Starker on 2/4/2014 at 12:01
Quote:
Unsure it’ll ever be told now, Brosius described for me her vision of the trilogy’s end, which would decisively resolve its thematic clash of technology and nature and the moral conflicts within Garrett. “I think Garrett was ready to accept that there are consequences to his actions … [he'd become] a different person, and his path would be a different one — probably one where he is finally ready to give, rather than always take.”
(
http://www.salon.com/2000/06/20/dark_glass/)
Platinumoxicity on 2/4/2014 at 21:01
Quote Posted by ClashWho
And just the basic rules of storytelling tell us that that's exactly what he does. That's not just some throwaway scene at the end of Deadly Shadows. And there's no point in pretending that the intro to Dark Project wasn't like that, because
it wasI don't see changes in how Garrett behaves from the first game to the last to the extent that the continuation you propose would be anything more than this. Nonsensical extrapolation from loose bits of information, grounded on some arbitrary "rules of storytelling." That's what it always sounds to me. Not a logical next step, but the use of a trope out of some misplaced sense of necessity. This happened when that happened, and because this happened again, that must follow once more. Not because of evidence significant to the latter case, but because it's dramatic presentation is aesthetically pleasing in some way. I'm sorry but I won't engage in speculation of anything in those terms. I don't like the idea of dismissing a new valid scientific theory just because it doesn't look as pretty than E=mc², or supporting a false one just because it does.
onetruekeeper on 15/4/2014 at 10:23
Quote Posted by Starker
When I decided that the new game I'd like to see would be about a new keeper organisation. One that relies on espionage and careful manipulation of events. One that isn't made of morons and murderers.
As for the old keeper order, they are incompetent idiots and should be left for their own devices. They would make excellent villains for the new game. For example, you could have a mission to get back some of the keeper property that some of the old guard decided to grab for themselves. Similarly, you could have a mission to get back things that the city watch confiscated.
Did you even read my version? What plot holes does it have? There's nothing that a proper writer wouldn't be able to solve. In fact, it makes the pagans more interesting and believable and deals with the power vacuum left by the mechanists.
Quote Posted by Platinumoxicity
Wait. Now you've suddenly decided that Garrett is the leader of the keepers? When did that happen? And what about the keeper order who were suddenly revealed? The baron and the City Watch are not going to apprehend and question this mysterious group that appeared out of nowhere right after the night of living murder statues? Feel free to explain that somehow.
And were the keepers actually aware of the failsafe and Garrett's purpose? Do they all look up to him as the hero, or do they despise him for taking away their abilities by acting rashly and using the glyph to defeat Gamall? Afterall, Gamall did attempt to obscure the prophecy. Even if you did manage to ignore the political repercussions of the keepers' unveiling, do the keepers actually think that Garrett did exactly what he was supposed to do? Or is he now more shunned than ever? There was no post-ending walk'n'talk with Artemus due to his death. Garrett didn't join the former keepers to talk things through and wonder about the future, he sat alone and said nothing.
The story really can go anywhere, but it would seem like your continuation is filled with massive plot holes, unexplained assumptions and just important details that you have failed to factor in. It's just an arbitrary extrapolation from a fraction of all the available factors, with some fairly big leaps. Wait... you wouldn't happen to be the writer of NuThief would you?
Garrett could make a good leader because he is still an important element in the Keeper prophecies. He does not have to be a leader in residence but consulted for jobs that need his expertise.
onetruekeeper on 16/4/2014 at 08:15
Quote Posted by Platinumoxicity
Wait. Now you've suddenly decided that Garrett is the leader of the keepers? When did that happen? And what about the keeper order who were suddenly revealed? The baron and the City Watch are not going to apprehend and question this mysterious group that appeared out of nowhere right after the night of living murder statues? Feel free to explain that somehow.
