Sweet Jesus. RPG elements? I want to be a kick-arse thief right from the get-go, rather than having to wait until I can do cool stuff. Save the choice-making for the equipment selection. Want to distract people? Buy noisemaker arrows. Want to sneak past? Buy water and moss arrows. Want to kill everyone? Buy regular arrows. Want to ghost? Buy nothing except maybe rope arrows. Bam, there're your choices. Don't want to play a thief? Would rather play a fighter or cleric? Then play a different fucking game, one which doesn't have the player class as the damn title.
And stealth is too slow-paced? Well duh. It's supposed to be tense and all about timing. Maybe have some levels with areas where you can see through the windows to work out guard pathing, but once you get inside you only have a few minutes to get to your next checkpoint before the alarms go off, requiring planning and quick execution. That should be the extent of adrenaline-pumping action gameplay, and the rest should be all about exploration and stealing everything that's shiny. Adrenaline can be pumped through pressure as well, and having combat as a last resort makes stuff like lockpicking very tense.
Really, the only way that I can see someone making the comment that stealth is "boring and slow-paced", and that "RPG Elements" are "in" with regards to a Thief game, is that they've never played Thief before so they don't know what the fuck they're talking about.
Man, I'm trying so hard not be all /rage on this, it's not the end of the world and all, but if Eidos Montreal fucks over the game that I cut my teeth on in my gaming adolesence, I will be pissed.
I don't understand these RPG elements. Garrett is reacting to the environment and his enemies. His quantifiable attributes (speed, sound, accuracy, damage) is all based on an enemy reaction. Does the enemy get stronger throughout the game? Would that be feasible? Would that even make sense? Who the fuck cares about quantifiable attributes?
Changing how Garrett sneaks throughout the game actually hinders the player's ability to learn how the specific environment reacts to Garrett. It should be constant. A bright stealth gem should render him visible to everyone. Clanky metal grating should make noise to everyone. And so on. This should not change during the game.
I think you guys are forgetting that RPG elements worked in Thief 3. The whole "Sell loot to fences, buy better equipment, upgrade lockpicks etc." thing has it's very roots in the RPG genre.
The term RPG is a very, VERY broad one. Hopefully what they mean when they say it is that your actions will have a lot of impact on the outcome of the story. Moral decisions and what not. I could see stuff like that working in a Thief game.
Thief has never been about moral decisions though, at least none that required the player to make the decisions. It's always been Garrett that makes the call, and we're along for the ride because that happens in the cutscenes. That's about it. There's really no room in the IP for a hamfisted "Good vs Evil" wankfest.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett and play the "let's slide the allignment bar up and down" game. Garret's supposed to be somewhat morally ambiguous. I mean, he's a goddamn thief.
Thief has never been about moral decisions though, at least none made on the players behalf. Garrett makes the call, and we're along for the ride. That's about it. There's no room in the IP for a hamfisted "Good vs Evil" wankfest.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett.
Garrett is about making money and paying back anybody who fucks with him. The only choices the player should have outside of the normal gameplay is what the best way to make money is. For example, it would be interesting if you could make agreements with a guild not to steal everything that is valuable during your missions in return for regular payments.
Thief has never been about moral decisions though, at least none that required the player to make the decisions. It's always been Garrett that makes the call, and we're along for the ride because that happens in the cutscenes. That's about it. There's really no room in the IP for a hamfisted "Good vs Evil" wankfest.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett and play the "let's slide the allignment bar up and down" game. Garret's supposed to be somewhat morally ambiguous. I mean, he's a goddamn thief.
I'm not arguing in favor of an alignment bar.
I'm just saying some degree of control over the story might be interesting for the Thief series. Thief 1/2 had EPG elements, when you bought new equipment. You DID NOT have all of your abilities at the beginning of the game, you slowly got them through your available equipment. Eventually you had access to all the best equipment.
Thief has never been about moral decisions though, at least none that required the player to make the decisions. It's always been Garrett that makes the call, and we're along for the ride because that happens in the cutscenes. That's about it. There's really no room in the IP for a hamfisted "Good vs Evil" wankfest.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett and play the "let's slide the allignment bar up and down" game. Garret's supposed to be somewhat morally ambiguous. I mean, he's a goddamn thief.
I'm not arguing in favor of an alignment bar.
I'm just saying some degree of control over the story might be interesting for the Thief series. Thief 1/2 had EPG elements, when you bought new equipment. You DID NOT have all of your abilities at the beginning of the game, you slowly got them through your available equipment. Eventually you had access to all the best equipment.
Sounds pretty RPGish to me.
