The Shroud on 16/1/2013 at 21:49
This poll relates to the Thief Prequel thread:
Quote Posted by The Shroud
A subject related to the idea of a prequel for Thief is what thieving equipment should be available for young Garrett, and which items from TDP should be omitted for that stage of his thieving career. There are two main issues involved here:
1. What kinds of items make sense for young Garrett to have acquired and used back then?
2. What kinds of items could make gameplay challenging and fun?
First let's take a look at what thieving items were featured during TDP (since this game would take place prior to TDP):
Blackjack
Sword
Broadhead arrows
Noisemaker arrows
Rope arrows
Water arrows
Moss arrows
Fire arrows
Gas arrows
Compass
Square-tooth lockpick
Triangle-tooth lockpick
Flash bombs
Explosive mines
Gas mines
Healing potions
Speed potions
Breath potions
Holy water
That's a total of 19 items. The game should probably not feature more than that, in order to maintain the same balance of versatility and difficulty that TDP had. Now let's evaluate which of these make sense to carry over to Garrett's past, and which should probably be restricted to TDP and later games in the series:
Blackjack: I think we can all agree that this item has become so ingrained in Thief's gameplay and is such a basic and simple standby for any thief needing to stealthily knock out guards or witnesses on occasion, that Garrett would most likely have acquired this very early on in his thieving career.
Sword: Far from a priority for any thief to be lugging around. It was one of the least useful, least necessary, and most counter-intuitive items in TDP, especially for Expert players who weren't supposed to kill humans anyway. Its primary use ended up being as a cutting tool for slashing banners that concealed hidden passages, which could just as easily have been accomplished with a knife or dagger. In fact, even if the player were to attempt to kill someone for some reason, a dagger in the back would most likely do the job just as well, as we can see from TDS. A dagger is also smaller, lighter, more concealable, and far more in keeping with a thief's trade, plus it doubles as a tool for disarming traps or jimmying open latches. Young Garrett would not be planning to get into sword-fights with guards, so he should have a dagger instead of a sword.
Broadhead arrows: Pretty basic, though rather counter-intuitive if one is intending to avoid murder, as we know to be true of Garrett's character from all those Expert-level objectives saying "Don't kill anyone". But at least it's stealthier than a sword if one does need to shoot at something for some reason, so I see no reason why these shouldn't be available to young Garrett.
Noisemaker arrows: These are very specialized thieving aids and would have to be specially crafted (which means they'd be very expensive and thus unobtainable to young Garrett during his earliest missions), but at least they serve enough of an important purpose in relation to thieving that young Garrett would want to acquire them eventually. So these should be kept available for the player, but too expensive to afford until mid to late-game.
Rope arrows: There's just something about these that seems to capture a bit of Garrett's style, isn't there? I think that's why we were all so disappointed by their absence from TDS. An arrow with a highly specialized arrowhead that splits into a multi-pronged grappler on impact would probably be among the most advanced kind of thieving gear a professional thief could ever hope to obtain. It would be incredibly expensive, but definitely something young Garrett would want to have made for him when he had acquired enough money to afford it. This should be saved for the late-game, when the player has amassed a small fortune and can feasibly purchase the really fancy stuff.
Water arrows: Probably the single most Thiefish item in the series, this is definitely something young Garrett should acquire at some point. Likely earlier than the really fancy gear, but still mid-game enough that we get the sense he had to work his way up to this level of artistry. An arrow with a crystalline head filled with a solution capable of dousing a flaming torch is doubtless going to be pretty expensive, and thus unobtainable for young Garrett at first, but once the player has enough cash to afford it, it should be incorporated into the gameplay.
