Chade on 19/1/2010 at 00:44
Well, back from holidays, and after a few aborted efforts to find time to respond to the points raised after my last post, I've given up. All I'll say now is that it is a pity that the "difficulty feedback" discussion has focussed almost exclusively on beginners.
The difficulty feedback problem is not specific to beginners: experts should not be denied a more challenging experience just because they play by the rules! In fact, this is a problem with thief more generally, and is one reason why I think loot counts should be used to increase the difficulty level in subsequent levels.
On a separate note, however, I have to disagree with Bakerman about combat. I think that killing people in thief, or doing any non-stealthy behaviour, is definately a problem. Thief is not a combat game. It's combat system is extremely limited compared to other fighting games (and thief 1 and 2 have game breaking exploits to boot). It does not reward combat. Its plot is focussed on trickery, not confrontation. Its main character is not a fighter. Its music does not thump. The game has a combat system, but the game is not designed to make combat either effective or satisfying.
Yes, the player can screw around with the combat system for a while, but they should do so knowing that they are "gaming the game". A novice who enters combat believing it is the best solution to his problem should be encouraged (and given every oppurtunity) to run away and try to find another way to solve his problems.
Bakerman on 20/1/2010 at 12:57
Quote Posted by Chade
All I'll say now is that it is a pity that the "difficulty feedback" discussion has focussed almost exclusively on beginners.
I've been barking up that tree because I feel that's the only place there's a problem. Experienced players will find ways to play the game to suit their tastes - they'll be fine whether you make it harder or easier, by altering their own goals and personal expectations (ex. ghosting). Maybe it's not ideal, but I don't think it's quite the same level of 'problem' as it is with newbies who can't do anything about it.
Quote Posted by Chade
On a separate note, however, I have to disagree with Bakerman about combat.
And
I disagree with
you! I don't want to go too deep into this, since it's probably the wrong place, but I think combat is a natural progression for a stealth game. You need to explore the consequences of failing the stealth part of the game, instead of it being "Oh! I spotted you! Back to the beginning for you!"
For the record, though, I actually thought Thief had a pretty darn deep and complex combat system - obviously not what you'd have in a dedicated fighting game, but that's something different. It conveyed well the difficulty of facing someone with a length of steel, and effectively discouraged combat as a viable option (but if you put in the effort, you can use it to great effect).
Chade on 20/1/2010 at 21:29
Quote Posted by Bakerman
Maybe it's [experts not being challenged] not ideal, but I don't think it's quite the same level of 'problem' as it is with newbies who can't do anything about it.
I agree, but I think it's two sides of the same coin tbh. It's unfortunate the debate focussed on newbies, but only because people get so boneheaded about the whole thing.
Quote Posted by Bakerman
And
I disagree with
you! ... but I think combat is a natural progression for a stealth game. You need to explore the consequences of failing the stealth part of the game, instead of it being "Oh! I spotted you! Back to the beginning for you!"
Well
I disagreed with
you first! :mad:
I think we're arguing past each other. I agree combat is a natural progression for a stealth game. I definately agree that newbies should not be penalised harshly for entering combat.
What I don't want to see is a complex combat simulation that encourages people to keep fighting (just simulating an option encourages people to use it, even if it's not an optimal option). People will go straight to the most interesting part of the game and stay there. In thief 1 and 2, combat is sort of like a local maxima of "interestingness". Combat is the last "encounter" choice we want the player to make, yet it's the most deeply simulated! Combat needs to be less interesting, and the process of running away should be more interesting.
Bakerman on 20/1/2010 at 22:08
Quote Posted by Chade
What I don't want to see is a complex combat simulation that encourages people to keep fighting (just simulating an option encourages people to use it, even if it's not an optimal option). People will go straight to the most interesting part of the game and stay there. In thief 1 and 2, combat is sort of like a local maxima of "interestingness". Combat is the last "encounter" choice we want the player to make, yet it's the most deeply simulated! Combat needs to be less interesting, and the process of running away should be more interesting.
I see what you're getting at, but I never found that to be the case for myself - obviously I'm not everyone. But every time I had to pull my sword out I was shitting myself because I knew that combat was tricky and likely to get me killed - and because it was noisy and likely to mean I'd fail completely and just reload the level. That was probably simply because I wasn't very good at combat, and it's much different for a better player who can take on any two guards in a straight fight and win.
But I tend to discount experienced players - as I said before, you can't make it too hard for them, and they'll do things you never intended with the game. From the perspective of the middle to average player, I think that while combat is certainly interesting and exciting, it's disincentivised enough that it's not a
problem per se.
But maybe my perspective's skewed :p.
Chade on 20/1/2010 at 22:17
It's actually the newbies I'm worried about: I've spoken to people who thought that thief had "rather poor gameplay": upon further questioning I found out they thought it was a fighting game (or at least, that fighting was a viable alternative to stealth in many situations).
Yes, combat isn't a good option: but there are plenty of combat options. It looks as if you should be able to use them in such a way that you can win the game (and in fact, this is true on normal). But it's an unsatisfying and ineffective route to go down.
jtr7 on 20/1/2010 at 23:03
Quote Posted by Bakerman
I see what you're getting at, but I never found that to be the case for myself - obviously I'm not everyone. But every time I had to pull my sword out I was shitting myself because I knew that combat was tricky and likely to get me killed - and because it was noisy and likely to mean I'd fail completely and just reload the level. That was probably simply because I wasn't very good at combat, and it's much different for a better player who can take on any two guards in a straight fight and win.