RPG stands for Role Playing Game, not Repeatedly Purchasing Gear.
I really doubt that buying equipment constitutes an RPG element, because by that logic that makes Counter Strike a sort of RPG.
Role Playing means acting in character, which means making decisions as that character. Thief never gave the player that option because Garrett was pretty straightforward. He's a world weary, cynical anti-hero. End of story.
Thief has never been about moral decisions though, at least none that required the player to make the decisions. It's always been Garrett that makes the call, and we're along for the ride because that happens in the cutscenes. That's about it. There's really no room in the IP for a hamfisted "Good vs Evil" wankfest.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett and play the "let's slide the allignment bar up and down" game. Garret's supposed to be somewhat morally ambiguous. I mean, he's a goddamn thief.
I'm not arguing in favor of an alignment bar.
I'm just saying some degree of control over the story might be interesting for the Thief series. Thief 1/2 had EPG elements, when you bought new equipment. You DID NOT have all of your abilities at the beginning of the game, you slowly got them through your available equipment. Eventually you had access to all the best equipment.
Sounds pretty RPGish to me.
RPG stands for Role Playing Game, not Repeatedly Purchasing Gear.
I really doubt that buying equipment constitutes an RPG element, because by that logic that makes Counter Strike a sort of RPG.
Role Playing means acting in character, which means making decisions as that character. Thief never gave the player that option because Garrett was pretty straightforward. He's a world weary, cynical anti-hero. End of story.
System Shock 2 had RPG elements, and you made zero decisions as your character. Likewise the entire JRPG genre.
Orogogus on
0
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
I don't see why an apprentice would have that different of an attitude. I could see her starting out less cynical than Garrett, but she should be cynical by the end of the first game.
Thief has never been about moral decisions though, at least none that required the player to make the decisions. It's always been Garrett that makes the call, and we're along for the ride because that happens in the cutscenes. That's about it. There's really no room in the IP for a hamfisted "Good vs Evil" wankfest.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett and play the "let's slide the allignment bar up and down" game. Garret's supposed to be somewhat morally ambiguous. I mean, he's a goddamn thief.
I'm not arguing in favor of an alignment bar.
I'm just saying some degree of control over the story might be interesting for the Thief series. Thief 1/2 had EPG elements, when you bought new equipment. You DID NOT have all of your abilities at the beginning of the game, you slowly got them through your available equipment. Eventually you had access to all the best equipment.
Sounds pretty RPGish to me.
RPG stands for Role Playing Game, not Repeatedly Purchasing Gear.
I really doubt that buying equipment constitutes an RPG element, because by that logic that makes Counter Strike a sort of RPG.
Role Playing means acting in character, which means making decisions as that character. Thief never gave the player that option because Garrett was pretty straightforward. He's a world weary, cynical anti-hero. End of story.
System Shock 2 had RPG elements, and you made zero decisions as your character. Likewise the entire JRPG genre.
I've never played a JRPG, so I don't know that side of the coin, outside of what Yahtzee says about the genre :P
System Shock 2 had different "classes" that one could play, and different skill sets you could use IIRC. Thief has consistently never had either one of those.
Honestly, the whole RPG element comment that EM made is really nebulous when you look at it. We could all debate on what they meant by "RPG elements", but until they come out and tell us what they meant, we're more or less engaging in pointless conjecture.
That said, I'm not sure if I want to play as Garrett again or his apprentice. Both would be welcome, but I wouldn't want to have a babysitting (escort) mission.
RPG stands for Role Playing Game, not Repeatedly Purchasing Gear.
I really doubt that buying equipment constitutes an RPG element, because by that logic that makes Counter Strike a sort of RPG.
Role Playing means acting in character, which means making decisions as that character. Thief never gave the player that option because Garrett was pretty straightforward. He's a world weary, cynical anti-hero. End of story.
System Shock 2 had RPG elements, and you made zero decisions as your character. Likewise the entire JRPG genre.
I've never played a JRPG, so I don't know that side of the coin, outside of what Yahtzee says about the genre :P
System Shock 2 had different "classes" that one could play, and different skill sets you could use IIRC. Thief has consistently never had either one of those.
System Shock 1 never had those, though. They were shoehorned into 2, and most people and reviews received it well enough. The classes were pretty bunk; all they did was affect your starting skills and loadout, and anyone could buy any skill. For all intents and purposes they could have just let you buy skills and equipment.
I'm rethinking the whole RPG stuff and choices affecting the gameworld.
