Beleg Cúthalion on 7/7/2010 at 07:37
Of course the sword/dagger thing isn't the most important element of Thief, but still the things I suggested would be (IMHO) improvements in terms of ...you know... grasp. Unless I'm completely spoiled with the idea of being able to carry twenty weapons on my back, I know what e.g. a sword is and in what way it could affect me. Plus, as I said, I wasn't talking about new and manpower-eating concepts. In 2010 it shouldn't devour a whole development team to implement a sword or dagger, left aside altering a few numbers to adjust (dis-) advantages. This isn't "much".
It's this ...let's say... handiwork realism I'm aiming for. (Gvozdika probably had the same idea.) The fantasy element doesn't kill my perception when I shoot a water arrow, pick a lock or fight some guard with nothing but a dagger. In these cases it's just a bow and an arrow, lockpicks and a dagger and there should be nothing fantastical about it. And I would want neither the pros nor the cons of a certain tool to be disproportionately altered. Plus, usually this doesn't necessarily mean the game would get unplayable or imbalanced. I mean, if we for instance took a more realistic approach to arrow shootin' we could make the aiming harder but increase the damage, instead of being able to shoot five arrows into a guard's face before he finally dies.
And finally, on the meta level, why would you want to choke all those discussion only because the devs might read it and bend over backwards in order to achieve it while dismissing other important elements? I mean, we've heard it once and I don't think anyone of us would want them to.
jtr7 on 7/7/2010 at 08:44
Quote Posted by Gvozdika
Thief for me has always been a game about immersion and atmosphere. The former requires a distinct level of plausibility. Im not saying realism mind you. If for the sake of simplicity or limited budget things make it into the game, that feel too dissonant or simply plain wrong, then this may have been forgivable when it was 1998.
Today I would not forgive that. Immersion needs a basic level of plausibility or else the whole thing is turned into a cartoon. And Thief should not be that kind of a game.
Are you sure you wanna go there? If the game had the ideas the tech, budget, and deadlines of the day didn't allow, it would be far less plausible, and more D&D-ish, save probably the grappling hook and rope. TDS was in many ways less plausible than TDP, and it was made years later. I don't know what games you've been playing where the blades are used plausibly without taking over the control from the player and automating combat moves, or something. You realize that EM is employing most of a team of 80, working two years--barring a possible extension granted by Square-Enix--to make the game do what no game I've seen has, right, including gutting an existing engine to make it do what no engine was born to do except the Dark Engine? For every implication that a modern game should surely be able to do some breakthrough thing, in the context of actual logistics, I want the name of the game(s) that can do what is almost claimed to be possible in the industry, with a small team and finite budget. A game that is built around combat will usually lack elsewhere to make it happen, and since utility is more important in a Thief game than killing, accurate moves are not as important as moves that lack sportsmanship to just give the player time to flee, or get through, or drop a monster quickly.
What you guys seem want is a reality simulator with no fantasy-genre or sci-fi, with I guess the exception of traditional non-Thief Steampunk, and no intentional silliness, with more attention given to perfecting archery and the use of blades (the latter of which is not a priority in a Thief game, and not due to limitations, but intention, else it would've been built upon in either sequel, not kept the same or made much worse); or you need to refine your arguments, because if the blades are unacceptably cartoony and implausible already, then so is 90% of the entire trilogy. You can blame limitations of the late 90s, but that's ignorance and folly and treats the devs as having their hands tied. The sword didn't force them to add several slashable and bashable and choppable items in Thief Gold and TMA, and they didn't treat the sword as a sword in most cases.
Thief was intended to be unusual on almost every level. Screw conformity to status quo and cultural norms and history in a world that was meant to mix and match from hundreds of crazy sources.
Any bragging about not having much problem with the dagger needs to be backed up by a video, not only to show you aren't full of it, but to show how it's done. Anyway, Garrett needs a utility
something so the world, not his fighting skills, can be fleshed-out more fully. Stealth and agility are not enough when breaking and entering is an obvious factor, and many things he can undo with his sword are plausible and common obstacles, which TDS did away with, even though other tools could manage.
Why pick on Thief, when you could look elsewhere for your Medieval combat fix, and let the devs make a Thief game, with the highest priority given to stealth and utility unlike any games out there, not frikkin' combat? Why are you drawing the blade so much and place yourself in situations that are entirely avoidable and unnecessary, unprovoked, not encouraged, merely allowable, and intentionally not given priority over, say, the elemental crystals?
