iCEE on 13/10/2007 at 00:58
In the past there were multiplayer patches for certain games that shipped out with single player camapings but no multiplayer (I think Deus Ex was one of those certain games).
What are the chances of a mod for Thief 3 that allows multiple players enaging in missions in co op or .vs
Because not one of the thief series are online oriented except for Thievery for Unreal Tournament, maybe it is somewhat of an idea for creative thief fans to create a multiplayer mod for Dark Shadows?
anyone plays thief 3 fm's and if so, what is your opinion on these. I haven't played any fm's I am waiting for your opinion...
That's it.
Digital Nightfall on 13/10/2007 at 04:50
Thief DS is hard enough to make FMs for, so I'd cast serious skepticism over any attempts to hack multiplayer into it. Skepticism at the level of saying "not possible" in fact.
Though I am sure that the dark modders will be replying to this post within about eight seconds, I'd first like to point out that the Thievery team has been working off and on (off at the moment, though soon, on, as UT3 is shortly to be released) on a new thief-like multiplayer game using the UT3 engine. It is taking far greater liberties than TDM on the content however, so don't expect it to be much at all like "multiplayer TDS" ...
And the Thievery team, Black Cat games, has produced published games in the past, so I'd put faith in their work!
Ahkaskar on 13/10/2007 at 12:07
Except that Thievery wasn't very good...
xxcoy on 13/10/2007 at 12:11
...and thief-fans have a propensity for playing the lone wolf - which makes any 'multi'player a dead issue in my eyes. :cheeky:
SubJeff on 13/10/2007 at 12:37
Quote Posted by Ahkaskar
Except that Thievery wasn't very good...
Yes it is.
There are no plans for multi-player in TDM, though since there is MP in Doom3 someone could try and hack it in I suppose.
Why don't we just wait for the new Black Cat game?
Neil_McCauley on 15/10/2007 at 19:55
I installed Thievery and tried a bot mission once. It annoyed the hell out of me. Too fast--UT Thief? I can totally see how in the real world it would degenerate into deathmatch. And the guards look like crappy UT robots. Blech. I uninstalled it.
SubJeff on 15/10/2007 at 22:17
So you never played a multi-player game with other players and you're passing verdict? Well done.
inselaffe on 16/10/2007 at 02:23
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
So you never played a multi-player game with other players and you're passing verdict? Well done.
In multiplayer it's far worse (although the ais bat ear aimbotness is in both sp and mp, for your added joy (the ai is pretty poor)).
The game encourages the thieves to just try and kill or ko the guards, because the developers reckon it would be "boring" otherwise.
You may as well call it dmery by how it in effect plays.
Apparently the new one is going to be even more "combat orientated" too :erg:
If I play it I ghost, but I am about 1 of 2 people who would do that - largely because it's very easy for the guards to trap / ai spam objectives, due to wondrous map design.
Some of it is really quite good, but for a lot of it, the developers really have their priorities wrong - it's ut but with swords, bows and koing - basically it encourages the kind of playstyle that your average quake player would attempt when trying thief for the first time without knowing what the hell it was.
SubJeff on 16/10/2007 at 03:18
Yeah thanks infoman I've played it lots. It is possible to ghost. The next one seems to be an extension of the combat bits of Thievery.
Ahkaskar on 16/10/2007 at 08:46
Thievery wasn't very good, and that much is inarguable. Somehow between Thievery 1.2 and 1.6 they managed to completely screw up detection. I was playing it with a friend on the guard team while I played as a thief. In his silliness he went about bashing his AI guard buddies upside the head. After a few solid whacks, they'd run off with some specific aim in mind, find me in the shadows clear across the level and peg me with a crossbow. And they'd do it repeatedly in any level we tried. Broken. Let's not argue this.
