God.. they had it all in their hands and spoiled it completely...

RavynousHunter on 25/7/2006 at 03:07

i think since everyone else is posting thier opinions on TDS, i think mine should be heard as well.

here we go.... :rolleyes:

No Swimmable Water
I agree, this is kinda stupid. What happened? Did Garrett suddenly lose his ability to swim or what? If he could swim with a ton of loot on him in the 1st two games, why not this one? Engine limitation?

Body Awareness
Eeeh... Though it does add realism, it doesnt give DS that oh-so-nugat-filled feel of say Thief 2. However, if you dont like it, then just turn it off. Its right in one of the .ini's, just set it to "FALSE", easy.

Key Bindings
They key bindings were a bit confusing at first, ill admit. But once i got them down solidly, i did pretty well.

No Rope Arrows
No vine arrows either :cheeky: ! I think that this wouldve definately added to the oh-so-cheese-coated feel of the game, but hey, they were pressed for time and had to make a quick decision, can you really blame em? I do miss em, and i do think the wall climbing gloves are a bit contrived. :sweat:

Poor Death Animations/Ragdoll Physics
Now this part makes the game truly hilarious! :laff: Its like all the people of the city are spinless (anyone getting a slight hint here? :sly: ), but it provides quite a bit of fun when gassing a guard and watching his spine fold over into an upside down 'v' shape and his arms and legs flailing around and folding into completely unnatural positions. Good for a quick laugh. :)

Bad Lockpicking
eh? personally, i kinda liked the little "minigame", made me feel more like a thief. i dont despise minigames when implemented correctly, and the lockpicking thing was done pretty well, IMO.

Everything Else
Im not gonna write an essay here, instead, im simply gonna sum it up with this conclusion. TDS was ok, though it was by all means sub-par in comparison to its ancestors, but i liked it all the same, and i do count it as a pretty good addition to the Thief dynasty. They couldve done better, granted, but gotta consider that they were dealing with a pretty constricting time table for development, if they wouldve extended the deadline, then we prolly couldve seen rope arrows and all that, but dont blame Ion Storm for Eidos being a bunch of restrictive pricks. I just wish the bastards would release a free Dark Engine source or even release a 'Thief 1/G/2 Source', i guess kinda like CS Source, cuz id LOVE to toy with Thief and its innermost workings. :sly: Kinda like freezing someone, cutting them open, then changing things around to see what happens. :ebil:

metal dawn on 25/7/2006 at 03:12

This thread is winnar

ZylonBane on 25/7/2006 at 04:01

Quote Posted by RavynousHunter

Body Awareness
Eeeh... Though it does add realism, it doesnt give DS that oh-so-nugat-filled feel of say Thief 2. However, if you dont like it, then just turn it off. Its right in one of the .ini's, just set it to "FALSE", easy.

NO, WRONG, NOT EASY.

henke on 25/7/2006 at 05:47

Quote Posted by RavynousHunter

oh-so-nugat-filled ... oh-so-cheese-coated

Cut it out, you're making me hungry over here.

Dussander on 25/7/2006 at 10:51

Quote Posted by New Horizon

Well, we have to set the record straight. :) TDS was a good game, but it still doesn't measure up. That's not meant to discredit the developers, they were handed a bit of a dodgy engine to work with....I seriously wouldn't have wanted to be in their shoes. Basically trying to build a game with tools that are being built while you're using them. It's like trying to bang a nail when all you have is the handle of the hammer.

You have set the record straight, ages ago, repetitively. I don't see the need to keep complaining about something that we can't change. Leave the TDS fans be if they want to think of it as good as the originals. :tsktsk: Especially Goldmoon Dawn's intolerant drivel.

Goldmoon Dawn on 25/7/2006 at 12:37

Quote Posted by Dussander

Especially Goldmoon Dawn's intolerant drivel.

Yeah, well, fret thee not, Dustup.

For I am, slowly but surely, realising that defending two games and a company that died 6 years ago doesn't equal bashing a mockery and a dead company from what, 3 years ago now?

:)

Besides, I have always confined my intolerant "drivel" to the Thief board. However; if certain people don't keep these things alive, they have a greater chance of fading into obscurity. No, Golmoon, they will fade into obscurity nicely all by themselves. They don't need your attention.

At least with MightMagicIX, there was *no* retaliation as the game was clearly a failure to meet past standards across the board. These damn new Thief fans are just so, fickle!

Dussander, I suggest that we redouble our efforts in order to convert as many of these youngsters as possible! What exactly is a life of new video games that strive not for elite gameplay and design?!

Spitter on 25/7/2006 at 13:28

Quote Posted by Goldmoon Dawn

The way the arm raises when you are close to a guard. Thief I and II didn't do that, remember? :) Someone said before, what if you ghost behind a guard with NO intention of blackjacking? It makes the "auto-raise" kinda stupid and pointless.

Surely you don't have blackjack equipped if you have no intention of blackjacking.

ZylonBane on 25/7/2006 at 13:39

Maybe I do, maybe I don't. The game really isn't in any position to read my mind, so it shouldn't even try.

"Hey, you frobbed a locked door! That means you want to pick the lock!"

Goldmoon Dawn on 25/7/2006 at 14:16

Good one, Spitter, and fair enough.

But you and I both know that "auto-raise" was yet another weak 3rd person concession.

~s:a:n:i:t:y~ on 25/7/2006 at 14:45

The argument is so wanted it will never fade, would it?.....:(
Every single point stated has been stated so many times it has become clear to everyone, and still it goes on with the same enthusiasm.

Pity:(