Beleg Cúthalion on 7/7/2010 at 11:33
While suggesting a deranged view on Thief for others, your own isn't exactly balanced (put into words) either. You are mixing the design (fantasy) elements all the time with simple gameplay mechanics which could exist elsewhere without any problem, which have almost nothing whatsoever to do with the "art direction". That's why there is indeed a difference between a stylistical design approach to the whole game and actually stylized tool implementation. The latter would be "cartoony" in a negative way, the former wouldn't. Yes, TDP probably was different from the rest when it appeared, but that does at no point say it was less realistic. Quite the opposite IMHO.
Second, the whole blade discussion is about being more thievy, not about having more "medieval combat", just in case you haven't noticed. It seems a bit paradox if you accuse us of longing for "frikkin' combat" while wanting to preserve the sword as a tool for "breaking and entering", which would go along with a lot of mutilation if it was not going to be a combat tool as well – just like the T1/2 sword was. It wasn't mutilated so much (only to be thievy and comfortable), but it definitely remained the biggest combat element of the game. The problem with this kind of argument is that you could justify anything with it, a super-thievy multitool shaped as a prybar, a cape to strangle guards, I cannot even think of something more anti-immersive. "The technical gameplay must work and it can be everything since we're talking fantasy" is a bit the path of least resistance.
Third, a video for the dagger? Ah, don't overdo it. It is possible to kill in combat.
You won't be able to change the fact that people do consider Thief medieval. Personally I appreciate and have always appreciated that it wasn't cartoony despite its stylistical art direction. Moreover, I appreciated that the actual gameplay mechanics were more or less realistic. Hiding, extinguishing torches, blackjacking guards (OK, with a bit of drawback). Other games were usually less sober. We're not trying to make Thief like other games by adding more realistic or sober elements, we're trying to distinguish it even more.
ZylonBane on 7/7/2010 at 14:53
Quote Posted by Chade
I'm arguing the sword should be removed to discourage combat ... logically, this implies a certain attitude towards such objectives ...
Good idea. I argue that fire extinguishers should be outlawed. You know... to discourage fires.
Gvozdika on 7/7/2010 at 20:23
Quote Posted by jtr7
Are you sure you wanna go there? If the game had the ideas the tech, budget, and deadlines of the day didn't allow, it would be far less plausible, and more D&D-ish, save probably the grappling hook and rope.
Dont know about that so I cant comment. I would however have prefered rope and grappling hook to rope arrows.
Quote:
TDS was in many ways less plausible than TDP, and it was made years later.
Maybe, but it was far more plausible in the areas that matter the most. Improved AI for one, arguably the single most important aspect in the game. And also changes in blackjack mechanics, the need for the player to carefully align himself with the victim's head instead of just jumping in club swinging from random direction, or even worse, exploiting the forward-leaning.
Quote:
What you guys seem want is a reality simulator with no fantasy-genre or sci-fi
I dont mind zombies, mages or bug beasts. What I want is a game that does basic things right. When guards can walk right into me without noticing me, then there is something seriously flawed with basic game mechanics. Its so absurd that all immersion goes down the drain in a split second.
Beleg Cúthalion on 7/7/2010 at 21:57
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Quote Posted by Chade
I'm arguing the sword should be removed to discourage combat
Good idea. I argue that fire extinguishers should be outlawed. You know... to discourage fires.
Epic logic fail I'd wager. Or rather: I'd sayin Internet. I wonder how many people you were able to trick just now with only sounding clever. :p
Chade on 7/7/2010 at 22:28
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Good idea. I argue that fire extinguishers should be outlawed. You know... to discourage fires.
That's a really stupid metaphor.
Fires can start with or without the player. Combat can't. Fire extinguishers can't start fires. Weapons can. Fire extinguishers are the quickest way to extinguish a fire. The sword isn't the quickest way to stop combat.
ZylonBane on 7/7/2010 at 22:53
Quote Posted by Chade
Fires can start with or without the player. Combat can't.
Without the player's volition, hell yes it can.
Chade on 8/7/2010 at 02:27
How? The player hangs around for no reason? Unlikely. The AI fight each other? Irrelevant.
ZylonBane on 9/7/2010 at 15:43
Uh, the player is doing something and a guard comes up and attacks him. You know, the entire reason hostile AIs exist in the game?
Stop being so stupid.
