Jah on 18/9/2009 at 09:37
:confused:
theBlackman's post was in response to this:
Quote:
I guess my perspective is a little different,
at least where my own game is concerned. The game will be online multiplayer...
In other words, I don't think he meant to say that Thief 4 will be online multiplayer.
Vae on 18/9/2009 at 09:39
Quote Posted by theBlackman
ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FUCKING MIND?
Multi-player for this type of game SUCKS MORE THAN A BLACKHOLE.
Quote Posted by jtr7
Multiplayer
Thief (oxymoronic) needs to be a separate thing than what I install on my drive (someday...maybe). What I mean is,
Thief 4 should be
Thief, and anything else should be expansion packs and things that don't eat up
Thief 4's development and playtesting time. This is not against multiplayer in The City with those game mechanics, it's against
Thief 4 coming with it built-in. I don't want to know it's there in
Thief proper by the way the world is built, and through seeing something that could've been better if the devs had more time.
Agreed. Any co-op or multiplayer attempt should be made into a completely different game, as it would cater to and serve a different purpose and experience, pretentious as it may be.
Regarding body awareness. jtr7, zylonbane, and theBlackman are absolutely correct when it comes to this. The six degrees of freedom that is achieved in T1/T2 is fluid and pure, and immerses the mind in the gaming experience with superior fashion. The crude and awkward attempt in T3 to mimic an in game body awareness serves only to distract and diminish the quality of play.
Beleg Cúthalion on 18/9/2009 at 09:57
Quote Posted by jtr7
Don't be a 'tard! We DON'T have to go back to LGS days--DAMMIT!--But let's ADVANCE the game, and not degrade the basics by doing so. ADVANCE, not add visual Garrett coolness to show shit off. Dummkopf! I keep finding out how inferior TDS was, a step below the rough realism of the older titles, undermining the advancements. Once again, what are you doing on the Thief forums, Beleg? "New" should be "BETTER", and the past should not have more advanced code and conceptualization! Screw you for continually not getting it. You're...not..getting...IT, or what I'm saying.
Now this is way beyond ridiculous. So when LG brought you the hamburger in a time of sandwiches you keep this thing in a time of, say, Big Macs, and simply/desperately define Big Macs as too big and too greasy to - voilà - show that the hamburger is still better and that there might be
some fantastic
Dark Mod way to improve it without actually changing it?
You're keeping a position of supposedly knowing some sort of
true spirit of the game which is - especially in this case - very much based on pure personal impression and ex post overglorification. There is probably nothing wrong with this unless you demand everyone to agree to it (which is on the other hand something in your behaviour that surprises me after those three or four years I'm here). YOU have probably no idea to how improve the game without changing "what LGS did" and YOU probably have only the blurry vision that it
might be possible to do it at all. And if I may be a little pettifogger, how can somebody hardly able to play TDS judge about body awareness and 1st person immersion in modern games like e.g. Dark Messiah? By watching YouTube videos?
I guess that if the Dark Mod and all its innovations will be widely-accepted among the community, this will to about 50% be based on politeness and comradeship within the only-we-know-what-Thief-is-screw-the-developers attitude, left aside a consequential greater willingness of getting used to anything new. Not completely because it's perfectly fit or exactly the "true classic Thief spirit" which probably doesn't even exist in the shape that everyone refers to.
Quote Posted by jtr7
Until TDS came along, the complaints about 1st-person in Thief were negligible. It wasn't an issue, and I'd like to see it not be an issue again.
See? That's what I meant with personal impression. I
did have a strange feeling with no visible body while the rest of the game was suggesting Garrett had one. Before TDS came out. On the other hand I never complained about Garrett's animations in TDS until I came here and read all the bashing threads. The problem I have with your statement is not the way you experience the game but the way you dismiss serious reactions to the game as "not an issue" or "negligible". And that's downright arrogant.
Vae on 18/9/2009 at 11:05
I don't see anything ridiculous at all here. jtr7's statements are perfectly valid and true. You seem to be looking at the personal aspect of THIEF rather than what's being said, and that is that the core design principals which constitute the fundamental game experience create the True Thief Experience (TTE). This is objective and by design, regardless of any superimposition of personal experience onto the game.
Regarding 1st person. I believe jtr7 was referring to the vast majority of players not having any issue with 1st person. This is true on the whole, and does not disqualify nor dismiss a rare reaction such as yours.