Moss arrows: I'm a strong believer that there are far better ways to make sneaking a challenge for the player (creaky floorboards/catwalks, dry leaves and twigs, broken glass, etc) than by giving Garrett the equivalent of tap-dancing shoes, and then giving him a means of silencing certain spots of the floor on which he treads to compensate for this ridiculous self-inflicted problem. Clearly, he's just wearing the wrong boots in the first place. No thief with any sanity would wear footwear that handicapping. A thief should wear boots with softly padded soles (i.e. leather mocassin boots or something similar). Thus, young Garrett would not have needed something as silly as moss arrows any more than older Garrett should need them. No doubt, jtr7 will argue that Garrett's tap-dancing shoes are canon, and therefore as sacrosanct to the series as Garrett himself, but I say it's a gameplay thing and its trumped up 'authenticity' is misplaced in terms of what is and is not literally part of the story.
Fire arrows: This falls under the really fancy, expensive, late-game stuff in my point of view. Fire arrows are surely not very stealthy, but I suppose it's possible young Garrett may have used them at some point or other. I won't arbitrarily rule them out, although I can't really think of why he would have wanted or needed them back then.
Gas arrows: I think this is one of those items that should be out of young Garrett's league. Really high-tech, powerful, and basically eliminates opportunities for challenging gameplay by providing a means of taking out groups of opponents with one shot, silently, from a distance, without having to sneak around them or find alternative ways of dealing with the problem they present. It's even more powerful than just letting the player kill guards, since killing is noisy and thus risky, where as gas arrows are silent and virtually risk-free. It's sort of counter-intuitive to the whole premise that the player must be stealthy, clever and patient to solve their problems rather than eliminating whatever stands in their way like in other games. So I don't think these should be available to young Garrett.
Compass: Another really basic item that I don't think calls for any debate. Young Garrett should acquire this very early on.
Square-tooth lockpick: For reasons stated earlier, young Garrett should acquire a set of lockpicks right away, but they obviously shouldn't be the same ones as those he later purchases from Farkus in TDP, nor should they be as effective or as high-quality as those are. This is also an opportunity to make lockpicking a much greater and more enjoyable challenge for the player, since we now have the perfect excuse: Garrett isn't yet as skilled at picking locks as he becomes later on in his career.
Triangle-tooth lockpick: I'm not sure whether each lockpick actually needs to be a separate item per se (I think TDS handled that aspect right). "Lockpicks" can simply be one item and the second pick can be traded for some other type of thieving tool, assuming of course that there's a lockpicking minigame employed like the one in TDS (actually I found the lockpicking in Oblivion and Skyrim quite enjoyable).
Flash bombs: These should be available to young Garrett I think, though they should likely be very expensive and thus unobtainable until later on in the game. Flash bombs are really one of the most powerful 'saves' that Garrett has in his arsenal for when things don't go according to plan. They actually might be a bit overpowered for young Garrett during the mid-game, since they are capable of blinding multiple enemies at once, allowing the player to either escape or knock out the lot of them in quick succession. A possible lower-powered precursor to flash bombs mid-game could be handfuls of blinding powder (basically just pepper, flour, powdered stone, dust soaked in onion juice, and other common types of irritants, extremely cheap and easy to come by). The limiting factor would be that blinding powder has to be thrown directly into a person's eyes to have any effect, and can obviously only be used on one opponent at a time. It also wouldn't be very stealthy, since whoever gets that stuff thrown in their eyes is likely going to wail and shout loudly at the offensive thief, alerting everyone nearby. But it would serve well enough in an emergency when flash bombs are too expensive to afford and the player just needs to escape from a single guard (or knock them out while they're blinded).
Explosive mines: These are about as contrary to the very premise of stealth and thieving as you could possibly get. I really don't think young Garrett should ever have these. Why would he ever want them anyway?
Gas mines: Like gas arrows and explosive mines combined... You've got the exceedingly high-tech aspect of gas arrows, which seems way out of young Garrett's league to me, and the ability to take out guards without even risking sneaking up behind them and blackjacking them. I don't think we need to give the player more ways of
eliminating the opposition (isn't that part of the point of forbidding killing? To maintain the challenge of guards patroling around?), I think we should focus on enforcing the stealth and thieving aspects of the game, which is driven in large part by the player's
inability to easily dispose of their enemies, thereby incentivizing them to rely more on discretion and avoidance, which is what the game is supposed to be all about in the first place. So I don't think young Garrett should have access to gas mines.