For instance, if you break into lots of houses in the city, people hire guards and more guards patrol the streets. If you use one fence too much, he gets busted for moving stolen goods and rats you out, forcing you to ditch your equipment stash. If you kill people, they start to assume that you're a killer, and will run away screaming for guards instead of allowing you to hold them up for shiny stuff.
If you pick lots of locks, the locks get tougher. If you break in through alternate routes, people start installing window bars.
That would be really fucking sweet. I hope that's what they mean by "RPG" elements. I also wouldn't mind slightly speeding up the gameplay with some acrobatic moves. It would make sense if they have a girly type PC, moving from the rough and tumble Garret to his more graceful and combat inept apprentice.
I'm not sure if it would be beneficial to have a skill set for a Thief game, though. If they did try it out, what skills would they offer?
Actually, if they went the route of th player being Garrett's apprentice, I could see the skill point system sort of working. If it were Garrett it'd be pointless, the man's a Master Thief.
I'm not sure if it would be beneficial to have a skill set for a Thief game, though. If they did try it out, what skills would they offer?
Actually, if they went the route of th player being Garrett's apprentice, I could see the skill point system sort of working. If it were Garrett it'd be pointless, the man's a Master Thief.
It wouldn't be that hard. Lockpicking, sneaking speed, health, the length of time you could draw your bow before growing tired, and so on. There's a lot of skills you could inject into a stealth game without ruining the core of the experience.
Velvet Assassin definitely isn't a Thief game, but it is a stealth game and it has three stats you can level up and the game is entirely beatable without touching them.
The interview gives the impression that the rpg elements were more about branching paths in the story, probably involving a choice between the hammerites/pagans/neither.
I'm mostly worried that they want to bring combat to the front more as a way of breaking up all that tedious stealth gameplay.
Rami on
Steam / Xbox Live: WSDX NNID: W-S-D-X 3DS FC: 2637-9461-8549
Garrett's described as a master thief, but in gameplay, it's been the player's skill substituting for Garrett's apparent mastery. That should remain the same. There shouldn't be a computer limit placed on how well a player can perform actions in Thief, and having a point system has always leaned towards the absurd as the final result. A specific set of hard coded rules - metal is noisy, grass is not, different shades of darkness mean different levels of guard visibility - is a lot harder to screw up.
EDIT - The interview mentioned RPG elements as being a large part of the game. I don't read that and see branching mission paths. Currying favor with factions also seems to be a bit of a slippery slope.
For the apprentice, attributes like speed, stealth, health, lockpicking, and strength would make sense. They could go the Deus Ex route and have skills for the bow, some other weapons, and medicine. If they go more steampunk, they can make it so that there is a mechanical skill that allows you to use certain complicated devices.
I've never played any of the Thief games, outside a demo of one of them on the old Coconut Monkey PCG cds. I remember enjoying it.
I do, however, have a lot of respect for unique games, and a TRUE stealth game where combat is a last ditch resort and you can easily be overpowered and get fucked up if two or three guys come.
For the apprentice, attributes like speed, stealth, health, lockpicking, and strength would make sense. They could go the Deus Ex route and have skills for the bow, some other weapons, and medicine. If they go more steampunk, they can make it so that there is a mechanical skill that allows you to use certain complicated devices.
Changing how Garrett sneaks throughout the game actually hinders the player's ability to learn how the specific environment reacts to Garrett. It should be constant. A bright stealth gem should render him visible to everyone. Clanky metal grating should make noise to everyone. And so on. This should not change during the game.
For the apprentice, attributes like speed, stealth, health, lockpicking, and strength would make sense. They could go the Deus Ex route and have skills for the bow, some other weapons, and medicine. If they go more steampunk, they can make it so that there is a mechanical skill that allows you to use certain complicated devices.
Changing how Garrett sneaks throughout the game actually hinders the player's ability to learn how the specific environment reacts to Garrett. It should be constant. A bright stealth gem should render him visible to everyone. Clanky metal grating should make noise to everyone. And so on. This should not change during the game.
You can have a leveling and skill system without any of those sorts of things ever changing. Not that I really understand how those things changing makes a game bad. If you're unable to adapt to slowly and mildly changing conditions, that's probably your problem.
Increased stealth could just change the distance at which they notice the sound because you are better at walking quietly.
...Which will lead to the player hopping up and down on tile floor directly behind a guard, and the guard never noticing because of 100% stealth skill.
Garrett's described as a master thief, but in gameplay, it's been the player's skill substituting for Garrett's apparent mastery. That should remain the same. There shouldn't be a computer limit placed on how well a player can perform actions in Thief, and having a point system has always leaned towards the absurd as the final result. A specific set of hard coded rules - metal is noisy, grass is not, different shades of darkness mean different levels of guard visibility - is a lot harder to screw up.
