours now, and I love it. what can I say, the game has a point, a plot, and time ing flies by when I play it. It's sad this game doesn't go on forever...

  11. #36
    Without having finished the game, I'd still give it a 8.9 out of 10, and naysayers better come up with some better arguments. A few negatives, however, are readily apparent:

    The lack of rope arrows and the failure, it seems, to have the climbing gloves be of any real use is very annoying. Maybe I haven't hit the right level yet, but I have not found the use of the gloves essential to anything. It's one thing to replace one climbing device with another. It's something else to make climbing a non-factor.

    Second, the City could have been somewhat more open-ended, meaning more shops and homes to loot, and more vertical challenges as well (see first criticism above). The streets are much improved in terms of potential action, but the buildings could have been a bit more elaborate.

    Third, I agree with the "consolely" criticisms for the most part. Something tells me, however, that it would have been more expensive to make the world more open-ended without having to load separate areas for different parts of the City. The fact is, cross-marketing to console users as well as PC purists is here to stay. From a pure business standpoint, the dev needs to get this thing to market with as few duplicative costs as possible. I HATE consoles, so I hope this makes my thought more objective.

    Notwithstanding, the game simply rocks. Gameplay is fabulous, and graphics criticisms are harsh. NOBODY should compare this to Half-Life 2, particularly where that game has had so many problems it has been postponed from release and cannot be properly compared. I buy at least a game per month, and haven't seen anything yet totally superior in terms of graphics.

  12. #37
    Unfortunately with the demo, you're not seeing the best the game has to offer. As I've progressed mission-to-mission I've become more engrossed in the game. I'll admit, I somewhat feel like I'm playing a console game on a PC, but this title is not as bad and obvious as some. Most of the time it's pretty obvious, and an awful experience to boot, when companies do that.

    Although Ion Storm tried, and produced a very nice game, there IS something's called Looking Glass Software. And I've read that some original members LGS worked on this project, but I have this nagging feeling corners were cut, exceptions were made, and things were compromised. It feels more corporate. I think the inclusion of some of the original members from LGS are what saves this game. (As I post this I've read most of these people have either left or been let go from Ion Storm).

    Although I have yet to finish the game, I do have to say this is one of the most immersive single-player game experiences I've had in a very long time. And although it may have been dumbed-down for mass appeal, I love it anyways.

    I don't think we'll see a part 4 though, unless it's popular on X-Box.

  13. I've only played the demo but so far I think it's really good. I love some of the new speech for the guards

    9 more days... Come On!!! I hope the UK dvd version has the editor to make it worth our 2 WEEK!! wait

  14. #39
    Lyril Guest


    I got the game yesterday. Amazing how stuff from the USA can arrive sooner than interstate Aussie mail! I was so excited, especially as I'd just had my computer upgraded (again) just for this game. All this for just the price of a healthy kidney and a cornea or two on the black market.

    To be honest though, I do feel a bit disappointed. The actions are jerky and unrealistic (none of the NPCs have knees!), and I don't like the long load times. Why are they necessary? But most of all, and I know I'm being a heretic here, I am disappointed in the graphics.

    There, I've come out and actually stated it. Does anyone agree?

    They remind me too much of a cartoon. Or an old game. I can't imagine that I am in this city as I can so readily in any of the OMs and FMs. Certainly I haven't played for long, - I've finished the first castle level and most of the city level, but I can't imagine the effect will improve. Lots of monochrome walls, and too many empty spaces. Too many closed doors in the city and no way of climbing. I want to explore this place!

  15. #40
    I think I voted twice.

    First vote was for good, second for superb. I'm staying up late to play on a work night - sure sign this is a good game.

    Now that I understand the way the game works, I'm finding myself just as entralled with it was I was with the first two. It's a bit different, I agree, but I am loving it. I was taken aback when Thief 2 came out, too, and wasn't sure I liked the changes in the game (minor though they were, given that the two games used the same engine). Lots to like about the new features. But mostly what I like is that they didn't change too much from the originals - unlike the less than stellar ( IMHO) DE2, this sequel looks and feels much like the originals, for the most part, and the way the game is played is much the same.

