Platinumoxicity on 28/6/2010 at 09:49
But using a sword against a sword is easier and less risky than using a dagger against a sword. Garrett is not stupid, and he wouldn't make stupid choises in weaponry by choosing a weapon that's significantly less capable of parrying blows.
Koki on 28/6/2010 at 11:06
It should be noted that Garrett finds himself facing zombies, skeletons, ghosts, giant spiders, monkey-men, "dinosaurs", fire elementals and bug-men surprisingly often. Going against all that just with a dagger is probably a bad idea.
Beleg Cúthalion on 28/6/2010 at 11:15
It should be noted that Garrett only sometimes faces zombies etc. and that most of the time he's not seen at all. :p I wonder what's so hard to notice about that. Giving Garrett a sword is like giving him a computer so he can solve computer-related issues which he wouldn't have without one.
Again, I'd vote for a sword/dagger option after the mission briefing, but with all consequences of these weapons (hindrance, exposure, damage & combat system etc.).
Platinumoxicity on 28/6/2010 at 12:07
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
Again, I'd vote for a sword/dagger option after the mission briefing, but with all consequences of these weapons (hindrance, exposure, damage & combat system etc.).
But because the consequences are not in balance between the weapons (Having the dagger instead of the sword can't have realistic amount of benefit to compare to the sword) the devs would have to create artificial "cheats" for the dagger to balance the weapons (for example an unnatural stealth increase because just having the sword sheathed with you in fact doesn't have a stealth decrease as demonstrated by the games), or they would need to create artificial handicaps for the sword to make it as bad a weapon as the dagger.
They don't balance out:
Sword
+ Useful in combat and self-defense
+ Ability to break stuff (because of superior weight and leverage)
+ (If we want to get silly in comparing TDS to the older games... -The ability to backstab quietly)
-Stealth decrease when drawn
Dagger
+ No stealth decrease when drawn
- Useless in combat and self-defense (No, health potions don't heal wounds in real-time when you mash buttons to kill one guard)
-Inability to break stuff (because of inferior weight and leverage)
-(If we want to get silly in comparing TDS to the older games... -The inability to backstab quietly. You know it's true. :cheeky:)
The sword doesn't win by a huge amount, but it still is the overall better weapon so it would be foolish to select the dagger instead of the sword to any mission, because the dagger's benefits are marginal.
So in order to make having the dagger slightly better than egotistical purposeful increase of difficulty by the means of irrational equipment choices, there would have to be artificial changes that don't make sense:
either...
Sword:
--Handicap: unnatural stealth decrease when merely having the sword with you. The explanation: Garrett has somehow gotten dumber and has lost the ability to effectively hide his equipment or to move silently when carrying it, because as we all know he clearly is able in the previous games whenever he's carrying a sword.
or...
Dagger:
++Cheat: unnatural stealth increase when having the dagger with you. The explanation: The dagger has a built-in magical cloaking field that makes Garrett blend better in the shadows. Notice: Because of this it's actually more stealthy to carry the dagger than not carrying anything at all. (Much like when in Counter-Strike having a Steyr Scout -rifle in your hand makes you faster than holding a knife.)
Koki on 28/6/2010 at 12:30
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
It should be noted that Garrett only sometimes faces zombies etc. and that most of the time he's not seen at all. :p I wonder what's so hard to notice about that.
Why dagger then? Garrett shouldn't carry any weapons, not even a blackjack. Only a bow with water, moss and rope arrows.
Sword is a weapon for offense as well as defense, you can carry it "just in case". Dagger is a weapon of offense, pretty much only useful when trying to kill unarmed opponents which Garrett doesn't really do.
Also actually he'd probably carry both, a good dagger has hundreds of uses outside of actual combat, but none of these uses are used as a gameplay mechanic.
242 on 28/6/2010 at 12:35
Quote Posted by Platinumoxicity
But using a sword against a sword is easier and less risky than using a dagger against a sword. Garrett is not stupid, and he wouldn't make stupid choises in weaponry by choosing a weapon that's significantly less capable of parrying blows.
I want a high frequency katana, especially now when Eidos is SE. You kill enemies with one side, you blackjack them with other side... oh, and since it's high frequency you can actually fend off arrows with it.
Koki on 28/6/2010 at 12:38
Damn. Good one 242.
Beleg Cúthalion on 28/6/2010 at 20:51
You're still under the impression that a sword is "gone" if you hit the ^ key. Forgive me when I don't subordinate gameplay completely to reality, but crawling or climbing (not to mention swimming) is significantly harder when you have weapons like bow and arrows or a sword with you. These are the consequences I'm talking about. Plus, right now you're comparing a sword for killing, smashing doors and huge icicles etc. which is gone after pressing ^ with a dagger for backstabbing, a bit of killing and destroying crates and barrels. Both of them are IMHO not implemented in the best of ways.
With the idea of more consequences to certain equipment taken you could also support the different playing styles in a way that more experienced players can leave out weapons and therefore take more loot or carry it faster etc..
Platinumoxicity on 29/6/2010 at 19:47
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
You're still under the impression that a sword is "gone" if you hit the ^ key. Forgive me when I don't subordinate gameplay completely to reality, but crawling or climbing (not to mention swimming) is significantly harder when you have weapons like bow and arrows or a sword with you. These are the consequences I'm talking about.
Yes, you're right. But as you can see in Thief 1&2, even though the sword isn't "gone" when you sheath it, it doesn't impact your stealthiness at all even though it's still with you. The sword only makes you more visible when you draw it, because the blade is reflective. Trying to make the sword constantly give you a stealth penalty even when you aren't holding it in your hand is inconsistent with the previous games and it's simply a selfish artificial handicap that dagger advocates are trying to force upon the sword to bring the dagger closer to it's level and balance them out.
Think about it. You... (I don't mean specifically you, but the dagger advocates) You all want the dagger, and don't care if there also is a sword, so you are advocating both being in the same game right? But you are also trying to make the sword worse in some aspects to make them more balanced simply because the dagger sucks. Why would you want a weapon that is in fact so bad that you need to mutilate anything next to it to make it look even bearable? :tsktsk:
Chade on 29/6/2010 at 22:39
As this is a thief game, I would like all weapons to be as bad as the designers can possibly get away with, thanks very much. I don't have any patience for this "WWGD" talk.
My criteria for weaponry is simple: the player should spend as little time in combat as possible. The first response when faced with combat should be to run away, the second response should be to get the combat over and done with as soon as possible and then run away.
This means that:
1) the player should take damage in combat, and
2) combat should be fast.
The dagger has two advantages over the sword: firstly, it is harder to approach a guard without being hit, and secondly, the player cannot hang around parrying blows while even more guards arrive at the scene and the player ends up spending even more time in combat (and afterwards, has less guards to sneak past, so it's a double failure)!
I know some people here enjoy combat, but IMO it's better to concentrate on stealth and do it well.