And were the keepers actually aware of the failsafe and Garrett's purpose? Do they all look up to him as the hero, or do they despise him for taking away their abilities by acting rashly and using the glyph to defeat Gamall? Afterall, Gamall did attempt to obscure the prophecy. Even if you did manage to ignore the political repercussions of the keepers' unveiling, do the keepers actually think that Garrett did exactly what he was supposed to do? Or is he now more shunned than ever? There was no post-ending walk'n'talk with Artemus due to his death. Garrett didn't join the former keepers to talk things through and wonder about the future, he sat alone and said nothing.
The story really can go anywhere, but it would seem like your continuation is filled with massive plot holes, unexplained assumptions and just important details that you have failed to factor in. It's just an arbitrary extrapolation from a fraction of all the available factors, with some fairly big leaps. Wait... you wouldn't happen to be the writer of NuThief would you?
Are we certain Artemus is really dead? Perhaps the Hag only used his form to get to Garrett. Artemus may have safely escaped from the Hag and is now laying low from the Baron's minions. He could still be "keeping" a covert watch on Garrett to observe and record for future generations of Keepers how the "Keeper of the prophecies" fulfilled all that was written about him.:ebil:
Ghostly on 16/4/2014 at 11:18
Artemus is most likely to be dead, everything Hag used for shaping to has turned out dead, just like the little girl.
I enjoyed reading this topic it was very interesting to see other fellow players and frmo some of the original key people behind the birth of franchise, views on how they would envision into future with a 4th sequel, I will share mine here but take note that this is merely just a personal opinion of my own envision.
With first game being about the pagans, second about the hammerites and third about the keepers, I would think a fourth installment could be about a new danger as a consequence from the actions of Garrett through the first three installments.
With every order getting their relic back their fanatical beliefs would further go into extreme and possibly motivate them for more petty boarder skirmishes within the city with pagans and what little is left of hammerites, more backstory of Karras would-be ambitious had he not been interfered with, but while all these petty skirmishes occure within the city and with baron returning back he would go on political skirmish against the now revealed order of Keepers with all glyphs destroyed that used to seal them into secrecy before, the new danger would come from the Cragscleft mountains from a secretful Hand Brotherhood order who's ambitions always been to take over the city and seeks the advantage now that the city is in political turmoil.
But to make sure my opinion isn't misunderstood it wouldn't be in any typical war-like/revolution like atmosphere for the game but more discreet and political style of wars that you wouldn't notice too much about when strolling around in the middle of night in most cases, that soothing atmosphere of feeling the city in slumber and its inhabitans not care as much about politics but just the most extreme group of orders with their beliefs and more developed story of how Garrett secretfully saved the city by interfering with the hand brotherood order that would otherwise have started war with undead-like curse/spell castings that would in comparisen for Pagans to pale out from.
With my personal envision here I could imagine a name for the game like "Thief - The Corrupted Brotherhood" which sounds quite okay and to the point in a somewhat sophisticated way.
onetruekeeper on 16/4/2014 at 15:15
For a sequel I would like to see the return of Constantine who will be brought back to life due to the Primal ritual conducted by the Baron during the beginning of Thief somehow also reaching down into the Maw where his corpse still lay. Constantine now seeks revenge against Garrett and resurrects Victoria from the ruins of Soulforge. Together they plan the destruction of Garrett and the City but Victoria still has feelings for Garrett which she hides from Constantine and has to choose which side she will be loyal to.:cheeky:
Platinumoxicity on 17/4/2014 at 17:55
This is just my opinion but I don't think Constantine should be resurrected. Or if he is, he'd be undead, just like every other dead creature that walks in Thief. Who knows, maybe the fake Eye that the hammerites created made sure the even that would be impossible. I think it's just way too stereotypical and cheesy for something to be somehow "immortal" just because he was worshipped as "a god" by primitives thousands of years ago. As far as we know, immortality doesn't exist in Thief. Arcane magic, elementalism, necromancy and glyphs, yes. But everything dies. Constantine was a very powerful creature, there's no question about that. But remember, he wasn't strong enough to oppose a civilization that managed to invent iron weapons and harness magical powers.* He went into hiding when the Order of The Hammer was established, and he had to recruit a thief to accomplish the goal of his dark project. He needed the powers of an artifact created by the Keepers to re-establish his dominance, and he didn't even possess the power to do that on his own. You can read from his research that he needed to resort to some type of natural alchemy to incapacitate the Eye in order to siphon its power. Otherwise the Eye would probably have just used him instead, for its own amusement just like what happened to the old quarter when the hammerites pissed it off by trying to control it. And the hammerites' attempts at control were just limited to trying to lock it into a safe, not trying take over the world with it.