    My only real quibble is that the climbing gloves are fun but there's not a lot of use for them - yet, anyway. And of course, like many people I would like larger levels and more rooftop missions. And more places to break and enter.

    Respecting the negative comments abut the technical requirements, my reliable old Geforce Ti 4200 plays the game very well, if not with everything maxed out, and I'm not finding much in the way of technical problems.

    Anyway, huge sigh of relief, waiting was not all in vain, etc. etc.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    May 2004

    the console... debate

    I think Eidos -or the designers of Thief3- should look unequivocally toward the Xbox2, and start plans on developing on that; if they haven't already. Or at least, present to Microsoft the idealism of the concept.

    That would neatly solve this paradox of a stunted gaming console and a powerhouse pc of varying power, both contributing to, er, unbalancing the nature of a games' development.

    Whatever the control of the game might be, I don't think it will outweight the considerable weight of the esculating power of the meagre console.

    Just like has already been said, the Xbox is contributory to some part of the failure of Thief3; however, once the console (loved by the younger generation) balances itself with the pc (loved by the veteran), then this sort of problem will be moot.

    *cough* Does anyone actually know if Thief3 is already a considered option for the Xbox2 (or PC'06 as I like to call it) ? As I would imagine, it would far outweigh any pc standard we have at the moment.

    And surely, Eidos must know by now, Thief3 is a winner in the eyes of the majority of most pc gamers?

  17. #42
    I've voted good as I'm just getting into it and it's a lot of fun, it's getting a lot better so a superb rating looks likely, time will tell.


    XBox2 is still on the drawing board, of course any spec you see now will obviously be above PC specs today, the same was said about the original XBox, at one time it was way above PC spec until it was released.

    I found it weird that Sony is comparing their PS3 processor to the latest intel processor, claiming how much more powerful it is, not really a fair comparison when you consider the PS3 won't be released until 2006, by then I'm sure by that time Intel and AMD will have much more powerful processors. The same is true for PC graphics cards, anything you see for a future console will look amazing, by the time it's released it will be bettered by anything Radeon or nvidia (if they're still in business) can produce.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    May 2004
    repy to Skull Gun
    SG: XBox2 is still on the drawing board, of course any spec you see now will obviously be above PC specs today, the same was said about the original XBox, at one time it was way above PC spec until it was released.

    I think it is safe to say that the Xbox2 is far more complete than just being drawn out. It's also safe to say that the delay of ATI's X800 in any form, and any quantity, is in part due to their very important development with the Xbox2- because I have a strong feeling ATI are delivering both a m'board AND a GPU.
    It's also unnerving to notice that ATI are focusing on low-end parts rather than high-end. Which might prove that the Xbox2 is taking up all the high-end time.

    SG: I found it weird that Sony is comparing their PS3 processor to the latest intel processor, claiming how much more powerful it is, not really a fair comparison when you consider the PS3 won't be released until 2006, by then I'm sure by that time Intel and AMD will have much more powerful processors. The same is true for PC graphics cards, anything you see for a future console will look amazing, by the time it's released it will be bettered by anything Radeon or nvidia (if they're still in business) can produce.

    I totally agree. I don't know why Sony, IBM and Toshiba did that. It's not like it should not have been compared to the original PS2 CPU. Since THAT is the benchmark they want to exceedingly surpass.

    By 2006, Thief4 should do well too.