EDIT - The interview mentioned RPG elements as being a large part of the game. I don't read that and see branching mission paths. Currying favor with factions also seems to be a bit of a slippery slope.
Ok, I have to agree with this take on the skill set. It would only cause to micromanage play-style, which is already maleable to begin with.
As for factions:
It also seems to be out-of-character for Garrett to do bitch work and attempt to curry favor for factions like the Hammers and the Pagans. In both games (T1 and T2), he's only allied with the Hammers and Pagans because of extenuating circumstances and because doing so was a means to an end.
It closely follows the old saw "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
Which also follows the game's theme of balance between order and chaos, and the danger of letting either extreme run rampant (the Trickster for chaos and Karas for order). By siding with either the Hammers or the Pagans, Garrett could upset the already tenuous balance.
Increased stealth could just change the distance at which they notice the sound because you are better at walking quietly.
...Which will lead to the player hopping up and down on tile floor directly behind a guard, and the guard never noticing because of 100% stealth skill.
Worst case scenario, and so far seems plausible.
Thats what I'm thinking too.
The only RPG-ish thing I'm trying to imagine that would fit with Thief is different outfits. Not "upgrade armor", but different types of clothes that help with different types of enviroments, like water, forests, etc. Of course you can only bring one outfit and if the missions follow the trend of the first two games the briefing at the start of the mission can be very misleading on what you should carry, which was a great way to mess around with the player.
Basically an expansion of the weapons and gadgets store at the beginning of a mission that the games already have.
I don't understand why levels, stats, and the like are needed in an RPG. My understanding has always been if you are given control over a character and play out a story then you are playing an RPG. You have been given a role to explore yourself. Since thief is linear then the role you play is more defined. In a game like Oblivion your role is still defined by the main story line but you have a lot more choice when it comes to how you reach that end.
Personally I don't think levels and skills will be a good addition to Thief. I don't want to feel the need of grinding skills and leave things to chance. What would higher lockpicking skills do? Make it easier to pick harder locks? Why not simplify it and allow access to new lock picking tools as the story progresses. As a master thief I am pretty sure Garrett knows how to pick locks. There are times I have a real problem with stealth because I can be standing infront of a window that is bright yet my gem is dark because the area I am in is dark. I want to be forced into tough situations in which I have a high chance of getting caught. I don't want to be rolling some dice to determine if I am hidden when I am right next to a light source and then through some luck get ignored by a guard. If I am seen then I am seen. I can't "learn" to hide better in a spot of darkness. The amount light an area receives is fixed and if I am visible at the start of the game then I should be visible at the end of the game at that same spot. The only way I could see something like this changing is if you receive some cloth that can absorb some light. Obviously I am totally against health and strength skills. Thief is about being sneaky not rambo.
I just don't see the benefit of having skills, levels or stats. Someone care to explain why they think these would be beneficial to gameplay?
You guys seem to be forgetting that the faction bitch work was already in T3, you can make friends with one or the other and they won't attack/will let you into their base. Extending that to a DX scenario by allowing it to influence the storyline seems like a logical progression for a dev team that considers rpg elements all the rage.
"D'Astous hinted that story, choice and RPG elements will play a large role in Thief 4"
Bringing up the balance from T1&2 doesn't mean much. Destroying all technology and plunging the world into a dark age was an extremely unbalanced yet viable option in DX. If they're going to make you Garrett rather than make you someone following his story having the option to side with the hammers and concrete the entire world doesn't require a large leap of imagination.
Rami on
Steam / Xbox Live: WSDX NNID: W-S-D-X 3DS FC: 2637-9461-8549
Well, I hope that they succeed in making a great stealth game, whether it's faithful to the mechanics of the original games or not. RPG elements are fine by me. A less linear story is great. As long as they produce a good game, I don't mind. The old games are great, but you can really tell when they came out.
I also honestly hope Garrett isn't the protagonist this time around, preferring his apprentice. I like Garrett. He's a good character. But his story's done. It's an opportunity to show more of what the City has to offer from a different perspective and to develop a new character in the same setting while still allowing old world weary Garrett to hang around.
Well, I hope that they succeed in making a great stealth game, whether it's faithful to the mechanics of the original games or not. RPG elements are fine by me. A less linear story is great. As long as they produce a good game, I don't mind. The old games are great, but you can really tell when they came out.
I also honestly hope Garrett isn't the protagonist this time around, preferring his apprentice. I like Garrett. He's a good character. But his story's done. It's an opportunity to show more of what the City has to offer from a different perspective and to develop a new character in the same setting while still allowing old world weary Garrett to hang around.
