Official: No Hammers. No Pagans. No Keepers.

Shayde on 18/6/2013 at 04:50

Quote Posted by thiefinthedark

In fact, they state in the Q&A that they've even renamed all the city quarters...

"I don't want to say we completely scrapped everything. We took a lot of inspiration from what made this city memorable. The connection might be a little different, but for us it's still the same. We haven't locked down the names of the new districts. We choose what matches best with what the old games have. Naturally we want to make it feel like it is the same place."

They might mean that they are giving names to new districts (that don't appear in T1,2,3) that match with the existing names of the old districts.

Chade on 18/6/2013 at 04:58

I think you could do a good prequel, although it probably would muck around with existing canon to some degree.

I'd cover Garrett's time with the Keepers and his early thieving career, introducing the crime lords seen threatening him in thief 1. By the end of the game Garrett should have established his independence from the Keepers and frightened the crime lords away.

Probably the main departure from canon would be that I'd want the Keepers to be initially reluctant to let Garrett go.

I don't think you could wring more then a game or two between the Keepers training and Bafford's, though. Garrett doesn't progress as a character in that time frame, so there's only so much you can do before the story would get a little unsatisfying.

You could probably do good episodic content in that time. There would be an understanding that everything goes back to normal at the end of each episode.

zacharias on 18/6/2013 at 09:18

Quote Posted by Renzatic

Most people here don't actually remember what it was like when they first played Thief. All those moments when they pulled out their sword, or used a few fire arrows to get out of a tough situation have long been lost to over a decade of ghosting through missions, perfecting their own techniques, and building upon their understanding of the series through thousands of discussions, fan missions, fan-fics, and fan art.

Really, most people here have come together and built up their collective idea of what would be make perfect Thief game in their heads over the years. Unfortunately, nothing anyone will ever make will ever come close to matching their expectations. What you're seeing here now is the inevitable outcome of someone making a sequel to the game a lot of people have dedicated a good chunk of their lives to studying, playing, and loving.

Whilst I think you have made a really good and valid point here, I think some of us Thief tragics are well aware that we have very demanding expectations, but are self aware enough to dial this back a bit and say, 'hang on then..I will settle for a current tech Thief style game, with good story, good storytelling (these two are not necessarily the same thing), and minimal things that break immersion'. Dishonoured was pretty awesome I reckon. If we get something of similar quality in Thief 4 I will be very happy with that.

I say Thief 4. But to me the Thief series is over; the legacy remains. This game is 'in the style of', which is fine with me.

Durinda D'Bry on 18/6/2013 at 10:09

Well, Keepers gone - dissolved because there is only the One True Keeper needed now, we knew that from Deadly Shadows ending. Well, Hammers and Pagans could destroy each other during war between them (mentioned in Deadly Shadows too: they did war preparations). I could accept it but find it quite extreme change. But how people in City could exist without religion? I'm sure there should be one or more religious factions, think EM could not ignore this...

Shinrazero on 18/6/2013 at 10:20

So many apologists, those who think they are high in mighty in their acceptance of the new direction of the game. So open minded. Great! you're able to find acceptance in all the changes. What I don't think is great is how anyone that expresses dislike for what they are seeing are automatically dismissed. Anyone can go back a page or two in this thread and see what I'm talking about. I've been called an idiot, muppet, fanatic, twat, just to name a few, all because I disagree with the direction of the game and that's just me. I've seen others endure far worse, with minimal intervention. Astonishingly, supporters are seemingly free to insult, put down, and rudely dismiss the voice of opposition as mindless rabble. :mad:

EM is vying for my dollars, just like everyone else.

So now they've taken out the factions, honestly, it wasn't much of a surprise. I'm tired of hearing from the devs that they are preserving the "DNA of Thief." You know that with 98+ percent identical DNA, chimps and humans are obviously quite different. Think about that. They've taken out the best bits of Thief, the seasoning, the charm. Dry ice arrow, no wait! water arrow! Why include f**k instead of sticking with taffer? Change for the sake of change or perhaps it makes EM feel justified in their age check on their website. So hardcore.

So what factions does that leave? The Baron and his cronies, and the opposition, the Graven? I'm well aware that the (http://i.imgur.com/TFxI0b5.jpg) Baron has been mentioned in the previous games, what else is there? A political opposition to the Baron's tyranny? To me, that seems uninteresting and boring. Perhaps there's another faction. Some sort of pagan equivalent I'd wager.The previous factions had such depth and character, mysticism. At this point, what else is there to distinguish this as a Thief game outside the fact that its a stealth game?