  19. #44


    While I cannot refute any of the technical jargon that is being floated, I can state that I am a PC purist who is very disappointed in the decline of a good, solid PC game in favor of the "profit in a second" console game. I do own a PS2, but only bought it to play games that I cannot get for the PC (Devil May Cry 1 and 2, for example). I have rebuilt my machine to accommodate any game out there as of this writing, but am always willing to boost it further ( currently, AMD XP 2200, 512 ram, GForce FX5600, Hercules muse 5.1 sound, creative labs 5.1 speaker sys, Win XP Pro). With that stated, here is my take on the game:
    Please note, this is in fact the first release of the game to the public, hence the release version 1.0. We all know that when a release occurs, there should be no flaws in a game. Reality is, the developer will be watching sales and feedback so when the patches and upgrades hit, more of what WE want to see in the game will be added in and what we do not want will be taken out. For instance, climbing is cool, but what use if we cannot access the "rooftop highway" that was integral in Thief 2? Perhaps we will see a patch that will address this. There are also many "modders" that can address these issues as well. I rated this game "good" due to the fact that it is first release. There are too many pros and cons that have already been listed, so I won't repeat them. There are certainly many FPS' that lend themselves to both console and pc, but the stealth genre is a different issue. If it is developed for PC only, released, revised then chopped for the console, go for it. But they should not try to develope and release for both platforms at once. As many of you have noticed, PC's use an OS, consoles do not. So of course there is going to be more horsepower for graphics issues in a console. In case you do not realise, AMD already has a new generation CPU out called the Athlon 64, so chin up for us PC vets. As far as T3 is concerned, I am satisfied with the game, hoping for some upgrades to address the various issues, and holding out for a continuation of the series. My gosh, if they can continue to produce the Half-Life series, there is hope for us Thievers. Great graphics, awesome sound, playability, ease of use, two thumbs way up for T3: Deadly Shadows.

  20. #45
    One thing that I saw a few people say is "I played the first two levels and I think its pretty good, but not superb." This game gets better as it goes on. The training mission is just that and the 1st real mission is probably the worst. You should at least get to the Cradle before you review it. The Cradle in my opinion is one of the greatest levels and most surprisingly different levels I've seen in a game for awhile. It also shows that someone(or some people) in Ion Storm know how to make a good scary First-person horror game. I think they should make on a horror game or something in the near future. Just my opinion.

  21. #46

    Big Grin Easily pleased?....perhaps!

    Once i saw the specs for T3S i was suddenly made aware that my pc was ageing:

    CPU - Athlon xp 1800+
    RAM - 256mb DDr 2100
    GFX - GeForce 4 ti4200 64mb
    SFX - SBlive 1024

    Release date for T3S here in the UK is 'sometime next week' according to my local 'GAME' store rep but, having a looky at the system requirements made me realise I'd best check to see if T3S would run on my meagre machine before I brought it.

    IT DOES!..... and, well too.

    So, for those of you [like me] who don't have an unlimited budget and an old machine... don't worry, the game looks damned sweet, plays well and sounds fine.... oh, lots of smiles here

    Oh... and I'm running the demo at the default settings [having only altered the key bindings].

    I may be easily pleased but this game looks amazing... graphically everything is terrific and it must be said, leaves the original Thief games in the 'dark' [there, I said it].

    That said, I'm still looking forward to the release of T2x...

    Roll on next week....


  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    i voted for 'good' although i think that the game while updated is a shell of its former self. i have to agree with a number of points already made by other folks who were less than amazed by the latest release. rather than repeat their items in my own words i'll just tack on a couple of items that haven't been said.

    -- i never once jumped in my seat like i did while playing the first two. i'm in the early 30's set and so i only get about 3 or 4 hours per night to play. with such a limited time it's difficult enough to get immersed into things but then there's the map transitions. okay i lied, that's been mentioned before but wow, what a mood killer. while in the last third quarter of the game i just got to the point where i dreaded seeing that smoky mask at an entrance.