But I tend to discount experienced players - as I said before, you can't make it too hard for them, and they'll do things you never intended with the game. From the perspective of the middle to average player, I think that while combat is certainly interesting and exciting, it's disincentivised enough that it's not a
problem per se.
But maybe my perspective's skewed :p.
All you have to keep in mind is that you should not put yourself in that situation to begin with, and the games make it very easy not to, once you take the advice in the manual, the training, etc., seriously.
Quote Posted by Judith
jtr7 - sorry, you seem to have no clue about tendencies in modern game design, and according to these theories games are made today. There's no reason to think T4 will be made according to principles set in 1980s. Things I stated are obvious to game designers. My views are merely a compilation of thoughts on stealth game design by Randy Smith, a former LGS/ISA employee and Thief designer plus Emil Pagliarulo, also former LGS employee/Thief designer and a lead designer on Fallout 3. You can google their articles on the subject.
Also "existing known problems" and "known system" are nonexistant. There's no continuity between implementing designs and addressing problems in Thief 1/2, TDS and the next game in the series. The technology is different, the ways of implementing might be different, the series is completely "rebooted" in therms of everything, engine, code, people working on the game, etc. Everything is made from scratch, not added to something Eidos Montreal already did, because they haven't made a Thief game yet. It might be an old gameplay problem for the players, but not "existing known design problem" for the dev team.
WTF? Damn, Judith... :mad::mad::mad::mad:
You don't know squat about me, I'll tell you that right now. Apples and
oranges venison. My god.
Vae on 21/1/2010 at 08:58
The CTL would provide a variable resistance against excessive violence, which is in accord with the true spirit of THIEF.
Some still mistakenly see the CTL as an absolute, which is incorrect. This is like saying that taking damage or being killed from falling is bad because the novice would not understand how to prevent it, and would just keep jumping off of high places to their doom. Even the newb would not do this unless s/he wanted too, just like everyone else.
The new player learns quickly that they can fall only a certain distance and land on hard surfaces without taking any damage, and they adjust accordingly. This is is just like the Level 0 (no effect) gap in CTL, where nothing occurs.
Now one might say that hitting the ground too hard provides the player with instant feedback of damage or death, and therefore providing clear feedback of the negative result...while with the CTL, negative consequences may not show up until later as a result unbeknownst to the player. This is easily remedied by a character voice-over on the first kill, such as "I'd better be careful, too much of this will make my life a lot harder". There could also be other warnings at different thresholds.
Keep in mind that by advocating the CTL feature, you are also supporting its possible creative custom application in future T4 FM's...as any stat could be made to affect the CTL...and the CTL could also be used to trigger special events.
Judith on 21/1/2010 at 11:30
Quote Posted by jtr7
All you have to keep in mind is that you should not put yourself in that situation to begin with, and the games make it very easy not to, once you take the advice in the manual, the training, etc., seriously.
WTF? Damn, Judith... :mad::mad::mad::mad:
You don't know squat about me, I'll tell you that right now. Apples and
oranges venison. My god.
Relax. Of course I now nothing about you and vice versa. I said that you
seem to ignore the modern approach and all the theory that's being gathered behind it. I read about that quite a lot, and I play modern games quite frequently. Believe me, the last thing devs want from the players is to study the manual. They want them to jump right in the game and grasp the idea as soon as possible.
The same goes for lengthy readables. It's not even the TL;DR thing, it's the ability to tell the stories with the environment, lightning, object placement instead - which seem to be more appropriate for medium that videogames are. Plus, leaving the space for player's imagination, interpretation, coming from what they're seeing, hearing interacting with, instead of just reading. I won't be surprised if Thief 4 would try to keep up with these ideas and make good use of them.
theBlackman on 21/1/2010 at 11:37
Unless you have a list of the keys needed to manipulate the character, or environment, you can't play any game.
Ergo, RTFM or play a training mission, such as the first in TDP or the very clumsy one in TDS.
No player can just jump into a new game and know all the keystrokes needed to use, change, load or even "draw" a weapon, open doors, or otherwise "use" the objects.
You, Judith, with all your "Modern" game themes and theory, still are missing the point.
The control keys in nearly every game are different. You can't play THIEF with the controls for DOOM or Mario Brothers or Farside.
Some type of information (usually included in a manual) is necessary.
Try thinking before you shoot off the mouth.
Judith on 21/1/2010 at 12:22
Ha, you're totally wrong on this one :) Controls for first person games haven't changed for ages, since, let's say Wolfenstein/Doom era, where there was no mouse control. After adding the mouse and switching the arrow keys for WASD it's always the mouse for looking around + jump key + use key + shoot/alt shoot key - plus some minor variations. The same goes for consoles, basic control layout is always the same (LS - movement, RS - camera movement, LT - aim, RT - shoot, A - use, etc.), that's why it's easy to grasp it within a short time. And last but not least - you don't need the manual for the control layout, as it's always accessible from game menu :)
And it's not "my" theory, these are the ideas developed by the industry, among them are people who designed Thief as well. But unlike you, they moved on, instead of getting stuck in denial :)