I'm fairly curious as to how fully they'll use the ending elements of Thief 3 to be honest. Or for that matter just what some of it actually meant.
Spoilers about the ending of Thief 3:
I mean, the Keepers are effectively gone, or at least, all the glyphs seem to be, and that's a pretty big faction to have missing as far as motivation. Granted, I suppose that was just motivation that Garrett needed because of the prophacies and such he didn't care about but kept getting caught up in. But now he's the True Keeper... so just what does that mean? Can just he use glyphs now or what?
It'll be interesting to see, even if they do go with the potential apprentice, what they do with the way Thief 3 seemed to leave things in The City.
Well, I hope that they succeed in making a great stealth game, whether it's faithful to the mechanics of the original games or not. RPG elements are fine by me. A less linear story is great. As long as they produce a good game, I don't mind. The old games are great, but you can really tell when they came out.
I also honestly hope Garrett isn't the protagonist this time around, preferring his apprentice. I like Garrett. He's a good character. But his story's done. It's an opportunity to show more of what the City has to offer from a different perspective and to develop a new character in the same setting while still allowing old world weary Garrett to hang around.
I'd prefer playing Garrett's apprentice. They did a pretty damn good job of resolving Garrett's story in the last game.
The problem, though, is that they don't like stealth based gameplay, or at least, they consider it a limiting factor to making a good game, and they're trying that approach on a franchise built specifically for stealth based gameplay. It reads like they'll use RPG elements to quantify the player's experience -- there's never been a stat based stealth game that got it right. In fact, most people point out that the old game's approach was stealth done right. If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?
To me it sounds like these guys are salivating over the prospect of making the next Fallout 3, but don't get the fact that the guys over at Beth pulled it off by not screwing with what made Fallout such a beloved series.
The problem, though, is that they don't like stealth based gameplay, or at least, they consider it a limiting factor to making a good game, and they're trying that approach on a franchise built specifically for stealth based gameplay. It reads like they'll use RPG elements to quantify the player's experience -- there's never been a stat based stealth game that got it right. In fact, most people point out that the old game's approach was stealth done right. If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?
To me it sounds like these guys are salivating over the prospect of making the next Fallout 3, but don't get the fact that the guys over at Beth pulled it off by not screwing with what made Fallout such a beloved series.
They said that stealth games have the reputation for being slow and boring and that they wanted to try to innovate in the genre, basically.
I don't see how that's necessarily a bad thing. Thief got us to the where the genre is and has basically stayed for more than a decade now. If it's not broke, don't fix it has led to quite a bit of stagnation. Why not try to change it up a bit?
I don't understand why levels, stats, and the like are needed in an RPG. My understanding has always been if you are given control over a character and play out a story then you are playing an RPG.
That definition is so generic and watered-down as to be nearly useless as a categorization. From that perspective, Half-Life is an RPG, Starcraft is an RPG (you play the roles of an unnamed Praetor/Cerebrate/Terran Officer), and so on.
The common understanding of an RPG includes items and/or weapons you can buy, find or steal; and skills and abilities that improve over time or by allocating points.
The problem, though, is that they don't like stealth based gameplay, or at least, they consider it a limiting factor to making a good game, and they're trying that approach on a franchise built specifically for stealth based gameplay. It reads like they'll use RPG elements to quantify the player's experience -- there's never been a stat based stealth game that got it right. In fact, most people point out that the old game's approach was stealth done right. If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?
To me it sounds like these guys are salivating over the prospect of making the next Fallout 3, but don't get the fact that the guys over at Beth pulled it off by not screwing with what made Fallout such a beloved series.
They said that stealth games have the reputation for being slow and boring and that they wanted to try to innovate in the genre, basically.
I don't see how that's necessarily a bad thing. Thief got us to the where the genre is and has basically stayed for more than a decade now. If it's not broke, don't fix it has led to quite a bit of stagnation. Why not try to change it up a bit?
Pancake, the thing is is that they don't want innovation, they want the exact same game but with different maps and shinier graphics and more realistic physics. That's it, no change in the core gameplay. I don't care either way really, I enjoyed the demo of the first Thief but that's all I've played of the series and I'd like to go back and play it and the second one but I don't imagine they'll run on Win7 x64 and even if they do I don't own them and probably will never buy them. I may get the third one on Steam though but I'll be watching to see what they do with this new one.
The problem, though, is that they don't like stealth based gameplay, or at least, they consider it a limiting factor to making a good game, and they're trying that approach on a franchise built specifically for stealth based gameplay. It reads like they'll use RPG elements to quantify the player's experience -- there's never been a stat based stealth game that got it right. In fact, most people point out that the old game's approach was stealth done right. If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?