    -- spooks, goblins and ghosts: i may be in the minority and yes i know they were in the first two but can we just have a thieving hero who robs from actual people? when i start seeing the monsters/magic in all three games i just start losing interest quickly. the hammers are great. the keepers are sorta on the edge but the pagans i could do without. i could REALLY do without all the rest. remember the bank mission or garrett climbing all over the city in that big long mission in 2? the first few missions in 1 where there aren't any undead/burricks? that's my idea of a thief.

    as a comparison, think of gta3 vice city. it is what it says from start to finish. halfway through the game they don't have you tackle some undead native american gang which haunts some area of the barrio. [sorry, it's quarter to 2 in the morning and that analogy makes sense right now].

    the thief monster angle just seems like lazy storytelling/development to me. would it be hard to make a 10-15 mission game solely on the life of a thief without any supernatural angle and still make it exciting and imaginative all the way through? absolutely, but that's what i expect for my 40 clams. i'm not sure at this point whether i'd pony up again for a t4 in 3 or 4 years knowing that at some point in the game i'm just going to get the big let down again.

    oh, favorite goofy townsfolk line:
    . not exactly a spoiler but i like to hear things on my own first rather than stumble upon the event only to think 'oh yeah, i remember that guy said that was coming'.

  23. #48
    Nothing really new in the game; however, I must say that the first two have been my favorites of all time. Therefore, even while there is nothing fantastic that grabs my attention - it will still be considered good to superb

  24. #49
    There is a continuing debate about this. As posted previously, as the game isn't released in the UK until 8th June. Having now played the demo through a couple of times, here's my two-penneth.

    Like most of you, I'm a big Thief fan since the series started (six years ago?). I shared all of the concerns regarding the cross platform development.

    I think the game plays great, and looks amazing.

    I am REALLY glad to see that some little details have been retained. These include the "in game" sound effects, and the voice overs. Also, the between mission cut scenes retain the style and feel of the original which is a smart move ("if it ain't broke, don't fix it").

    I was worried about the 3rd person (console) perspective, but although I play in 1st person, I found that it's really quite cool to be able to switch between the two.

    My opinion is that IW was shallow and disappointing, but that this same engine was clearly "born" for Thief. Interestingly, as the pace of the game is much slower, I think that it's slightly easier for the system to handle.

    I do find myself agreeing with the consensus of opinion in that the XBox friendly, frequent level loads are a pain, and it is a little unfortunate that the software can't make use of my 1GB of RAM.

    On the whole, I think that Ion Storm have done a cracking job (from what I've seen so far), and that consequently my pre-order has already been placed. Not quite perfect, but a fine effort.

    Rating? I reckon it's superb.

    Nice work, all

  25. #50
    as a comparison, think of gta3 vice city. it is what it says from start to finish. halfway through the game they don't have you tackle some undead native american gang which haunts some area of the barrio. [sorry, it's quarter to 2 in the morning and that analogy makes sense right now].
    GTA:VC is a perfect example of game designers that know what people want from a game, I've had that comparison between what Thief SHOULD be and what GTA:VC IS (in concept, not in actual gameplay, not by a long shot) in my head for a while now. I would rather think of this game as a Thief simulation than a drawn out over-dramatic cheeseball storyline played out over the course of 20 or so missions.

    If I have to force myself to enjoy a story by looking deeper into it than I really care to, it's not a good sign, and that's what I had to do for Thief 3. It just wasn't interesting enough to pull me in, but I pulled myself in anyways just so I could get more enjoyment out of the game, because what can I say, I'm a fanboy.

    I think the majority of gamers, whether they know it or not (which is the ultimate design difficulty), want to play their idea of a realistic medieval Thief. Doing so is tactical, skill-based, and a hell of a lot more entertaining.

    And I still think that well thought-out supernatural designs such as the Cradle mission are NOT included in my idea of the fantasy that corrupts the rest of T:DS. If you're going to put in supernatural elements, make them few and far between, and make them realistically (yes.. realistically) supernatural. That's what makes it scary, and that's what makes it not only acceptable, but revered. Random, unexplained zombies, spell-casters, and other various fantastical creatures in the Thief series.. no thanks.

    If I were to visit in real life a dark, 100 year-old boarded up former insane asylum former orphanarium that was charred in an accidental fire and marred with a painful history, you better believe that I wouldn't be surprised to see some crazy **** happening if I somehow worked up the courage to explore it (at night, no less). I'd be scared ****less, but not surprised.

Page 2 of 3 First First 123 Last