Beleg Cúthalion on 18/9/2009 at 12:51
It's my "rare reaction" to think a body model in a Thief/1st person game doesn't necessarily throw me out of immersion or hinder me in my way to play the game fluently. Plus, I think the strange feeling of having no body is not necessarily less natural than feeling some sort of discrepancy between my own limbs and those of a game avatar. Now what makes that so outstanding? The difference is – and what I'm trying to make clear here since the last page – that I do not sell my "reaction" as empirical evidence and the fact that at least some people here agree already contradicts those attempts.
Quote Posted by jtr7
And what the taffin' taff are you doing looking vaingloriously at your avatar for, instead of...
The City?!?Wrong game wrong game wrong gaaaaaaame...!!!!!! Ungrateful bastages
Ah, sorry, he doesn't sell it as evidence but just starts to insult people. Or is there some kind of shrooms day in the US...? I'm honestly not sure about that. What he said about my T3Ed work for instance is quite far from correct or well-approached, so much for the "perfectly valid" thing. The rest appears to me more and more as stubborn platitudes paying no respect to the world around Thief.
Ostriig on 18/9/2009 at 12:54
Quote Posted by jtr7
Other than
the time taken away from better things to build it in and make it a separate code so the body doesn't move the camera during player movement...ever...?
[rant]
As if there were any further need, you prove once again that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. You wouldn't have to write additional code to
prevent the camera from moving with the animation, but precisely the other way around. Why can't you understand this? There is no inherent connection between animation of the player mesh and the camera or control.
And stating that, generally, dev time should not be put into this is a classic cop-out of an argument. Following that line of thinking, the rooms in T4 might as well have single, large polygons for walls, and contain just loot, guards, lights and crates to hide behind.
Quote Posted by Vae
jtr7's statements are perfectly valid and true.
jtr7's statements are perfectly clueless and counterproductive. They're born of technical ignorance, lack of imagination and stubbornness. He doesn't understand the technical implications (or lack of thereof) of body awareness as a feature, the way in which it could genuinely add to the game, if done right, and refuses to even consider these things when they are presented to him. With fear and disdain for any feature that could be associated the term "modern", he makes passive-aggressive comments about consoletards and posts vague rhetoric about the "true spirit of Thief", refusing to understand that
some changes or additions, such as this one, need not entail any compromise to the core design principles of the franchise.
And so he chooses to go "WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM?!" on those who disagree with him. Literally in this case, funnily enough.
crazy_Clown on 18/9/2009 at 13:07
Oh the drama here.... It's so amusing :cheeky: Im eagerly waiting jtr7's response to these posts :)
Beleg Cúthalion on 18/9/2009 at 13:11
I'm not sure he's serious. :erm:
Bakerman on 18/9/2009 at 13:20
theBlackman - as Jah said, I was talking about my own game when I said that, sorry for the confusion.
Beleg - I really hope he's not serious :P
Ostriig - thank you for being a bastion of sanity.
jtr7 -
Quote:
Until TDS came along, the complaints about 1st-person in Thief were negligible.
And until human rights came along, the complaints about feudalism were also negligible. Does that make feudalism better? Floaty-eyeball was the standard ten years ago, and since then we have moved on a little. I assume you would complain if T4's AI was the same standard that TDP's was? It's the same with immersion.
The whole issue of whether floaty-eyeball is more immersive than body awareness is something you seem to be sidestepping in favour of trying to start a flame war.
Quote:
Never noticed. I have an imagination.
Then would you prefer to play Thiaf in grey-walled boxes patrolled by green cylinders? I have an imagination too, but why not ask to be indulged if I'm going to pay $60 for this? :P (Or $100, since I'll be in Oz...)
Quote:
Gamer wussies want their hand-held, need to see where they put their feet to take a step, need to see their hands to pick something up.
Not need, want.
To everyone else - would he calm down if I mentioned I hated TDS and don't own a current-gen console? :P
Except the Wii, and that was got without me being involved in the decision.ZylonBane on 18/9/2009 at 15:23
The only place that body awareness belongs is in a mech game. Beyond that, any visible body model should just be "along for the ride", and not be allowed a single shred of influence over player movement. If memory serves, that's how Arx Fatalis implemented it.