Healing potions: For the same reasons that I say no to gas arrows, explosive mines and gas mines, I say no to healing potions. They're essentially an "undo button", a way of reducing the consequences of being caught and attacked, which in turn reduces the pressure on the player to remain undetected and avoid combat - the point of the game. Where as flash bombs are only a temporary getaway device and are totally in keeping with the evasion-and-avoidance principle, healing potions actually negate the fear of being caught by making it permissible and acceptable. They enable the player to engage in combat with impunity, and I don't think that promotes the Thief theme, I think that works against it. Young Garrett should not have access to healing potions, he should just be careful - or run away.
Speed potions: For the same reasons as with healing potions, I say no. Young Garrett doesn't need this power and shouldn't have it.
Breath potions: Again, he doesn't need them and by not having them, the player is under more pressure to play well. And that's a good thing, that's something that should be enforced. So no to breath potions.
Holy water: This is actually one item that I
do think Garrett acquired for the first time during TDP, and he most likely never had access to it prior to that. In the mission briefing to Down In The Bonehoard, he says, "Think I'll go make some inquiries about where a heretic like me can get some holy water..." That suggests very strongly that he has never gotten his hands on holy water before, since he doesn't know where he can obtain it and has to ask around just to find it. And he likely never had a reason to acquire it before that either. I fully believe that Garrett never saw a zombie with his own eyes before he entered those haunted mines. TDP probably did a lot to open his eyes to the existence of the paranormal. So the game should not include any undead, and consequently, young Garrett shouldn't ever need to acquire holy water.
Which weapons and items do you think should be included in a Thief prequel, set immediately after Garrett leaves the Keepers as a young man and begins his thieving career?
Renault on 16/1/2013 at 23:22
Just curious, but where are you going with all of this? Are you considering making an FM that covers the time before TDP? You're probably aware, but there are several FMs that cover this topic already (not that it couldn't be done again).
Constance on 17/1/2013 at 00:11
Hey there .o/
I still think we should keep the sword instead of the dagger ; after all that's one weapon Garrett always had since the beginning until the end of Thief 2. Also it can be used to bash open wooden doors —yeah, not stealthy but hey, there's got the be an alternative to lockpicks sometimes— and I don't really see that happening with a dagger - or it would take much longer.
Also, since almost every guard in town has one, it'd make sense that Garrett could acquire one pretty easily. (Dunno if that would be possible depending on which engine you plan to use but I guess it'd be nice if, when the player has no sword, assuming that ever happens, he can take that from any KO-ed guard and not only from specific locations by picking up a designated item.)
Also we have to keep in mind, I guess, that Garrett is supposed to be less experienced than in Thief 1, so he very well might have kept a sword "just in case things go wrong".
Except this, I pretty much agree with what's in the first post.
jtr7 on 17/1/2013 at 00:23
Add 1 to Gas Arrows--I was sure I checked it!--though not all equipment should be carried at once all along, of course, or be available for all missions. Of course. I'm more concerned that all the elemental magicks and world-building aspects, including the crystals, could be part that world, used or not, seen at any time or not. Same with the tech available throughout TDP/Gold, especially if it's found in the sealed Old Quarter, except the explosive device/"sunburst." Also, Precursor artifacts are known about, acquired, and sold, even if the Karath Din portion of the old world was cut off, just to point out that these things exist even before Garrett was born, decades and even centuries, even if we never see them or hear about them ourselves, they are fenced and commissioned. If only I'd not submitted my votes before knowing Gas Arrows weren't checked! We don't know how Garrett learned to use the elemental crystals as weapons, so I hope writers have explored that already, or will.
