Neb on 12/6/2010 at 15:25
- Rope arrows with auto-target. Obviously.
(Oh god, please, no)
cast on 12/6/2010 at 17:46
Quote Posted by Neb
- Rope arrows with auto-target. Obviously.
That's unimaginable to me ;0
I'd like to see arrows travel a bit faster though, currently they're comparable to my paper planes ;x
zil on 12/6/2010 at 20:45
Missions at different times of day, not only midnight. Variable weather. And then the stuff from older games, swimming, rope arrows. AI should be more tough.
Lytha on 13/6/2010 at 14:11
Make it only playable in 3rd person mode, and make the thief character wear some sexy outfit. Add clothes shops so that you can pimp her up even more with appropriately slutty hotpants and stuff.
Then make her sidestep whenever she tries to lean, because 3rd person mode demands that. If that means that leaning is essentially useless now, since she'll leave the shadow and stand in bright light whenever she does that, is of course not important at all.
Disable lean forward, because you can't fathom a way to implement that in 3rd person view.
Same goes for swimming, rope climbing, archery, sitting, running, sneaking, etc.
Combine all of these technological advances with stupidly and pointlessly drawn out missions in the sense of Thieves Guild or Soulforge, and split these for the consolists into small chunks, say, 6 per mission or something.
Make sure that the exit screens between the parts always ask immersively for a confirmation that the player really wants to leave the current map.
---------------
The bad thing about this thread is that I can actually see them implement a lot of these horrible suggestions, by the way. Nope, I have no faith in them.
TheGrimSmile on 14/6/2010 at 18:53
On the dagger vs. sword argument-
I feel that a thief carrying a sword is a bit odd... well, more than a bit. I thought carrying a dagger was more thief-like, but I disliked the ability to backstab. It's basically bjing while making more noise. You could do the same thing in the first two games by walking up behind someone and bringing your sword down on their head, but the loss of speed and slow movements conveyed that this was the wrong way of going about it.
For that reason alone, I would say to keep the sword.
I love my in-mission saves. I press the quicksave button twice as much as I knock a guard out. I don't think I should have to play the dumbed down version just because I like to play that way. I know if I die that I did something wrong. No need to start at the beginning for me to understand that. If I'm going to wish for the return of longer levels, I would definitely not like to see this implemented.
Saving is messing up and going back to fix it.
Cheating is messing up but not having any penalty for it.
Also, it would be a good idea to limit you based on the weight you can carry, but I don't think it should have an effect on your actually ability.
First, why would you want to discourage the gathering of loot? Isn't that the point of the game?
Second, why would you want to discourage swimming? It's not like swimming has ever made the game easier or anything, so I don't understand why it would be looked down upon.
I think swimming should be allowed, but maybe some limitations on where you could swim. Invisible walls are boring, but perhaps there are... I dunno, piranha's out in the ocean that prevent you from swimming across the ocean...
Yeah, I'll have to think about that one.
I agree that the loot glint and arrow paths should be done away with, and I stand by first person.
I think there should be some kind of money sink. Though I like the city hub element, I also liked how in the first two games, you had to start from scratch and you couldn't just hoard money. Not like we want a Bioshock problem on our hands...
The Faction AI has much room for improvement. I don't want Hammers crazily attacking citizens or Pagan's going after me because I happened to be nearby when someone walked over a thirty foot drop after waking from their nap.
TDS always hinted that Pagans and Hammerites could cast spells on you, but that only happened when I was standing next to a pagan who had been turned invisible.
Gvozdika on 14/6/2010 at 19:04
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
But you cannot impose it on everyone (without causing complaints about console elements especially here). It was enough over the last years to leave it to different playing styles and thus self-imposed rules.
Of course I cant, I dont make the game. I would if I did, as a general improvement in gameplay. I think a good game is one that does not have players restrict themselves, but makes them accept the game with all its playing abilities as a satisfying
challenge. Naturally you can also argue that maximum
freedom is best. That however is not a game you can win, as winning then is a mere definition made by the player.
(Here = a community, that is so obsessed with and stuck in the past, that it considers any kind of change as bad by default. That scares away anyone with a fresh approach on the game with their elitist bickering. And I see trial and error - which is what reloading boils down to - among the most consolish playing styles.)
Quote:
Maybe for a higher difficulty
Its a start.
TheGrimSmile on 14/6/2010 at 19:19
I'm not mocking you, but I'm just curious. Have you played a game that operated in this way with long, sprawling levels and the large possibility of death or else having to run and hide somewhere for 5 minutes upon discovery?
Malleus on 14/6/2010 at 20:20
Quote Posted by Gvozdika
Of course I cant, I dont make the game. I would if I did, as a general improvement in gameplay.
You've got to be kidding me. How about having a quicksave/quickload function and letting each individual player decide if they use it or not? You can keep ironmanning, while others can mess around with quickloading if that's what they like. What's wrong with having options?
Gvozdika on 15/6/2010 at 13:04
Quote Posted by TheGrimSmile
Saving is messing up and going back to fix it.
Cheating is messing up but not having any penalty for it.
If you - as the game does allow - quicksave your every move, then that penalty is virtually void. Now, in my opinion chapters / missions make a good threshold for a big-enough penalty.
Quote:
First, why would you want to discourage the gathering of loot? Isn't that the point of the game?
I would want to discourage gathering more loot than your actual skill allows, give it a risk vs. benefit trade-off.
Quote:
Second, why would you want to discourage swimming? It's not like swimming has ever made the game easier or anything, so I don't understand why it would be looked down upon.
Swimming has made the game easier at various points. The fact alone that guards drown in water or simply do not follow you there made for plenty opportunities for exploitation.
Quote:
Have you played a game that operated in this way with long, sprawling levels and the large possibility of death or else having to run and hide somewhere for 5 minutes upon discovery?
Well. I did play Thief Gold. I havent been able to complete Bonehoard on the highest difficulty without saving, but I did on lower setting and it felt good.
When I played Fallout 3, I would restart the entire game from scratch upon each death. Due to non-linear gameplay it never felt repetitive until I had explored virtually the entire map after weeks and months of playing. Due to my cautious play style my learning curve was quite shallow, which in turn meant I got many times the play experience I would have gotten from one quick linear walkthrough.
Lytha on 15/6/2010 at 14:37
Personal challenges are fun.
Enforcing your personal challenges onto others is not.