New Horizon on 18/6/2013 at 11:53

Quote Posted by Renzatic

DX:HR was as much a reinvention of of that series as Thief will be for...er...Thief. The style, pace of technology, everything is out of whack when you compare it to what was seen in the original Deus Ex. It's a retcon starting from scratch, rather than making assumed changes after the fact.

It's really not the same thing.

Deus EX: HR was a genuine prequel, whereas Thief is neither sequel nor prequel. DX is supposedly based in our own universe, whereas Thief is neither our universe or Earth...though some would argue the latter.

From what I recall in some Developer interviews, something might happen between the year 2027 (DX:HR) and 2052 (DX) to help reconcile the vast difference in tech, although I believe another dev interview said that since we now have more capable computers, they were simply able to more fully realize the world of DX. Either way, DX takes place in the same universe...Thief does not.

As a long time fan, I am extremely disappointed in their choices. It is not that I believe in treating the source with such reverence that there can be no latitude for change, but to strip the series down to its 'ahem' DNA, is no different than what Dishonored did. Why Eidos Montreal did this and insisted upon calling it Thief is beyond me. They would have had far fewer issues if they had just made their own stealth title.

Shayde on 18/6/2013 at 13:18

Quote Posted by Shinrazero

I've been called an idiot, muppet, fanatic, twat, just to name a few, all because I disagree with the direction of the game

Quote Posted by Shinrazero

So many apologists...

all because they don't entirely disagree with the direction of the game.

Now I'm going to call you a hypocrit to round out your list of slurs.

fett on 18/6/2013 at 13:54

There's another angle we're not talking about here.

Unlike T3, we're dealing with an entirely different group of devs here. There is absolutely no connection to LGS, IS, or even Irrational (tenuous, but adjacent). That being said, I think we would all agree that the people creating these games are artists (some arguably more gifted than others). As artists, they will only produce good art if they are being true to their individual vision for the project. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be informed by what has come before - especially in a situation where they are picking up someone else's IP and carrying on with it, as is the case here. But trying to exactly imitate the vision and feel of another game house's art is disingenuous and will result in the worst kind of failure.

I point this out because the sense of outrage expressed here seems to assume that this is a personal insult on the part of the devs, a middle finger to the community. I don't think that's the case. I think you simply have a group of people who may be trying their best to infuse their own vision into an existing IP and falling a bit short (in some people's opinion). But look at the heights to which they must attain - they are not LGS. It's been said of LGS that they were "the smartest kids in the room," multi-talented etc. It was a very unique situation that is unlikely to be relived. We've seen this with The Beatles, Zeppelin, etc. - you take one part of the equation out, and it can never be the same. Without Randy, Doug, Emil, Laura, etc. it's simply not going to come close to the brilliance of LGS. Even Ion Storm, despite their best efforts (allowing them slack for time/budget constraints) fell short.

So I guess the question for me is, would I rather experience a new team's vision for Thief as they try to do something new while holding on to the old as they see fit, or never see Thief again? Some have spoken up for the latter. I would rather have the former - just as I did with DX and Tomb Raider. I guess that's why I'm pretty open to however they interpret things. I know the gameplay won't be the same, or as good. But I will be happy for a well thought out stealth game. Dishonored and DX:HR were a blast. Not as engaging as the original LGS games, but they're as close as I can hope to get in this day and age, and that's a reality I'd rather adapt to than rage against an industry that's so far removed from the climate of the original LGS titles. Maybe that's settling, but it didn't feel like it to me when I was playing DX and DH. It just felt fun. On Facebook yesterday, Duncan (DeC) said, "I buy games based on whether or not I think I will have fun playing it. It's not any more complicated than that."
I wholeheartedly agree. And when I look at the new Thief footage, it looks like it's fun to play. It's not right to ridicule those to whom it doesn't, but it's also not cool to curse the devs and act like they hate the community because they're trying to make the game they think they should.

nickie on 18/6/2013 at 14:35

I'm still very much a 'don't-knower' as I just haven't seen what I want to see yet but I thought that was very well put, particularly the last sentence.

SneakyJack on 18/6/2013 at 14:47

Yeah that pretty well sums it up.