Cavalorn on 17/1/2013 at 00:54
Quote Posted by jtr7
Add 1 to Gas Arrows--I was sure I checked it!--though not all equipment should be carried at once all along, of course, or be available for all missions. Of course. I'm more concerned that all the elemental magicks and world-building aspects, including the crystals, could be part that world, used or not, seen at any time or not. Same with the tech available throughout TDP/Gold, especially if it's found in the sealed Old Quarter, except the explosive device/"sunburst." Also, Precursor artifacts are known about, acquired, and sold, even if the Karath Din portion of the old world was cut off, just to point out that these things exist even before Garrett was born, decades and even centuries, even if we never see them or hear about them ourselves, they are fenced and commissioned. If only I'd not submitted my votes before knowing Gas Arrows weren't checked! We don't know how Garrett learned to use the elemental crystals as weapons, so I hope writers have explored that already, or will.
I didn't want to check Gas Arrows, so I'll check it for you.
Garrett on 17/1/2013 at 01:38
Water arrows and the compass are the only two items which I need to play Thief therefore I voted for them.
The Shroud on 17/1/2013 at 02:45
Quote Posted by Brethren
Just curious, but where are you going with all of this? Are you considering making an FM that covers the time before TDP? You're probably aware, but there are several FMs that cover this topic already (not that it couldn't be done again).
A group of FM's on the Dark engine strung together into a storyline is one possibility, but I'm treating this as a project that might be done on other engines as well, or even a hypothetical future Thief game all its own (not that I really expect Eidos Montreal to consider our ideas very seriously, but who knows?). It's also a hypothetical experiment, a "what if?" scenario to explore and discuss, independently from whether or not it will actually be successfully implemented someday. But just suppose for a moment that all of us Thief fans were to thoroughly explore and flesh out all of the various topics and aspects of this hypothetical Thief game as if we were one big team of game developers designing the next game in the series, and basically saying to anyone watching, "This is what we want to see." I think that might stand a reasonable chance of getting somebody's attention eventually, don't you? At any rate, it never hurts to brainstorm ideas. :)
Quote Posted by Constance
Hey there .o/
I still think we should keep the sword instead of the dagger ; after all that's one weapon Garrett always had since the beginning until the end of Thief 2.
Well he had it since the beginning of TDP, yes. But does that necessarily mean that he had it when he first began his thieving career? I'm not convinced that he must have had it back then. Anyway, that's the story aspect of the issue. The other aspect is gameplay: in the context of the world's purest and greatest first-person-sneaker, which Thief is, wherein stealth and discretion is the name of the game rather than violence and combat, is the sword really something that the player
should have available? That's the more important question which I think we need to be considering here.
Quote Posted by Constance
Also it can be used to bash open wooden doors —yeah, not stealthy but hey, there's got the be an alternative to lockpicks sometimes— and I don't really see that happening with a dagger - or it would take much longer.
Granted, alternative solutions to problems presented in a game are a good thing, but does bashing a locked door open with a sword really need to be one of those possible alternatives in a game like Thief? In other games, sure, I'm all for it. But in Thief, where the whole object is to be sneaky, why not have a key lying around somewhere for the player to steal or pickpocket from someone, if they don't want to pick open the lock, or an alternate route to the location behind the locked door, or the possibility of waiting for a guard/house servant/other person to open the door and then slipping quietly inside after them? Wouldn't those types of alternatives be truer to the game's central theme than hacking through locked doors with a sword? And if those alternatives are available, does the player actually need to be capable of using brute force to defeat the game's obstacles?
Quote Posted by Constance
Also we have to keep in mind, I guess, that Garrett is supposed to be less experienced than in Thief 1, so he very well might have kept a sword "just in case things go wrong".
Isn't that what flash bombs or running and climbing to safe places are for though? And besides, if we forbid murder, which I think we should, does the sword actually help the player in the first place, or just result in either failing the mission due to transgressing the no-killing objective, or leading almost invariably to the player's death anyway due to Garrett's sword-fighting skills being severely outmatched by those of his opponents? Isn't it pretty much always a bad idea for a thief like Garrett to combat armed guards with a sword? Why empower the player to do things that stray completely from the core theme of the game?