To me it sounds like these guys are salivating over the prospect of making the next Fallout 3, but don't get the fact that the guys over at Beth pulled it off by not screwing with what made Fallout such a beloved series.
They said that stealth games have the reputation for being slow and boring and that they wanted to try to innovate in the genre, basically.
I don't see how that's necessarily a bad thing. Thief got us to the where the genre is and has basically stayed for more than a decade now. If it's not broke, don't fix it has led to quite a bit of stagnation. Why not try to change it up a bit?
Pancake, the thing is is that they don't want innovation, they want the exact same game but with different maps and shinier graphics and more realistic physics. That's it, no change in the core gameplay. I don't care either way really, I enjoyed the demo of the first Thief but that's all I've played of the series and I'd like to go back and play it and the second one but I don't imagine they'll run on Win7 x64 and even if they do I don't own them and probably will never buy them. I may get the third one on Steam though but I'll be watching to see what they do with this new one.
Your best bet for Thief 1 and 2 would be to get Eidos to sign on to GOG - if they do so, I would be astonished if Thief 1 and 2 were two of the games that they didn't try to get working.
The problem, though, is that they don't like stealth based gameplay, or at least, they consider it a limiting factor to making a good game, and they're trying that approach on a franchise built specifically for stealth based gameplay. It reads like they'll use RPG elements to quantify the player's experience -- there's never been a stat based stealth game that got it right. In fact, most people point out that the old game's approach was stealth done right. If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?
To me it sounds like these guys are salivating over the prospect of making the next Fallout 3, but don't get the fact that the guys over at Beth pulled it off by not screwing with what made Fallout such a beloved series.
They said that stealth games have the reputation for being slow and boring and that they wanted to try to innovate in the genre, basically.
I don't see how that's necessarily a bad thing. Thief got us to the where the genre is and has basically stayed for more than a decade now. If it's not broke, don't fix it has led to quite a bit of stagnation. Why not try to change it up a bit?
It's not that I'm against them changing things up a bit, I'm against them changing things up and, in the process, fucking things beyond all recognition, which is what usually tends to happen in these types of situations.
Call me a cynic, but I've little faith in a company that essentially comes out and says "We feel that stealth games are boring and tedious, ergo, we're doing the fourth game of the Thief series." Of course, the day that this game comes out, I'm more than likely going to throw my wallet at it. Providing of course they release it for the PC the same time they release it for the console.
Your best bet for Thief 1 and 2 would be to get Eidos to sign on to GOG - if they do so, I would be astonished if Thief 1 and 2 were two of the games that they didn't try to get working.
I love GOG and I hope Eidos signs on for it but that's not going to help me play them right now. :P That's alright though, I can wait to play them or even never do so. Like I said, I'm looking at buying T:DS on Steam and I'll see how Thief 4 turns out.
Posts
If I want a slow paced, tense, realistic sneaker I'll install thief.
I hope the devs figure this out. Of course, since NOLF outsold Thief by something like 2:1 IIRC I think we're jolly well fucked.
As an aside when the fuck is Monolith getting their act together and making NOLF 3. Holy fuck I want to play the shit out of that game.
Really, the only way that I can see someone making the comment that stealth is "boring and slow-paced", and that "RPG Elements" are "in" with regards to a Thief game, is that they've never played Thief before so they don't know what the fuck they're talking about.
Man, I'm trying so hard not be all /rage on this, it's not the end of the world and all, but if Eidos Montreal fucks over the game that I cut my teeth on in my gaming adolesence, I will be pissed.
Changing how Garrett sneaks throughout the game actually hinders the player's ability to learn how the specific environment reacts to Garrett. It should be constant. A bright stealth gem should render him visible to everyone. Clanky metal grating should make noise to everyone. And so on. This should not change during the game.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
The term RPG is a very, VERY broad one. Hopefully what they mean when they say it is that your actions will have a lot of impact on the outcome of the story. Moral decisions and what not. I could see stuff like that working in a Thief game.
In fact, the worst thing they could do would be to allow players to assign some moral stance for Garrett and play the "let's slide the allignment bar up and down" game. Garret's supposed to be somewhat morally ambiguous. I mean, he's a goddamn thief.
Fixed for ominous Japanese muckery.
Garrett is about making money and paying back anybody who fucks with him. The only choices the player should have outside of the normal gameplay is what the best way to make money is. For example, it would be interesting if you could make agreements with a guild not to steal everything that is valuable during your missions in return for regular payments.
