The Shroud on 21/1/2013 at 09:18

---

Well, now 18 have voted and the only item which has received almost unanimous approval is the blackjack (17 votes), which is pretty much what I anticipated. Water arrows, broadhead arrows, and the compass also have a high percentage of approval (over 3/4ths of voters), next being non-TDP/TMA lockpicks (close to 3/4ths), then rope arrows (exactly 2/3rds). From there, the vote drops steadily below a 2/3rds majority, starting with healing potions (11 votes), then flash bombs (10 votes), and rapidly on downward. Voters are divided exactly in half when it comes to moss arrows and holy water. Then approval drops below 50%, starting with the sword (8 votes), then noisemaker arrows and a grappling hook (7 votes each), only 1/3rd approving of gas arrows, less than that wanting fire arrows, explosive mines, gas mines and a dagger (5 votes each), and finally the extreme minority wanting speed potions and breath potions (only 4 votes each).

So more or less what one might expect in the long run. The Thief fan community is a diverse group, everyone having their own unique idiosyncrasies, preferring certain items and disliking others for various reasons that often don't sync up with one another. There is no unanimous commonality, no single uniting viewpoint, no fundamentally opposed groups or 'factions' within the crowd, no party-loyalty or exclusivity. Ultimately, it comes down to each item having multifacted approval or disapproval - not based on simplistic, singular principles or stances but varieties of factors and reasons for each item either receiving or not receiving a vote from each individual person. In short, we should abandon our assumptions of any one of us representing the community's views and opinions - we are all separate, all different, and none of us truly defines what constitutes an 'authentic' taffer.


If you acknowledge the likelihood of such an assumption being wrong as readily as you assume it could be right, I fail to understand why you bother to highlight the assumption in the first place. At any rate, that assumption would obviously be wrong, from a sheer statistical standpoint. If that were the case, all "fantasy, magic, and alchemical items" would have received the same number of votes each, thus plainly dividing the community into pro-fantasy and anti-fantasy factions. Clearly that isn't the case, as the various fantasy-oriented items have each received different levels of approval, indicating that there are no truly defining 'pro-fantasy' or 'anti-fantasy' factions among us. In fact, the vast majority of the items each have a different total of votes, ranging from 17 to 4 at present. So there are no 'parties' here, just individuals, each with different opinions and perspectives. It's time to discard this notion that there are united, competing groups among us, representing fundamentally opposing ideals. There are no defined groups, every single fan has different preferences about everything.


No one has even come out and said that they want a strictly "real world tool-set" yet, as you put it, and the numbers don't reflect that either. I really don't see much point in supposing this and supposing that, and saying people "might" want this or that, and if so, what they must really want is a reboot rather than a prequel. There's already a poll up to determine whether people want a prequel or not. Let's leave it to people to speak for themselves about what they want and why they want it. That's what this thread and the associated poll are for, after all - to find out the facts, not to presume.


You have no right to label anyone here "pseudo" or "quasi" taffers (aka inauthentic Thief fans) just because they don't think every single item from TDP belongs in a Thief prequel. Who are you to determine what constitutes a "true" or "pure" devotee of the Thief series? You don't have a monopoly on the criteria for what earns that badge. Stop with the condescending labels.


Well, has anyone actually said that? No. So far, the only one who has been talking about a reboot is you. The rest of us are talking about what the whole point of this discussion was in the first place, a prequel set immediately after Garrett leaves the Keepers and begins his thieving career - in Thief's world, not ours.


Well, that's why I asked Constance (one of those veterans to whom you refer, by the way) why she wants to keep the sword in the game. And it turns out that her reasons aren't about killing and confrontation for experienced players, they're about making the game accessible to new players. I disagree with her point of view, but at least I now know what her point of view is. I think that's the first step one must take in any discussion or debate. Facts are always better than assumptions. So I agree - let's find out why people have voted or not voted for each item, and let them state their reasons themselves. On that note, I also asked you about your reasons for wanting to keep gas arrows in a Thief prequel. You appear to have ignored that post...

The Shroud on 22/1/2013 at 21:32

---

But that's just it - the argument about whether or not the sword belongs in the game is just as much or more about the gameplay side of the issue (i.e. "game-confined argumentation") as it is about the logic or illogic of a character like Garrett carrying a sword around on his thieving jobs. To a large extent, the argument belongs confined to the game, because it is specifically the game (and more specifically, a hypothetical prequel to TDP) that we're talking about, not our world.


I don't see anything here that I disagree with or that contradicts the points I've made. If anything, this enforces my points - the sword is not a particularly useful item for Garrett. Maybe your statements are more in response to what jtr7 and Constance have said (which is what I had originally thought, but your statement, "I have already reminded you both" was somewhat ambiguous as I'm unsure who "you both" refers to)?


So more or less a display piece on his wall, then? The thing is, in my point of view, Garrett is above all those using knives, clubs and axes, but not because he can wield a sword - rather, because he's capable of avoiding melee combat altogether with his skills in stealth and evasion. For that reason, I don't think a character like Garrett would actually value such a weapon very much, or look to it as a status symbol. He's above using a sword just as much as he's above using knives, clubs or axes. Why care about a sword when a simple blackjack or a few water arrows gets the job done, and much more cleanly and quietly? If, for example, someone had offered to sell Garrett a sword to help him in his trade, I would expect Garrett to more or less snort arrogantly and reply something like, "No thanks. The shadows and the element of surprise are all I need."

