Jarvis on 25/5/2009 at 01:36
"No single player Thief experience comes close to the intense satisfaction that I have felt from ghosting past bands of very intelligent, skillful, and thorough human players. It's one thing to have AI walking in the same redundant patrol paths as you leave. It's another thing entirely when four or five thinking people are left wondering "WTF?!?" as they suddenly discover that loot they were camping has mysteriously gone missing."
~Me, from earlier in this thread...
What you describe, hikikomori-san, is your experience and why it means so much to you. What my above quote describes is my experience and why it means so much to me.
So what makes your experience so much more important or real than mine? Not a thing. I appreciate that you enjoy the Immersion of the single player game. I do to, believe me. But don't dictate to me the only "classy" way to play Thief. It's known as a the "No true Scotsman" logical fallacy.
If you don't like multiplayer, then don't play it.
The Magpie on 25/5/2009 at 01:53
Quote Posted by 1861721;'hikikomori-san'
I don't need to try anything to be able to tell that
I had so many retorts to this that I needed to take a break in order to retain a modicum of civility.
Of course the mood of a game changes somewhat in the company of another human. In many ways it's
enhanced. Otherwise I would hardly have bothered with my MP advocacy. Judging by your comments, I really don't get the impression you've witnessed multiplayer games played by mature people. You'd be very surprised.
But you still haven't explained why the very presence of a MP option would destroy
your personal Thief 4 experience, since you evidently don't plan on using it.
Quote Posted by 1861721;'hikikomori-san'
And yes, having a social experience around playing thief is ridiculous. There, I said it.
You''re partly right. Writing on the TTLG Thief social forums about playing Thief may force us to endure some ridiculous experiences.
--
L.
mxleader on 25/5/2009 at 02:23
I say focus on single player. I have played a few different multi-player games/sims and some are fun and work well, others are garbage. I have enjoyed games that are single player only more than games that offer both. Single player mode allows total immersion, whereas multi-player ... well just imagine trying to sneak around on a rooftop and some kid starts yelling in your ear because you are acting like a noob. No thanks! I'll take single player only.
Taffer36 on 25/5/2009 at 03:00
I don't understand this bizarre argument that Thief must somehow be an experience that can ONLY be enjoyed by loners.
Singleplayer and multiplayer games inherently offer different experiences. Just because Thief shipped with only one of those doesn't somehow negate the possibility of the other.
hikikomori-san on 25/5/2009 at 04:07
Quote Posted by Jarvis
So what makes your experience so much more important or real than mine? Not a thing. I appreciate that you enjoy the Immersion of the single player game. I do to, believe me. But don't dictate to me the only "classy" way to play Thief. It's known as a the "No true Scotsman" logical fallacy.
If you don't like multiplayer, then don't play it.
I dictated nothing. I merely expressed my opinion on multiplayer and why I think it's not suitable for Thief, and I also remarked upon my surprise to find that the community thinks different. And I wouldn't think less of a game simply for having multiplayer in it when I can simply ignore it, but not always can single player and multiplayer be implemented completely separately such that one won't affect the other, even if just in level design.
Quote:
I had so many retorts to this that I needed to take a break in order to retain a modicum of civility.
Well, gee, thanks! You see, I seem to have failed to mention earlier that I have psychic powers, and The Builder speaks to me. He said to me: "At no time shall multiplayer ever be introduced into the world of The Thief, since it wouldst sucketh". That's why I don't have to try it to know it would suck. You on the other hand, normal people, can not make such a conclusion until you actually try multiplayer. Praise be to The Builder.
Quote:
You''re partly right. Writing on the TTLG Thief social forums about playing Thief may force us to endure some ridiculous experiences.
Yeah, sorry about that. I must be out of my mind thinking "capture the loot" wouldn't be awesomeness.
Quote:
I don't understand this bizarre argument that Thief must somehow be an experience that can ONLY be enjoyed by loners.
Singleplayer and multiplayer games inherently offer different experiences. Just because Thief shipped with only one of those doesn't somehow negate the possibility of the other.
Really? You're saying they offer inherently different experiences, so what's there not to understand? The single player experience has been rich and successful, while the multiplayer one will be different (and sucky IMO). Again, if you are talking about adding multiplayer completely separately without it having ANY effect on the single player gameplay (including mechanics, level design, and overall quality), then nobody can say anything against that (except maybe complain about the additional unnecessary disk space).
[EDIT]Actually, as my screen name suggests, I'm a (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikikomori) hikikomori (not Japanese though), which may explain my quarrel against multiplayer Thief, although I don't think I'm alone in this.