Quote Posted by jtr7
Add 1 to Gas Arrows
I'm curious about your answer to the main issue I raised regarding gas arrows:
Really powerful and basically eliminates opportunities for challenging gameplay by providing a means of taking out groups of opponents with one shot, silently, from a distance, without having to sneak around them or find alternative ways of dealing with the problem they present. It's even more powerful than just letting the player kill guards, since killing is noisy and thus risky, where as gas arrows are silent and virtually risk-free. It's sort of counter-intuitive to the whole premise that the player must be stealthy, clever and patient to solve their problems rather than eliminating whatever stands in their way like in other games.
I haven't seen this glaring problem with gas arrows addressed by anyone. Maybe that's why they've only received 2 votes so far; most people appear to agree that they're overpowered and unnecessary, at least for a younger and less experienced Garrett.
Constance on 18/1/2013 at 00:14
I think the player should be have enough freedom to choose whether or not he bashes doors, even if that's not sneaky and even if there are other sneaky ways to get past it.
LGS did include that possibility and I think many people would have just dropped the game before the end if they had not — because not everyone masters sneaking on their first game. I believe some people who now enjoy sneaking very much, maybe even "ghosting", might not even have actually bought the game, if there had not been a sword in the demo, because it would have seem to much a challenging game at the time.
Thief's main theme is indeed sneaking but still I don't think a prequel should be exclusively designed with experienced players in mind.
Garrett may not be a assassin/murderer —or at least, most experienced players want him not to be, even though both in TDP's intro and Thief2's we do see guards getting killed— that shouldn't prevent him from trying to defend his life with any means at his disposal... And a sword is, in the Thief universe, one weapon you easily can get your hands on.
Heck, even in TDP's tutorial mission, "
A Keeper's training", they introduce you to the basics of the sword, while they don't show you how to use water arrows. I thought Keepers were supposed to remain ever unseen, why would they train to use a sword ? And why wouldn't Garrett use one if he can and was trained to ?
Also, with a sword, you can fight against haunts and still have a chance to survive, which you probably don't with a dagger.
And, if you don't include a sword, then what's the point in allowing broadhead arrows ? If you want to use them only to make noise and draw the AI's attention away, just give Garrett a bag of small stones and allow him to grab random noisy junk to throw.
Basically, my point is that fleeing shouldn't be the only option when you get spotted. Most missions, original or not, allowed to "kill", at the very least, the undead and other non-human creatures. If I remember well, Brother Murus even specifically asks Garrett to dispose of the undead in some difficulty mode (though some players such as Lytha have ways to avoid dealing with him).
Let's suppose a Thief prequel would have 3 difficulty modes, just like the originals : I firmly believe that some killing should still be allowed in the lowest difficulty at least. It's alright with me if you forbid any killing in the medium difficulty and even forbid/limitate KO use in the highest difficulty mode : these are made for the experienced player. But the lowest difficulty should be "noob friendly". (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132248) Let Khad play it the way he wants ! xD
The Shroud on 18/1/2013 at 02:34
This is the sort of thing I enjoy - a civil, thoughtful debate. Before I address the points you raised, let me just say that while I disagree with your point of view, I do respect your reasons for having it.
Quote Posted by Constance
I think the player should be have enough freedom to choose whether or not he bashes doors, even if that's not sneaky and even if there are other sneaky ways to get past it.
I don't think the player should have that option, just as I don't think the player should be provided with a spear or halberd or mace, or other types of weapons that may have been possible for Garrett to have purchased if he wanted, but run contrary to the theme of the game. I think the player already has plenty of options for tackling the game's obstacles without need for a sword. Anyhow, that is likely something that boils down to personal judgment and preference rather than a debate about hard facts that can be proven or disproven, so we probably can't reach any agreement there.
Quote Posted by Constance
LGS did include that possibility and I think many people would have just dropped the game before the end if they had not — because not everyone masters sneaking on their first game. I believe some people who now enjoy sneaking very much, maybe even "ghosting", might not even have actually bought the game, if there had not been a sword in the demo, because it would have seem to much a challenging game at the time.
