Thief 3. finally i can play it ! - by sterlino
R Soul on 2/10/2007 at 13:16
Regarding enforcers and statues, I liked the fact that Garrett wasn't quite in control of things. A bit like in Thief 1 after RTC.
That moment in T3 when I found myself just outside the Keeper compound, hiding among some bushes with a couple of enforcers actually searching for me rather than just patrolling, was one of the best moments of the game.
You see, most players, myself included, don't normally evade AI who are searching for them, they just reload and try sneaking again. It made a nice change to be actively searched for without it being my fault.
And this is where it falls down. They weren't really searching, it just looked like they were (to be fair that was also the case in Assassins from T1 if you set off the alarm). Consequently they were not that hard to evade. In my opinion that realisation summed up T3 - good ideas*, but too many of them were poorly implemented.
*And some bad ones too
New Horizon on 2/10/2007 at 14:03
Quote Posted by BR796164
Oh there is, Trickster be praised. You have 5 city districts to explore and optional miniquests to accomplish. You aren't being taken forcibly from one mission to another. You have to find entrance points to missions by yourself. You have choice in what order you want to accomplish Pagan Sanctuary and St. Edgar's Eve, Abysmal Gale/House of Widow Moira and Sunken Citadel. And as a bonus, optional Pavelock Prison
Running around pointlessly in a 'somewhat' freeform city? That's not Thief. Thief was a tightly nit narrative...it unfolded like a storybook before your eyes. While it was linear in story telling, it made up for that linearity in the size and choices 'within' the missions. They traded mission sizes, and choices within missions for GTA style roaming and blundering. It didn't feel like Thief, it felt like a different platform completely.
I'm glad you enjoyed it...that's good for you.
By entrance points, you mean glowing symbols that magically throw up a loading screen? Yes..very satisfying.
Quote:
I don't know, probably something to do with crappy GPU/monitor. Also, buy more RAM.
What does the Monitor have to do with loading times? :) Answer: Nothing. RAM, yes...but that's hardly the real answer. The engine was highly unoptimized...and barely made it out the door in a commercially releasable form. I stress barely.
I played Doom 3 on the same computer I played T3 on. The difference in loading times between the two was highly night and day. T3 was like molasses on Pluto compared to D3, and D3 didn't use any fancy 'cooking' of the files into the maps to increase load times...it used a simple zip file format, just like T1 and 2. The difference....an optimized engine that didn't need band aid fixes to work better.
Quote:
Yes, fuck all LGS veterans like Randy Smith for overseeing this whole thing, Terri Brosius and Laura Baldwin for writing a pretty conclusive story, Eric Brosius for giving it that right audio feeling, Chris Carrollo for programming it and all of them for even trying to put a big effort into making a Thief sequel.
Hey, Kudos to them all for effort. How does that nullify the issues people have with the game? Why should it? They were hired to make a game, it's not like Randy called them all together, out of his own gumption, and said..."Damnit, I miss Thief...we HAVE to make another one. (Randy Sobs) IT CAN'T END THIS WAY!!!!"
They were hired to make a product...a rather uninspired product. TDS was built in a rather turbulent atmosphere, and you can sense that in the execution of the game...it feels pretty much like 'paint by numbers'. That's what happens when people are in a less than happy situation, they just want to get shit done. From what I've heard, both Randy and Harvey made some of the bad decisions that gave us the game we got. Effort is great, but the final result DOES count for something too you know.
Quote:
Or fuck some unreasonably whining spoiled fans? More like that.
Apologists are just as easily seen as whiners too.
My purpose is not to flame...just to point out that the 'whiners' points are just as valid as the 'apologists'. I don't feel however, that the game...or the developers need defending. Some of them have owned up to the bad decisions already...so you're actually undermining them with all of this defense posturing.
SiO2 on 2/10/2007 at 14:32
I was going to make a joke about being able to fit all TDS levels in one of the TMA FM's (apologies for forgetting it's name - it's the mega-huge "warehouse" one) but I think it's actually for real.
Then again, with the FM I'm thinking of you can probably fit TDP, TMA and TDS all in one of the warehouse offices. :D
Rogue Keeper on 2/10/2007 at 15:03
I think we've been over this before, New Horizon, but if you wish we can be over it again.
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Running around pointlessly in a 'somewhat' freeform city? That's not Thief. Thief was a tightly nit narrative...it unfolded like a storybook before your eyes. While it was linear in story telling, it made up for that linearity in the size and choices 'within' the missions. They traded mission sizes, and choices within missions for GTA style roaming and blundering. It didn't feel like Thief, it felt like a different platform completely.