That's the last I have to say about this. See you all when Thi4f is out.
Taffer36 on 25/5/2009 at 05:31
So basically you're Mr. Antisocial? Why are you using a Japanese name? GOD WHY DO THE ANTISOCIAL ONES FLOCK TO MY CULTURE?
And you completely missed the point of my post. My point is that if the two experiences are meant to be different, then saying that the lack of atmosphere and story in the multiplayer will be what kills it is a bollocks argument, because the point of multiplayer has never been to give either of these features.
Not to mention the over-generalization by many that multiplayer MUST be some form of pure deathmatch or standard fare.
rainynight65 on 25/5/2009 at 06:04
Quote Posted by The Magpie
That argument is easily turned on its head. A short SP campaign is slapped on a decent MP game just to snare in some disconnected peeps, cf. Q3A. Boo.
Apples and oranges. Boo.
Quote Posted by The Magpie
Games are notoriously short nowadays anyway, MP or not. (But I dare you to call StarCraft's or Quake's MP "fake longevity".) So if you're addressing the "main problem" in current industry trends, then you're missing the point.
I never said that any MP was 'fake longevity'. There are games which are well suited for MP and there are games which aren't. An earlier poster said that MP was compulsory in modern games, but I still disagree. Then again, I also think that it is not necessary to try and adapt every possible genre to the console and its limitations. Don't get me wrong, I own a decent gaming PC as well as an X360, but I still think that they should stay out of each other's turfs. Why are games short nowadays? Because more resources go into creating graphics and effects, and less into crafting stories and gameplay. There has been a paradigm shift among gamers during the last decade or so. I can remember times when a game was called short if it provided 20 hours of gameplay. Now we can be happy if we get half of that. And more often than not an MP mode is slapped onto it to 'make up' for the lack of SP experience. MP will not add any value to a crappy SP game.
Quote Posted by The Magpie
The point being that EM is going to create a new
Thief game, not just another decent, but run-of-the-mill shooter title. The trends should therefore be less relevant. Even if there might be a lot to be learned from them. Even if co-op gaming story mode has just started to become popular on the consoles. Even if times are different now.
Oh, one can only hope that the trend is less relevant. And I seriously hope that EM will try to make the best game possible, not the game with the broadest appeal possible. I don't expect them to make TMA with a new engine, but I would like them to recreate as much of the original Thief atmosphere as possible, while carefully integrating new elements or refining existing ones.
Quote Posted by The Magpie
I'm so surprised to witness in these two weeks since the announcement what I perceive as a backlash against official Thief multiplayer, when on the old forums, when LGS was still alive, there were long threads enthusiastically dedicated to multiplayer suggestions. And when it's been known for such a long time that LGS didn't mind Thief MP per se
As far as I am concerned, my argument is not against MP per se. I am sure that a properly thought-out MP mode could add a lot to Thief. But, and this is a big one - doing that requires a lot of brainstorming, testing, experimenting and resources. The question is, how willing is a semi-broke publisher to invest that kind of resources into a series that has a fanatical but comparatively small following, and has never been a top seller?
Quote Posted by The Magpie
As you can see, this is
NOT equal to the
"I fret for the SP experience not being PERFECT 'cause they spent some resources on MP development". But like hexhunter points out, that is currently the
only real argument against
It is also the most valid argument against. There have been numerous attempts in the past to take a tried-and-true recipe and add to it in order to appeal to a broader audience. And there have been a lot more instances where such an attempt failed. Not only did it fail in attracting new blood, it also put off the already established fan base. Deus Ex 2 is probably one of the prime examples for that. Now if I am going to get a half-baked Thief SP game with an even more half-baked MP mode, then I'd rather have no Thief 4 at all. And, considering trends in the industry, the chances for that are a lot higher than if EM concentrate exclusively on SP - and maybe use the proceeds from the game to create a standalone MP later.
Quote Posted by The Magpie
And I find this line of thinking so very tedious and reactionary it bores me to tears, because what I hear is just another way of saying what I already know: That you love the game(s) as they are and prefer playing the way you're used to. Which is, necessarily, single player. As Garrett. With rope arrows. Blah blah.
Firstly - what's wrong with reiterating a successful or working formula? There are games out there that are doing exactly that, over and over and over, and noone complains. SIMS anyone? Now we are not talking about some run-of-the-mill FPS here, we are talking about a game that defined a genre - albeit a small one with comparatively few followers and not many imitators.
