sNeaksieGarrett on 31/10/2009 at 15:46
You mean from point A to point B back to point A again?
jtr7 on 31/10/2009 at 16:07
Yep.
Alias on 31/10/2009 at 23:37
Quote Posted by Captain Spandex
...but floating fireballs that shoot
other floating fireballs in Thief 1 aren't stupid at
all. :rolleyes:
It's all personal taste. It's just a shame that your personal taste is so terrible.
I can see where JC_Denton is coming from though. While I could tolerate the robots, the security cameras bugged me. There are two things that make a "modern" setting for a game. Guns and security cameras. While Thief 2 thankfully did not add guns (though the launching of explosive balls at high speed could be considered somewhat gun-like) they did have security cameras. Robots and security cameras are characteristic more of a "modern" setting than a Thiefy setting, so it was something of a disappointment. They explained it well enough that I could accept it, but I would have been happier without the security cameras even if they did have to add robots.
Fireballs that shoot fireballs and even the undead are surely silly, but they are part of original thief universe. Robots brought the thief universe rapidly into "modern" times which took away some of what made it thief (as opposed to a Deus Ex where that stuff fit in fine). Thankfully one of the things Thief Deadly Shadows got right was the removal of the robotic elements that Thief 2 had. I am not knocking Thief 2 though. I was very glad that Thief 2 removed almost all of the “beast” type creatures (i.e. fire elementals, burricks, rat men, bug beasts, cray men, and magic spiders). I enjoy the creepy feeling of an undead level, but monsters did nothing for me.
jtr7 on 1/11/2009 at 00:15
Fireballs that shoot other fireballs? When? I'll have to look into that. Considering they are sentient and territorial, and creatures of most types in real life fight amongst themselves--as we do, stupidly--I don't see the stupidity in territorial guards/guardians duking it out.
TMA was Thief Modern and it was steampunk. Get over it.
And once and for all, the monsters were essentially the same as human AIs. Cripes.
The security cameras of TMA were no different in essence than the ones in Cragscleft. They just looked different, had different sounds, and the extra little alert-level light, but the game-mechanic was the same and built upon the Cragscleft version. The eyeball plants are another version, without the alarm link. Same thing, but your imagination made you think otherwise.
Cragscleft and Ramirez' mansion had alarm systems. The Bonehoard had proximity sensors, as well as Constantine's manor.
You treat all the same way: Study before moving, watch for patterns and plan your move... Stay out of the cones of vision... Be quiet. Or keep behind, above, or below, don't alert them, and take them out with a single hit from the appropriate piece of equipment.
JC_Denton on 1/11/2009 at 09:05
Quote Posted by Captain Spandex
...but floating fireballs that shoot
other floating fireballs in Thief 1 aren't stupid at
all. :rolleyes:
firstly, they didn't shoot each other, secondly - are you saying that all fantasy universes and games are stupid because there's magic in them? you must be missing out a LOT then. maybe i wouldn't mind a Thief game in a modern or futuristic setting, Deus Ex is a very good example. all i'm saying is that there is no place for robots in the original Thief universe. if everything went well for Looking Glass, in Thief 3 we woulda seen missions on rusty space ships and receive our mission objectives in PDAs? would that still work for you?
Namdrol on 1/11/2009 at 09:17
The beauty of the robots was they were purely mechanical not electronic.
And it's been shown that they are technically feasible . (not that that should be an issue, in any game a certain suspension of disbelief is needed).
But in the Thief universe we've seen "tech" of one sort or another from the start.
Think about the Haunted Cathedral and the power grid system. And you gave 10/10 for TDP
Why is this acceptable and 'bots not?
And the whole rational behind TMA was the rise of tech.
edit. but yea I see you dislike TMA because of this last point.
jtr7 on 1/11/2009 at 10:11
There is all kinds of precedence for clockwork steampunk devices in the Thief Universe. It's not futuristic, Thief is full of anachronisms and technical marvels before TMA, that would be far in our future. Why is fantasy only in the past and sci-fi only in the future. That thinking is unoriginal and complete BS.
Vae on 1/11/2009 at 10:31
Exactly...that's one of the things that I love about THIEF...it transcends that typical past-fantasy/future-science paradigm...it's timeless fantasy...:D
Goldmoon Dawn on 1/11/2009 at 18:13
Quote Posted by JC_Denton
if everything went well for Looking Glass, in Thief 3 we woulda seen missions on rusty space ships and receive our mission objectives in PDAs? would that still work for you?
lol
In order to predict what LGS *would have* done, one must first understand why they did the robot thing in the first place. For example, do you think that it was a random choice to have robots used so heavily in the game? Perhaps they put some thought into the decision? How much time do you think that the team put into the decision? Where did they get the idea to have a "metal age" that descends upon the "steampunk world that coexists uneasily with magic"? No, friend, your example of what they *would have* done is uninformed and as such completely off the mark. Amusing though. :)
sNeaksieGarrett on 1/11/2009 at 21:20
OH! Nice come back JTR.. Way to show the flaws in the "well tma is unrealistic with its cameras" bullshit.:thumb:
Seriously, get over it guys... It's a fictional game we're discussing anyway. Thief was never that realistic - but what game is? Even Call of Duty is unrealistic. (e.g. -respawning) It's called entertainment, and so, it's perfectly fine to have fictional stuff.... Now, that's not to say that a realistic game isn't necessarily fun, because it can be fun in the challenge kind of way.