You wanted to say "that's not Thief for ME". The concept of an open city was obviously based on some fan missions, especially Calendras, which offer free roaming in the City. That's what many people expected to see in Thief 3. They weren't afraid to experiment and bring something new in storytelling mechanism. The overall playing time is roughly equal to TDP/Gold. For the rest, see "Multiplatform".
Quote:
By entrance points, you mean glowing symbols that magically throw up a loading screen? Yes..very satisfying.
Glyphs, yes. Like Master Nightfall once said after he played beta 'Now you understand what the Keeper at the end of TDP meant by telling Garrett 'I hope you can still read hieroglyphs''. Also what is wrong with mission briefing screens?
Quote:
What does the Monitor have to do with loading times? :) Answer: Nothing. RAM, yes...but that's hardly the real answer.
He mentioned that loading screens "throw you back to the desktop as if the game is ready to crash" Read carefully. It has never happened to me. And my loading times were quite fast on 1GB RAM + 256 GPU, and I'm using hi-res textures. Being bothered by loading screens too often is a different issue (again "Multiplatform").
Quote:
The engine was highly unoptimized...and barely made it out the door in a commercially releasable form. I stress barely. I played Doom 3 on the same computer I played T3 on. The difference in loading times between the two was highly night and day. T3 was like molasses on Pluto compared to D3, and D3 didn't use any fancy 'cooking' of the files into the maps to increase load times...it used a simple zip file format, just like T1 and 2. The difference....an optimized engine that didn't need band aid fixes to work better.
It is not significantly less optimized for variety of PC hardware than many other recent titles (Stalker or Bioshock come to my mind). Other flaws can be tracked back to compromises in multiplatform programming. Doom 3 was tailored to nVidia cards. Half Life 2 was tailored to ATIs. That's why HL2 doesn't perform as greatly on GeForces than on Radeons. Note that both Doom 3 and HL 2 were programmed primarily to PCs and their development has been funded more than generously. They both used original engines which could have been tweaked by their respective developing teams to the most insiginificant details. Each of these three games is, of course, a whole separate story for itself.
Quote:
Hey, Kudos to them all for effort. How does that nullify the issues people have with the game? Why should it? They were hired to make a game, it's not like Randy called them all together, out of his own gumption, and said..."Damnit, I miss Thief...we HAVE to make another one. (Randy Sobs) IT CAN'T END THIS WAY!!!!"
They were hired to make a product...a rather uninspired product. TDS was built in a rather turbulent atmosphere, and you can sense that in the execution of the game...it feels pretty much like 'paint by numbers'. That's what happens when people are in a less than happy situation, they just want to get shit done. From what I've heard, both Randy and Harvey made some of the bad decisions that gave us the game we got. Effort is great, but the final result DOES count for something too you know.
Imagine if Eidos and IS didn't give a shit about ex-LSG people. Imagine if they gave an absolute zero respect to how the previous games looked and how they have been presented. Imagine a completely different, Thief spin-off game for new-generation of clueless kiddies. Now that would give somebody a REAL reason to cry. =) Can't imagine that? Be glad.
Thief 2 has been done in turbulent atmosphere as well and it shows. It can be said that LGS didn't invest into development or adjustment of a new engine, because they didn't have much time and money. A large patch for the time being was necessary to remedy flaws in design and more. It is basically just as simple.
I've heard Randy has invented climbing gloves while he was desperately trying to climb the wall to get into locked toiled through the window. I like backstage rumors.
Quote:
Apologists are just as easily seen as whiners too.My purpose is not to flame...just to point out that the 'whiners' points are just as valid as the 'apologists'.
There is reasonable critics. Then, there is nitpicking and whining and unprofound bitching. And then there is also radical refusement and scorning of anything new and unfamiliar, because conservative nostalgia owns somebody's brain. It just depends on how you formulate your points. Either you sound like a profound critic or you sound just like a notorious spoiled whiner.
Quote:
I don't feel however, that the game...or the developers need defending.
They do. Everybody does sometimes. But hey, I'm a professional opponent. ;)
ZylonBane on 2/10/2007 at 15:04
Quote Posted by R Soul
You see, most players, myself included, don't normally evade AI who are searching for them, they just reload and try sneaking again.
Beg pardon?
New Horizon on 2/10/2007 at 15:47
Quote Posted by BR796164
You wanted to say "that's not Thief for ME".
No, I meant to say what I said. Thief was established as a tightly nit narrative. Yes, the open city was done in some fan missions....but they are stand alone missions, within a single map, and were done far better.
Quote:
Glyphs, yes. Like Master Nightfall once said after he played beta 'Now you understand what the Keeper at the end of TDP meant by telling Garrett 'I hope you can still read hieroglyphs''. Also what is wrong with mission briefing screens?