So I think the Trickster was just a pretty badass demon, deified but not omnipotent. Not some cosmic creator of a universe. More like a pharaoh or an emperor, just with magical power rather than political influence. A relic of history that the world left behind long ago. He is the chaos of nature that humanity crawled away from, and he couldn't keep up with them, even by exploiting the powers that humanity had discovered in spite of him. A pretty sad story really. He was just wishing for the old days to return. :(
Still, as I said. Nothing in the canon actually prevents him from being resurrected as some sort of a powerful zombie or one of those ghostly apparitions. That's less far-fetched than "immortality by definition" at least, since there's loads of evidence for the possibility of the former and none for the latter. It just depends on how powerful you think the weapon of the hammerites was in killing him, and how powerful a necromancer you think would require to resurrect something like the Trickster.
onetruekeeper on 18/4/2014 at 04:47
The Primal is supposed to be the source of most of the magic, including necromancy so I see no problems in seeing Constantine coming back to life through the effects of the Primal when it was unleashed during the ritual performed by Baron Northcrest. However I don't see EM bringing back any of the characters and factions we know of in the sequel to Thief. The current Thief story is almost a total disconnect from the previous Thief games and I predict that the next installment will be totally unrecognizable and may not even involve Garrett as the main character. Perhaps it will take place in a futuristic setting and will be similar to System Shock and Deus Ex and it will be a console only game. It is obvious that EM is showing nothing but contempt for the hardcore Thief fans by not even providing a disc for the PC version in the U.S.. I guess this is the end of Thief as we know and love. Back to the fan missions!:ebil:
Platinumoxicity on 18/4/2014 at 07:22
Well I'm not actually even considering a sequel to NuThief, but a Thief IV. Taking place in the first unwritten era. The so-called "future" in NuThief is too ridiculous with its crazy amount of coincidental recurring names to be taken seriously. The name-dropping literally makes no sense whatsoever, it's much more sensible for all of the names, including "Garrett" to be dismissable as misguided attempts at poor fanservice towards a group outside the target demographic, rather than parts of canon lore. The game would be less bad if all those names would be replaced with new ones. It would probably end up eliminating so many inconsistencies that the game would actually be less comprised of plot holes than actual plot.
And in my opinion, the primal is a pretty dull concept. Some generic magic that literally gives you "magic poisoning" when you try to control it. Yeah, none of that "power corrupts" nonsense, where newfound magical might ends up being your downfall due to your own actions. Though I have to admit that there is the thing about not putting clichés in Thief. There is no great power and great responsibility. No temptation of the dark side of the force. Just magic, and it kills you because you're weak. I guess that is somewhat original. I just don't think it fits, considering that NuThief is trying to exist in the same universe as the Thief trilogy.
Sycamoyr on 18/4/2014 at 23:45
If Thief 4 would have been a true reboot, I would have liked a Thief 3 prequel. I always thought there seemed to be a gap between TMA and DS. I would have liked to see more wrap up after Thief 2; the aftermath of the Mechanist downfall and the subsequent rise of the Hammerites back into power. I felt that the Hammerites didn't fight back as hard as they should have against the Mechanists taking over their influence and there was no true confrontation between them, though much griping on the side of the Hammers. How did the city recover from the mechanist destruction of vegetation? Did the pagans have a hand in restoring anything? Would the hammers have been opposed to this? It would have made a good setting for a religious conflict between all three parties.
