Thief13x on 17/4/2009 at 19:48
Quote Posted by all
What, are you saying the guards are less alert than they were six or seven years ago? Maybe they've just become fed up with guard duty?
haha!
Also, I agree with sneaksyJack, I never used em in T1 but in T2 there is just a ridiculous amount of marble in some of the mission ahem bank and trust ahem
CEEtheDinoman on 17/4/2009 at 22:30
I also agree with Sneaksyjack, but you can't forget the metal floors either . . . They're difficu;t withoput them mossies. I actually found that noisemakers were ones that became more effective, though, but that's because broadheads don't make that huge impact noise anymore . . . :erg:
Meisterdieb on 18/4/2009 at 02:27
At least the guards not hearing Garrett is more in line with him being a Keeper trained master thief. Actually giving his training -and the backstory with the Keeper standing in the middle of a busy street- I was kinda expecting that Ai would not see or hear me easily, so I actually like the "blind and deaf" guards :cheeky:
What I hate is when some sleeping AI bolts wide awake and alert because you are unlocking a nearby chest. The dumb part is that the AI doesn't wake up from the louder "click" when using the wrong lockpick but from the faint "click" the correct lockpick makes...:sweat:
baeuchlein on 18/4/2009 at 15:28
Quote Posted by SneakyJack
There are so many great unused conversations - I know a few of them have been littered throughout fan missions over the years, but I don't know if that one has or not.
I am very certain it is used partially - the last three pieces, from the point where one guard gets angry, I think - in one or two fan missions. I was very surprised when hearing it because there appeared to be a german conversation in an english (I think) fan mission. Then I noticed that even the voice actor was the same one which spoke several lines in the german version of
Thief 2 (which I own), so this had to be from the game itself.
I am not sure whether the conversation could be heard once in the original game. Perhaps it was used in
Thief 2 version 1.07 (the unpatched original version), but I am not certain. Maybe one day I'll play through it again to check that out, but not today.
jtr7 on 19/4/2009 at 04:06
You know that FMs are made by fans and not LGS, right? When talking about OMs, FMs don't factor in as official. UNUSED doesn't mean never used by the fans in over 700 FMs, it means never used in the official LGS games. No, that conversation is never used at all in the official games. None of it. There are more than one occasion when the Smart Guard snaps at the Dumb Guard and calls him "Taffer!":angel:
Meisterdieb on 19/4/2009 at 19:25
Maybe you have to consider as well that once you have played the Thief games several times and played a lot - a whole lot- of FMs it may become a little difficult to remember whether a certain conversation is actually used in the OMs - especially, as baeuchlein points out, when that conversation is clearly done by the official voice actors.
jtr7:
If a conversation or soundfile is in the original game, but not actually used in-game - is it official or not?
I'd say, yes, they are part of the canon
jtr7 on 19/4/2009 at 23:40
They are official insight to what the devs were thinking, but there are some unused materials that clash with the in-game materials, so I suggest a strong consideration of the whole of the in-game materials. Some things seem obviously omitted due to a mission having enough reading material or conversations as it is, but they are perfectly valid and harmless to the overall picture. Other things are leftovers from things that were intentionally discarded as not fitting. One must approach it from a scholarly point of view. If you notice, there are times when I happily point out a readable or conversation as worthy of the canon, even though it was unused. Yeah, I almost agree with you, except for the many items that really DON'T belong. I thank the devs for keeping the materials in the folders anyway, for the insight.
I understand things blurring together, but when someone knows and states they are referring to an FM, then there is no confusion as to where the material came from and should not be applied to the OM canon when it's been taken out of context. If I lift a conversation from a movie or novel and put it in my fanfiction or fan-made movie, I wouldn't dare call it canon, but a tribute to canon, or fan-service, or at worst, laziness and plagiarism, but I know the FM authors aren't lazy or plagiarising. If you quote something out of the original context, you've changed the meaning, and because the devs had no say in how it was used, it is no longer canon. If you need further illustration, I could quote you from something you said a year ago, and make you sound like you said something else entirely, by merely changing the context. I would be misquoting you if I did not keep to your intended meaning. Since FMs are made with love, blood, sweat, tears, hair-pulling, I know no malice is intended, but it should never be mistaken for canon just because it borrows material.
A replica of a famous monument is not THE famous monument, doesn't have the original's history, intent, meaning, or place in the world, no matter how impressive the replica is, and even if it is much better.
Meisterdieb on 20/4/2009 at 13:16
You're preaching to the choir, here, jtr7 :D
But let me elaborate on my previous post, because I just read it again and it doesn't really say what (
I think) I wanted to say. (Or maybe I just like to argue pointlessly, I don't know... ;) )
1) It's sometimes hard to know (without having a go at all the soundfiles etc) whether a conversation is from the OM, not actually used in game, or just from a FM (there are some missions that use dialogue that is
very close to the original stuff).
2) Soundfiles that are fan-made or from other sources (movies etc) are obviously not cano.
We have:
A) the (sound)files that are actually used in-game
B) (sound)files that are in the files but not actually used
C) any other files that fans mod ino their missions
It's clear that C) isn't canon, ever. As great as T2x or ANIR may seem, they are not canon.
A) is always canon (unless a power that be would decree otherwise, maybe)
It's another thing how you want to decide what B) should be called.
I was making my point
only about the
soundfiles, but - and I infered as much from your post- you obviously can (or should) use the same criteria when discussing any game material.
The problem is how you decide what of the unused material constitues canon.
There may be people who wouldn't consider unused material canon, but I say the more info we have the better. Exceptions may arise, especially if there are some (unused) files that contradict a used file.
I would say if any file doesn't contradict an existing fact and otherwise only adds "flair" or ambience to the game, then it can safely be considered canon.
2 Examples to illustrate my point There's one unused conversation in Masks (or Casing, the two missions are confusing) with a Hammerite priest and a servant. I don't know why it isn't used (I seem to remember someone telling me there was a bug involved or something) but it clearly (to me) seems to belong and also fit into the game and is therefore canon.
Another one where I wouldn't consider the material canon is the case of some strange monster that came up in this (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125687) thread and here
Inline Image:
http://www.tesp.co.uk/spidera.GIF.
Since the devs changed that monster enough (into the small white spiders IIRC) it is evident that they decided against this monster, and it isn't canon.
Do we have soundfiles that contradict "known" facts of the game in TDP/TG and TMA? What about TDS?
jtr7 on 20/4/2009 at 21:56
Half the time I describe things in ThiefGen, I feel like it SHOULD be preaching to the choir, but the questions and statements seem to indicate otherwise, so I play along.:cheeky:
I like the creepy conversation between the priest and masked servant. There's nothing buggy about, but it's not in-game. But because I like it, and the Priest is given a name in DromEd, I just go ahead and call him Huxley. It's not strict canon, but it's given the honour of Effectively Canon.
Thanks for breaking it down for me, so I can see where you are coming from.:cool:
I've mentioned elsewhere that well-made FMs deserve to be honoured, but should never be called Thief canon. There really is more confusion over it than I know what to do with, so I get intense about it.:o