Quote Posted by The Magpie
But that argument is IMNSHO particularly worthless because it can be used for
ANY new element that you're not entirely sure about, just to stay on the safe side. Imagine what you'd have said about TDP: "Oh noes, I fear LGS is gonna spend resources adding zombies and supernatural stuff while Garrett still lacks visible FEET! The immersion must be PERFECT! Or I'll blame the zombies."
There has to be a balance between playing it safe and integrating new elements. Innovation is good if it serves the experience - innovation for innovation's sake is not so good. Personally I liked the new elements TDS brought in, and I hope that they will at least take a few of those up for Thief 4. Some others were debatable, but all in all I thought they were on the right path. But there is no need to change the fundamentals of the gameplay if they are working. And in Thief they definitely are working. If you try to change a great recipe, it can go one of two ways - you succeed brilliantly or you fail miserably. Yes, there is a bit of in-between, but most attempts to create a successor to a great game while altering the fundamental mechanics went horribly wrong. Again, see Deus Ex 2.
Quote Posted by The Magpie
But at the same time, I actually wouldn't be disappointed at all if Thief 4 was multiplayer-only, with no Garrett anywhere. It's the one thing I've always missed the most about the official Thief series.
I'd probably be disappointed if Thief 4 had to be MP only. That's not to say I wouldn't give it a try. But then it had better be absolutely fucking brilliant.
FriendlyStranger on 25/5/2009 at 09:40
Quote Posted by rainynight65
Honestly - I don't concur with the 'take what you can get' attitude. Because that's one of the factors that has enabled the industry to go the way it has gone. Ten years ago, gamers should have started protesting against half-finished, bug-riddled and patch-heavy games. Instead they just kept buying whatever the hype made them believe they had to have. That's one of the reasons why nowadays we have to deal with uninspired, buggy crap software. There have been very few exceptions...
And what would have been your suggestion to counter this development? Its absolutely unthinkable that gamers unite and say, hey look Stalker was only about 1/3 of what they promised +buggy, lets all together not buy this game. A few would stick with you but all the others...
I don't say I like the attitude, and I don't live by it, but to change things for the Thief 4 release its far too late... you would need a very broad basis of gamers to influence a multi billion dollar industry. In 1-2 years things won't change, I expect them to get worse - so lets face reality and not state idealistic dreams, that will be ignored.
Addition: The latest development of releasing really shitty games (bugged+content lack+hyped) started in November 2008 with L4D. You can't blame people for buying it, cause 90% of the press gave out ridiculous overratings - you wouldn't see such a thing coming, alas you wait a few weeks. The next example was DOW2, absolutely the same way from a company that normally releases great games like Company of Heroes... I mean you can't really counter the success of a game when this success is based on a conspiration of game mags, press and the developers. These games were sort of an ambush. How counter that when people buy it in the first few days, cause they trust a certain company like valve?
rainynight65 on 25/5/2009 at 11:37
Honestly - I have no suggestion, and I fear it may already be too late to change anything about this development. You can't really trust the big gaming magazines anymore because none of them will call an overhyped game crappy even if it is crappy - they're too dependent on advertising sales in order to piss off the big publishers. And that did not start yesterday. Remember Black & White? That was possibly one of the most overhyped games which delivered the least of what it promised, yet the press loved it, and hardly anyone called EA and Lionhead on this obvious failure. A recent development however is publishers trying to gag the press if they actually write a less-than-euphoric review of a new release.
I really have no solutions or suggestions at this point in time. All I can do is observe and draw my own conclusions.
FriendlyStranger on 25/5/2009 at 12:12
Quote Posted by rainynight65
Remember Black & White?
Black and White !? That was the reason why I stopped buying these magazines... man I was pissed about the creature. Funny though they never stopped kissing Molineux' ass... this man is mainly hot air -every game the same.. think of the Fable announcements...
The next possibility to get reliable infos would be sites like metacritic, but I don't think they are immune to manipulation either, additionally the users seem to take part in hypes happily.
In the past I spent quite some time counter arguing these "wrong" reviews on forums etc. But when trying so, you do not only have to quarrel with the editors, no there are also the fanboys of the magazines/companies which are not open to reality and perform die-hard company-defense for free(<--?).
I think I will wait a bit longer and look what they make out of Thief, but recently I'm thinking about getting a new hobby anyway - gaming was funny back then, when not everyone was doing it, when there were lots of fresh ideas. Nowadays it has became crowded and uninspiring - here on the internet and everywhere else ... and "crowded" is something a real thief-fan isn't too fancy of - I guess.
But Thief 4 could still get one of the rare exemptions like F3. Bethesda learned from Oblivion (random/scalable loot tables - bah) EM could learn from what Ion Storm did. So there definitely is some hope.
