jtr7 on 8/11/2007 at 07:34

---

Nice example. And coincidentally, my co-worker and I were discussing his Bogey collection tonight. He was quoting his favorite scenes.

jtr7 on 27/3/2008 at 23:34

---

It could be said that Garrett enjoys games of one-upmanship. Several examples come to mind....:sly:

jtr7 on 28/3/2008 at 00:27

---

Not only had I tweaked my memory weeks ago about "Ken's" statement of Garrett's amorality, I've also drastically changed my mind about the "amoral to moral" shift.

Here's what you are referring to, Larris?:

"I remember back when we were working on Thief...the original version of the mission where you're supposed to kill a local crime boss had you being hired by a bunch of merchants to assassinate the guy. They didn't like him because he was shaking them down and they wanted him dead. So your mission was to go into the guy's home and murder him, taking what you will along the way.

There were a lot of people at Looking Glass who were uncomfortable with this. So they insisted that the mission be rewritten that Ramirez tried to kill you first. I thought it was a cop out. Garrett wouldn't need to be motivated in self defense. He was motivated by money. That's what defined him."

Which is what much of the middle of TMA's plot centered around, with Garrett trying to find out who was trying to kill him. And he worried about that again in TDS.

I'll add this bit of trivia from M90GOALS, only 'cause I was reminded of it, heh heh:

"Goal: Get Ramirez and bring him to this room.

Hard: Don't kill him.

Expert: Don't kill anyone."

And from the same interview there's this, too, right?:

"When I did the original plot for Thief, I tried to make Garrett (or Palmer, as he was originally known) a guy with no ideology except himself. He got stuck in the middle of larger forces, each driven by a strong and opposing ideological bent (the Hammers and the Trickster)."

Quotes come from this copy of the TTLG interview with Ken:

(http://www.bioshock-online.com/interviews/irrationaljuly06.asp) http://www.bioshock-online.com/interviews/irrationaljuly06.asp

And then from the interview up at Evil Avitar:

"...What's interesting about thief is that Garrett is more moral than the powers that be. Because at very least, he's honest about who he is. Everybody else hides behind a moral proposition or an ideology to cover up their greed and cruelty. Garret (sic) just puts it out there.

I like to think that we were creating of one of gaming's first anti-heroes.

...Most heroes in games just take on the tasks given to them because, they're, well, the heroes. I wanted Garret (sic) to be motivated by things that every day people could understand: money, women, and a sense of ownership of his own body."

To which I agree in the sense that the major and minor "factions" Garrett deals with are so corrupt and immoral that the criminal Garrett looks good. He's not moral, but he straddles the fence, and mostly looks out for himself. So yeah, Ken Levine didn't use the word "amoral", but I don't see how he is not. Now that's the way to challenge somebody. Thanks Larris!:cool:

I APOLOGISE TO THE HANDFUL OF PEOPLE THAT MAY HAVE TAKEN MY SCREW-UP TO HEART AS FACT! I SKEWED YOUR PERCEPTIONS! I'VE MOVED ON AND FORGOT TO TELL YOU!

In the last 4 months, my opinion has since shifted away a bit from what I'd said then, as reflected in the more recent threads. Confabulation is a constant threat whenever one goes by early memories and impressions rather than revisiting the source.

jtr7 on 28/3/2008 at 00:44

---

:joke:

nicked on 28/3/2008 at 13:00

---

Weakness for women would definitely make the character seem less in control of himself. His weakness for money doesn't come across as a weakness, it is instead his driving force, and the main motivation in the plot. If Garrett had a weakness for women in the same way, we'd have seen a very different plot, centred around lust rather than greed. And then, as Garrett went around frobbing prostitutes, we'd realise we were actually playing Grand Theft Auto.