The Shroud on 24/1/2013 at 03:09

---

I said to a large extent, the argument belongs confined to the game (due to the gameplay-focused side of the debate), not completely confined to the game. My point was that a large portion of this issue is specifically about gameplay, which we know is often times an independent subject from the "Is this logical?" argument. This all goes back to how I prefaced this discussion in the beginning, by saying that there are really two separate issues involved when considering whether or not any given item belongs in a Thief prequel: "Does it improve the gameplay?" and "Does it make sense for Garrett to have this?" Some items might fulfill one criterion while not meeting the other. In the case of the sword, I happen to think it fails to meet both criteria, but those two subjects are still separate arguments, and the gameplay side of the issue has been the main focus of the debate so far. Again, I'm not saying by any stretch of the imagination that general logic is irrelevant since it's a game - I'm saying general logic is relevant, but largely a separate type of debate from the discussion about the quality of gameplay.


I agree completely, and therefore I think you misunderstood my position on the subject. You and I are actually on the same page about this.


It isn't backed up. That was never my position and that is not the reason I brought up the fact that this isn't our world. I was talking about the division between gameplay-centered arguments, like "The sword shouldn't be in the game because it is counter-intuitive to stealth gameplay", and arguments about real-world facts and logic, like "The sword wouldn't really be as versatile and effective at bashing open doors as the game makes it out to be".

My point was that these are separate topics - both valid, but independent from one another, in so far as the meat of each topic dealing with a different type of objective in the overall game design: one objective is for the game to be fun and engaging, and another is for it to make sense and achieve verisimilitude. People assign different degrees of priority and importance to those two aspects, and that's another reason why these two subjects are typically self-contained discussions - maybe brushing against each other from time to time or relating to each other in the larger scheme of things, but diverging into independent topics when we really explore the focus of each one.

So far, it's true that our discussion has dealt mainly with the gameplay side of the issue, and thus the whole debate appears to be confined to just the game's mechanics without accounting for real-world logic, but that's because we're focusing on these issues one at a time. To a large extent (not completely), the gameplay side of the argument does belong confined to the game's warped reality, rather than relying a great deal on real-world logic, just as the issue of real-world logic does not rely upon the game's mechanics - they are separate spheres. It could also be that the pro-sword people don't necessarily disagree with the cons when it comes to the real-world logic side of the issue, and therefore have elected to concentrate largely on the gameplay side of the debate, since that's apparently where the primary focus of our disagreement lies.


I simply meant that it's not our reality - by very dint of the fact that things in the game often don't behave as we would expect them to in the real world. I am simply stating what is, not what ought to be. I completely agree with you that the game's reality ought to simulate our reality (at least as far as basic physics and logic - I'm not against fantasy elements like fictional creatures and magic), but again, that's a separate discussion from whether the gameplay itself is fun, balanced, and functioning the way we believe it should within the context of the game's premise and theme.


Ah, I see. I remember those. But we're not talking about a longsword versus a short sword this time, we're talking about whether young Garrett should be carrying a sword of any kind to begin with.


Hehe. Well I honestly never thought about Garrett esteeming himself as superior based on his sword training (especially since, as we've both acknowledged, his fencing skills really are quite inferior...). But anyway, I think we agree on the things that matter. A sword isn't, and shouldn't be depicted in the game as being, useful for bashing open locked doors. That's utter nonsense - and it detracts from the stealth theme of the game as well.

The Shroud on 24/1/2013 at 22:18

---

You know, I was thinking, it might be a really crazy idea, but what if we used Skyrim's engine to construct some pre-TDP FM's? I mean, Skyrim already has the medieval-like elements of Thief (stone and cobblestone textues, torches, medieval weapons, clothing, etc), and even contains some industrial/mechanized elements (dwemer machinery). With enough mods, it might conceivably be possible to completely convert Skyrim into a Thief game:


* Replace the player's default appearance (including clothing) with Garrett's appearance and leave out character creation
* Disable leveling of skills so the player's skills never increase and they never level up
* Set skills like Sneak, Lockpicking, Pickpocket and Archery to appropriate values and give the player appropriate skill perks
* Remove all spells and powers from the player so they can't use magic or special abilities
* Disable the player's ability to use forges, workbenches, grindstones, tanning racks, alchemy labs, enchanting altars, etc.
* Create thieving items like a blackjack, water arrows, fire arrows, rope arrows, noisemaker arrows, flash bombs, etc.
* Construct zones for missions that are isolated from other locations in Skyrim with no way to access the rest of Skyrim
* Disable the map so the player can never view Skyrim or fast-travel to any of its locations
* Include interiors in the same cells as exteriors with openable doors, so there is no loading between interiors and exteriors
* Disable Skyrim's music and replace it with appropriate ambient sound files from TDP and TMA

...and lots of other tweaks and changes of course. It would obviously be a hell of a lot of work, but Skyrim's engine is capable of a lot more than what the Dark engine or the Unreal engine can do, and graphically, it's undeniably superior. As fas as items go, there are already bows and arrows, swords, daggers, lockpicks (and a decent lockpicking minigame), and other things from Thief. The Skyrim modding community is highly dedicated and capable, and there is very little that they can't accomplish at this point. What do you think?

The Shroud on 28/1/2013 at 20:33

---

But why would copyright infringement be an issue with what essentially boils down to a big downloadable mod for Skyrim, for which no one receives any profit? I thought copyrights were only relevant when something's actually being sold.