No, not another "will there be thief4" thread, but... - by Flux
jtr7 on 13/4/2008 at 18:34
Agreed.
I wouldn't be opposed to leaving a way for fans to edit one in, so they can have their fun, but definitely not a part of the official gameplay.
Ah Nickie, now we get to the heart of it!:sly:
RavynousHunter on 13/4/2008 at 19:41
Sounds like a good idea ta me! Just don't make it as hard as it apparently is with Thief II, lol.
Gambit on 13/4/2008 at 19:41
Well there must be at least a minimal Multiplayer part. With a map or two. And then they could let the players use the editor to make more.
In fact any mission created in a T4 editor could be made co-op. The dromeder would just add additional player spawning points. Then any T4 FM could be single and multi.
jtr7 on 13/4/2008 at 19:45
So we agree there should be an interface, so it's not out of the question or a royal pain to establish multiplayer, and that there are fans who'd dig it enough for the developers to make it possible, without spending too much time on it, lest they compromise the game about the single, Keeper-trained, and independent thief.
Don't forget that Eidos Montreal has established that they will keep their teams smaller than average, so their time spent is even more important to us.
"...at EIDOS-MONTREAL, there's one major difference: we do everything to help our people achieve their goals, with, among other things:
- Closely-knit teams with a cap on demographics (max. 80 people)
..."
And this may make multiplayer a reality, rather than an option:
"The Montreal studio, which specializes in top quality video games for next generation consoles, will uphold the pursuit of excellence that permeates the Eidos culture."
Renault on 13/4/2008 at 20:22
I think most (I'm guessing 90%+) of Thief players don't care at all about multiplayer. I agree with Shadak, any attention given to multiplayer will detract from single player, so leave it out. Especially given the technical side of it, it's probably a resource hog. Not to mention that none of the previous Thief games had it.
And I don't think the fact that Thief4 would be made for "next generation consoles" means anything as far as multiplayer - everything these days is made for next generation consoles.
Martek on 13/4/2008 at 20:31
I'm one - I could not care less if and T4 had multiplayer.
Also it doesn't bother me at all if Garrett is not the main protagonist. But hopefully in a T4 the setting would allow him to have an occasionally visiting presence or something. Kind of like "old Ben" Kenobi in Star Wars - A New Hope.
(Lastly, why are the current-generation consoles like the Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii still called "next-gen"? They're current technology and they're getting older every day. Two or three years ago they were "next-gen". Now it's just a stupid buzzword if used to refer to those consoles.)
jtr7 on 13/4/2008 at 20:39
:thumb:
Personally, I have no interest in multiplayer, but since a lot of fans want to go up against other fans.... I suppose I should clarify and say I'm not opposed to multiplayer unless making it gets in the way of a pure Thief experience, and is not purely an option.
Yeah. "Next-Gen" means something different to the companies than the consumers. Same with "AAA titles". I couldn't find a definition of the term that wasn't a guess or different from another source.
Renault on 13/4/2008 at 20:45
Martek, agreed. I don't need Garrett as the main focus of Thief4, but I would love to see him still involved to some degree. It might even be cool if he acted as the narrator to the story, doing the voiceovers for the briefings.
But unlike others, I don't see why the focus can't be Garrett. Sure, the Keepers and Glyphs are history, but that doesn't mean The City will live on in prosperity from now until eternity. There's an infinite number of directions at Garrett-centric story could take.
nickie on 13/4/2008 at 21:10
Quote Posted by jtr7
Ah Nickie, now we get to the heart of it!:sly:
Beg pardon? Do enlighten me. ;)
Multi-player? Mmmm. It's hard to envisage that at all. I mean, I'm in my 'cupboard', lights out, OM/FM it's all the same (yes I know that's a heresy in itself), it's just me and a game. And reality is suspended. I can't imagine how multi-player would do anything other than break 'immersion'. I don't like the term but it's descriptive.
And I'm sorry if it's also heresy but I don't need Garrett either but wouldn't mind if it was him or not. I would like a character with similar attributes and obviously a story and a relevance and also a connection to T1/2 and TDS (whatever that story was).
To have been subjected (?) to shoot-em-up and nothing much else, to play Thief which is so utterly different and just completely suits me, I don't really mind what I get as long as it's in the same style and doesn't have cumbersome gameplay.
jtr7 on 13/4/2008 at 21:46
:thumb:
And I apologise if I've misunderstood your joke, Milady:
Quote:
...very nice voice indeed and
hardly 'American' at all.:cheeky:
--
How about taking established Thief game-mechanics--infiltration, disguise as a Hammer novice, eavesdropping and reading texts to learn about people and/or acquire new objectives, gathering information about an enemy's goals, etc.--and giving the player a mission that is about taking a job as a spy? Someone hires you to go somewhere in disguise, walk among the enemy in plain sight, acquire knowledge, and steal what you can without ever getting caught, or letting them know what you are up to. You learn something that makes you reluctant to tell your employer all you know. You return to your employer and the information you give gets you caught up in a scheme too deep to flee from, so you have to play it out, very carefully, stealing what you can 'cause that's who you are. You realise you made a mistake in telling that employer anything at all, but you know it wasn't a mistake to learn what you did. The rest of the game's main plot is about getting through alive, beating the employer to the punch before he/she can do something atrocious to many people and yourself, and using the information to turn the situation around to your favor (which so happens to be favorable to most others, as well).