I'm not arguing in favor of an alignment bar.
I'm just saying some degree of control over the story might be interesting for the Thief series. Thief 1/2 had EPG elements, when you bought new equipment. You DID NOT have all of your abilities at the beginning of the game, you slowly got them through your available equipment. Eventually you had access to all the best equipment.
Sounds pretty RPGish to me.
RPG stands for Role Playing Game, not Repeatedly Purchasing Gear.
I really doubt that buying equipment constitutes an RPG element, because by that logic that makes Counter Strike a sort of RPG.
Role Playing means acting in character, which means making decisions as that character. Thief never gave the player that option because Garrett was pretty straightforward. He's a world weary, cynical anti-hero. End of story.
System Shock 2 had RPG elements, and you made zero decisions as your character. Likewise the entire JRPG genre.
Nnnope.
I really would like to play as Garret, but
I've never played a JRPG, so I don't know that side of the coin, outside of what Yahtzee says about the genre :P
System Shock 2 had different "classes" that one could play, and different skill sets you could use IIRC. Thief has consistently never had either one of those.
Honestly, the whole RPG element comment that EM made is really nebulous when you look at it. We could all debate on what they meant by "RPG elements", but until they come out and tell us what they meant, we're more or less engaging in pointless conjecture.
That said, I'm not sure if I want to play as Garrett again or his apprentice. Both would be welcome, but I wouldn't want to have a babysitting (escort) mission.
System Shock 1 never had those, though. They were shoehorned into 2, and most people and reviews received it well enough. The classes were pretty bunk; all they did was affect your starting skills and loadout, and anyone could buy any skill. For all intents and purposes they could have just let you buy skills and equipment.
For instance, if you break into lots of houses in the city, people hire guards and more guards patrol the streets. If you use one fence too much, he gets busted for moving stolen goods and rats you out, forcing you to ditch your equipment stash. If you kill people, they start to assume that you're a killer, and will run away screaming for guards instead of allowing you to hold them up for shiny stuff.
If you pick lots of locks, the locks get tougher. If you break in through alternate routes, people start installing window bars.
That would be really fucking sweet. I hope that's what they mean by "RPG" elements. I also wouldn't mind slightly speeding up the gameplay with some acrobatic moves. It would make sense if they have a girly type PC, moving from the rough and tumble Garret to his more graceful and combat inept apprentice.
I highly doubt we'll see Garrett leveling up so he can finally wield that +2 Broadsword.
Actually, if they went the route of th player being Garrett's apprentice, I could see the skill point system sort of working. If it were Garrett it'd be pointless, the man's a Master Thief.
It wouldn't be that hard. Lockpicking, sneaking speed, health, the length of time you could draw your bow before growing tired, and so on. There's a lot of skills you could inject into a stealth game without ruining the core of the experience.
Velvet Assassin definitely isn't a Thief game, but it is a stealth game and it has three stats you can level up and the game is entirely beatable without touching them.
I'm mostly worried that they want to bring combat to the front more as a way of breaking up all that tedious stealth gameplay.
EDIT - The interview mentioned RPG elements as being a large part of the game. I don't read that and see branching mission paths. Currying favor with factions also seems to be a bit of a slippery slope.
I do, however, have a lot of respect for unique games, and a TRUE stealth game where combat is a last ditch resort and you can easily be overpowered and get fucked up if two or three guys come.
The excerpts from the interview sound HORRIBLE.
No, because
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
You can have a leveling and skill system without any of those sorts of things ever changing. Not that I really understand how those things changing makes a game bad. If you're unable to adapt to slowly and mildly changing conditions, that's probably your problem.
...Which will lead to the player hopping up and down on tile floor directly behind a guard, and the guard never noticing because of 100% stealth skill.
Worst case scenario, and so far seems plausible.
Ok, I have to agree with this take on the skill set. It would only cause to micromanage play-style, which is already maleable to begin with.
As for factions:
It also seems to be out-of-character for Garrett to do bitch work and attempt to curry favor for factions like the Hammers and the Pagans. In both games (T1 and T2), he's only allied with the Hammers and Pagans because of extenuating circumstances and because doing so was a means to an end.
It closely follows the old saw "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
Which also follows the game's theme of balance between order and chaos, and the danger of letting either extreme run rampant (the Trickster for chaos and Karas for order). By siding with either the Hammers or the Pagans, Garrett could upset the already tenuous balance.
Thats what I'm thinking too.