That's an interesting theory, I'm not sure how much supporting evidence that actually has though. Are there a lot of people here among us who fit that description? I'm curious to see if a substantial number of Thief fans actually believe they would have rejected Thief if the game had not included a sword. And what about TDS? In that game, the player had no sword, only a dagger. Did anyone reject it based on that factor alone? I highly doubt it, but I'm open to being proven wrong.
Quote Posted by Constance
Thief's main theme is indeed sneaking but still I don't think a prequel should be exclusively designed with experienced players in mind.
On that principle, we're in agreement. We just disagree about whether it requires experienced players to get through the game without a sword.
Quote Posted by Constance
Garrett may not be a assassin/murderer —or at least, most experienced players want him not to be, even though both in TDP's intro and Thief2's we do see guards getting killed— that shouldn't prevent him from trying to defend his life with any means at his disposal... And a sword is, in the Thief universe, one weapon you easily can get your hands on.
Yes, but the point I'm making in regard to that issue is that the sword is also highly
ineffective at defending Garrett's life in the first place, far less helpful than a flash bomb or simply the ability to run away and hide, or maneuver to safe places where Garrett's enemies can't reach him. In contrast, engaging opponents in combat with a sword is almost certain to result in Garrett's death, particularly for inexperienced players. Since it is those exact players that you cited as a justification for providing the sword in the first place, and it requires a lot of experience before a player can successfully engage armed guards in combat without dying, I think the two points you're raising contradict each other. By the time the player is experienced enough with sword-fighting to consistently defeat their enemies in combat, they have almost certainly played the game long enough to learn how to sneak properly and escape from their opponents as well, thereby rendering the sword unnecessary anyway. In fact, it's almost as if the primary purpose of giving the player a sword is just so that the game can punish them so thoroughly for relying on it, with defeat after defeat after defeat, that eventually they learn the hard way to try stealthier tactics. That may be the single most legitimate reason for having it in the game - to teach the player what
not to do.
Quote Posted by Constance
Heck, even in TDP's tutorial mission, "
A Keeper's training", they introduce you to the basics of the sword, while they don't show you how to use water arrows.
This is true, although that in and of itself does not justify it.
Quote Posted by Constance
I thought Keepers were supposed to remain ever unseen
They are!
Quote Posted by Constance
why would they train to use a sword ?
Exactly! They wouldn't and shouldn't. But the game had them do it anyway. That's what happens when you try to compromise between sensibility and gameplay geared toward the widest possible audience. Things don't always make very much sense. I agree with you about the reasons the developers chose to put the sword in the game - they wanted to attract as many players as they could and they didn't think the stealth theme by itself would hook enough people. But first-person-sneaking was a new and novel experiment in gaming back then; now that it's been established for almost 15 years, we know it works, and works well. Maybe that's why TDS was bold enough to drop the sword in exchange for a dagger. I think we can agree that it wasn't
that decision which harmed the gameplay, right? TDS suffered from countless flaws, but I really don't think that was one of them.
Quote Posted by Constance
And why wouldn't Garrett use one if he can and was trained to ?
Because look what usually happens whenever he tries...
Quote Posted by Constance
Also, with a sword, you can fight against haunts and still have a chance to survive, which you probably don't with a dagger.
Oh dear Builder... Haunts??? You must be a far better swordsman than I am, if you can defeat those bastards in melee. They're
fast! In my opinion, a sword is the
worst possible defense against those guys! Give me flash bombs, broadhead arrows, hell, give me fire arrows while we're at it, but I'd rather drown myself than go toe-to-toe with those things in a sword-fight. At least it'd be a more peaceful way to die...
Quote Posted by Constance
And, if you don't include a sword, then what's the point in allowing broadhead arrows ?