The keeper at the end of TDP was more likely referring to the ancient texts.
Quote:
He mentioned that loading screens "throw you back to the desktop as if the game is ready to crash" Read carefully. It has never happened to me. And my loading times were quite fast on 1GB RAM. Being bothered by loading screens too often is a different issue (again "Multiplatform").
Well what he actually said was..."long load screens (that
first throw you back to the desktop as if the game is ready to crash)". TDS does have a little snap to it when it loads a mission...I think it was just the way he described it. Still doesn't have a lick to do with the monitor though.
Quote:
It is not significantly less optimized for variety of PC hardware than many other recent titles (Stalker or Bioshock come to my mind).
Yeah, it was actually. The developers themselves have even said so.
Quote:
Other flaws can be tracked back to compromises in multiplatform programming.
Agreed.
Quote:
Doom 3 was tailored to nVidia cards. Half Life 2 was tailored to ATIs. That's why HL2 doesn't perform as greatly on GeForces than on Radeons. Note that both Doom 3 and HL 2 were programmed primarily to PCs and their development has been funded more than generously. They both used original engines which could have been tweaked by their respective developing teams to the most insiginificant details. Each of these three games is, of course, a whole separate story for itself.
Well, Doom 3 started off as the Quake 3 engine...ported from C to C++ and heavily modified. Carmack is an experienced programmer, and from what I've read in his interviews...he builds upon the last generation...rather than toss all that code aside. It wasn't exactly original...and it was also designed to support Linux, Windows and Mac.
Half Life...I know little about.
Quote:
Imagine if Eidos and IS didn't give a shit about ex-LSG people. Imagine if they gave an absolute zero respect to how the previous games looked and presented.
Heh....isn't that what we got?
Quote:
Thief 2 has been done in turbulent atmosphere as well and it shows. It can be said that LGS didn't invest into development or adjustment of a new engine, because they didn't have much time and money. A large patch for the time being was necessary to remedy flaws in design and more. It is basically just as simple.
It was a completely different set of circumstances for Thief 2.
Eidos then stepped into the breach and firmly intended to buy Looking Glass, presumably intending to protect their projected income stream from Thief II Gold, Thief III and other potential future projects such as Deep Cover. The deal was agreed upon, and, while the paperwork was processed, Eidos began to keep Looking Glass afloat. It seemed that Looking Glass had been saved.
However, the economic instability sweeping the entertainment industry slammed into Eidos, which found itself with insufficient funds to complete the purchase. Eidos asked its bankers for more money. The bank was itself in a period of difficulty, and thus the bankers said no.
Left with only enough cash in hand to pay off its employees, Looking Glass was forced to shut down.
There is a huge difference between the internal 'personality' conflicts of T3 and the 'financial' issues Looking Glass had during T1 and T2. From what I've read, LGS was actually doing alright after T1 and 2...but a few bad things happened to offset it. It was all pretty quick. They got the game out quickly because they were unsure if they would have funding to finish it....and the patch was pretty extensive. Far more extensive than the 'take it and leave it' patch we got with T3.
Quote:
I've heard Randy has invented climbing gloves while he was desperately trying to climb the wall to get into locked toiled through the window. I like backstage rumors.
I would hardly call them rumors when both Randy and Harvey have admitted being responsible for them. :nono:
R Soul on 2/10/2007 at 16:02
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Beg pardon?
I get the impression that most players prefer the AI to be at alert level 0, because the player then has more control over events. If they cause the AI to start searching for them, I think most players are more likely to reload and try again than to try and deal with an AI at alert level 2 or 3.
sethL on 2/10/2007 at 18:29
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Heh....isn't that what we got?
No.
New Horizon on 2/10/2007 at 22:30
Some of you folks take me way too seriously. :laff:
Gambit on 2/10/2007 at 23:18
I´m a new Thief fan. I managed to finish Thief 1 and 2 (by the way, I haven´t played FMs yet so don´t get angry if I say that SOULFORGE IS THE HARDEST MISSION EVER ).
And now I just intalled Thief 3. Finished the Tutorial Inn but I had to stop because it crashed when I tried to enter a blue portal in Rutheford Castle... I will see what´s wrong.
Well, personal opinion...
Yes, graphics are much better. Althought people are right, the first sceneries that I saw seems monochrome like everything is blue.
You don´t feel natural with your movement. It´s more "clumsy". And I still haven´t managed to properly control my blackjacks nor the arrow phisics.
The ragdolls are ridiculously funny :D
I blackjacked the innkeeper and he managed to fold himself against all laws of phisics.
Blue portals in the middle of a mansion...
These are nitpicks, I confess, at least after ten minutes of play I managed to get in the mood. I still hope the story is good.