The only RPG-ish thing I'm trying to imagine that would fit with Thief is different outfits. Not "upgrade armor", but different types of clothes that help with different types of enviroments, like water, forests, etc. Of course you can only bring one outfit and if the missions follow the trend of the first two games the briefing at the start of the mission can be very misleading on what you should carry, which was a great way to mess around with the player.
Basically an expansion of the weapons and gadgets store at the beginning of a mission that the games already have.
Personally I don't think levels and skills will be a good addition to Thief. I don't want to feel the need of grinding skills and leave things to chance. What would higher lockpicking skills do? Make it easier to pick harder locks? Why not simplify it and allow access to new lock picking tools as the story progresses. As a master thief I am pretty sure Garrett knows how to pick locks. There are times I have a real problem with stealth because I can be standing infront of a window that is bright yet my gem is dark because the area I am in is dark. I want to be forced into tough situations in which I have a high chance of getting caught. I don't want to be rolling some dice to determine if I am hidden when I am right next to a light source and then through some luck get ignored by a guard. If I am seen then I am seen. I can't "learn" to hide better in a spot of darkness. The amount light an area receives is fixed and if I am visible at the start of the game then I should be visible at the end of the game at that same spot. The only way I could see something like this changing is if you receive some cloth that can absorb some light. Obviously I am totally against health and strength skills. Thief is about being sneaky not rambo.
I just don't see the benefit of having skills, levels or stats. Someone care to explain why they think these would be beneficial to gameplay?
"D'Astous hinted that story, choice and RPG elements will play a large role in Thief 4"
Bringing up the balance from T1&2 doesn't mean much. Destroying all technology and plunging the world into a dark age was an extremely unbalanced yet viable option in DX. If they're going to make you Garrett rather than make you someone following his story having the option to side with the hammers and concrete the entire world doesn't require a large leap of imagination.
I also honestly hope Garrett isn't the protagonist this time around, preferring his apprentice. I like Garrett. He's a good character. But his story's done. It's an opportunity to show more of what the City has to offer from a different perspective and to develop a new character in the same setting while still allowing old world weary Garrett to hang around.
I'm fairly curious as to how fully they'll use the ending elements of Thief 3 to be honest. Or for that matter just what some of it actually meant.
Spoilers about the ending of Thief 3:
It'll be interesting to see, even if they do go with the potential apprentice, what they do with the way Thief 3 seemed to leave things in The City.
I'd prefer playing Garrett's apprentice. They did a pretty damn good job of resolving Garrett's story in the last game.
The problem, though, is that they don't like stealth based gameplay, or at least, they consider it a limiting factor to making a good game, and they're trying that approach on a franchise built specifically for stealth based gameplay. It reads like they'll use RPG elements to quantify the player's experience -- there's never been a stat based stealth game that got it right. In fact, most people point out that the old game's approach was stealth done right. If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?
To me it sounds like these guys are salivating over the prospect of making the next Fallout 3, but don't get the fact that the guys over at Beth pulled it off by not screwing with what made Fallout such a beloved series.
They said that stealth games have the reputation for being slow and boring and that they wanted to try to innovate in the genre, basically.
I don't see how that's necessarily a bad thing. Thief got us to the where the genre is and has basically stayed for more than a decade now. If it's not broke, don't fix it has led to quite a bit of stagnation. Why not try to change it up a bit?
The common understanding of an RPG includes items and/or weapons you can buy, find or steal; and skills and abilities that improve over time or by allocating points.
Pancake, the thing is is that they don't want innovation, they want the exact same game but with different maps and shinier graphics and more realistic physics. That's it, no change in the core gameplay. I don't care either way really, I enjoyed the demo of the first Thief but that's all I've played of the series and I'd like to go back and play it and the second one but I don't imagine they'll run on Win7 x64 and even if they do I don't own them and probably will never buy them. I may get the third one on Steam though but I'll be watching to see what they do with this new one.
Your best bet for Thief 1 and 2 would be to get Eidos to sign on to GOG - if they do so, I would be astonished if Thief 1 and 2 were two of the games that they didn't try to get working.
It's not that I'm against them changing things up a bit, I'm against them changing things up and, in the process, fucking things beyond all recognition, which is what usually tends to happen in these types of situations.
Call me a cynic, but I've little faith in a company that essentially comes out and says "We feel that stealth games are boring and tedious, ergo, we're doing the fourth game of the Thief series." Of course, the day that this game comes out, I'm more than likely going to throw my wallet at it. Providing of course they release it for the PC the same time they release it for the console.
I love GOG and I hope Eidos signs on for it but that's not going to help me play them right now. :P That's alright though, I can wait to play them or even never do so. Like I said, I'm looking at buying T:DS on Steam and I'll see how Thief 4 turns out.