Well, once in a while Garrett might have to snipe some spiders or hit a distant button or something, I don't know. I don't particularly care that much about broadhead arrows, I just didn't propose making them unavailable because I can conceivably imagine Garrett using them at some point or other. I rarely ever needed them, personally.
Quote Posted by Constance
If you want to use them only to make noise and draw the AI's attention away, just give Garrett a bag of small stones and allow him to grab random noisy junk to throw.
I agree that broadhead arrows aren't necessary for creating distractions.
Quote Posted by Constance
Basically, my point is that fleeing shouldn't be the only option when you get spotted.
But fleeing
isn't the only option when you get spotted...even without a sword.
Quote Posted by Constance
Most missions, original or not, allowed to "kill", at the very least, the undead and other non-human creatures. If I remember well, Brother Murus even specifically asks Garrett to dispose of the undead in some difficulty mode (though some players such as Lytha have ways to avoid dealing with him).
Agreed, but Garrett has plenty of other ways to kill non-human creatures if he really has to, like broadhead arrows, fire arrows, possibly backstabbing with a dagger, turning creatures against each other, and probably other ways I haven't thought of. I don't think having a sword handy on top of all that is that important, even during those types of situations. And besides, I'm not even really sure that young Garrett should face undead and lots of inhuman creatures prior to TDP. I think his opponents back then should pretty much all be humans. Wouldn't you agree?
Quote Posted by Constance
Let's suppose a Thief prequel would have 3 difficulty modes, just like the originals : I firmly believe that some killing should still be allowed in the lowest difficulty at least. It's alright with me if you forbid any killing in the medium difficulty and even forbid/limitate KO use in the highest difficulty mode : these are made for the experienced player. But the lowest difficulty should be "noob friendly". (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132248) Let Khad play it the way he wants ! xD
Fair enough, I concede that particular point. I just don't think the player has to kill with a sword.
jtr7 on 19/1/2013 at 06:44
Interesting. Twelve have voted, but no item has twelve votes. Also, one could assume, and be quite wrong or right, that those who didn't vote for the crystals also didn't vote for any fantasy, magic, alchemical item. If it's true that several people have voted for just a real world toolset, then they might want a reboot, not a prequel, glad to be rid of creatures--OR! OR...they want Garrett to really be unprepared for typical City denizens who aren't, or no longer are, human, which could be exciting for veteran players looking for increased challenge, but still misses the point of "prequel".
Seeing the lack of interest for fantasy items, I wonder if these pseudo- or quasi-taffers want a reboot where the game plays exactly like they thought it would when they first fired up a Thief game, and they just want to rob real world locales and humans (maybe dogs and cats, but no spiders, no creatures, no undead), without glyphs and magic, etc. And since the sword is still thought of as a person killer, rather than a tool, and the many purely navigational and defensive, non-lethal, survival uses, non-doorway bashing purposes (reduced if there are no huge spiders' webs, boarded-up passages, foliage, bashable electronics, or magic ensnarements to get out of) are typically forgotten, then I wonder if the sword is popular in this poll as a killing and confrontation excuse, since surely the veterans know how to stay close to the shadows, avoid the light, and have learned how to remain unseen.
Say, have any of you ever knocked an enemy's arrow out of the air before it hit you? It's possible. Try it. If patches haven't disabled it on purpose or accident. The arrow emitters in the Keeper Chapel are a good place to make your own sort of pitching machine, and Shipping...and Receiving, up on the catwalk stretched North and South between Buildings A and B, with the archers on the ground below, make a good place to give yourself time to dodge, and it's lit well enough to see the arrows coming. I haven't tried swiping at Mechanist crossbow bolts or Turret bolts with the sword, yet, but I've had mixed results with the Sawbots and good results with cannonballs. Using the block key works half the time if you aren't really trying, and of course, the blackjack works on lots of AIs and items, just with only one hit-point max, versus many hit points with the sword, especially if you can increase the velocity with how you move Garrett himself as the swing goes. Just wondering if those who want the sword are going for more than purist or combative wishes.
A reboot would completely free up the possibilities, indeed.