New Horizon on 29/7/2008 at 20:53
Quote Posted by hexhunter
Anyway, the game is probably going to use pre-made engines, Eidos may not toy around with the numbers that much...Less is more in the sense of 'the imagination' being larger than what can be presented on the screen.
It has already been stated that it will use a pre-made engine, but the engine will still have to be majorly overhauled.
Zillameth on 29/7/2008 at 21:07
Quote Posted by nicked
Less is more!More can be more, too. You just need to remember what games are for. Or any other kind of media, for that matter. Call it fun, art, or entertainment, in any case their purpose is certainly not to emulate life.
In my opinion, a good way to design a game is to think about it in terms of layers. Each layer adds new degree of depth to the game (which usually involves increasing its complexity), but is essentially optional. Ghosting works in this way in Thief, and so do difficulty levels. Faction system in TDS is also something a player can ignore. This allows different people to be equally entertained: casual bypassers as well as hardcore fans. It also allows the game to adapt to player's needs without violating its own integrity. If making friends with a bunch of fanatics is too much of a headache for you, you can just rob them all and forget them, and it won't be any less "thiefy" than shredding all those rustmites into needles.
Adding new features, such as guards who wake up, is not going to be a problem for as long as the layered structure is retained. I really like Sid Meier's Pirates in this regard. It allows the player to choose their preference by simply selecting a difficulty level. Each level not only makes a pirate's life more difficult, but also more complex with new factors that need to be taken into account.
The problem with many features proposed in this thread is that they cannot be layered like that. For instance, picking locks with audio hints alone would make the game inaccessible for that 25 percent of population whose hearing is just not good enough, because lockpicking is an obligatory part of gameplay. This can be bypassed by providing visual hints as well on lower difficulty levels, but some features reach so deep into core mechanics that providing an alternative would effectively mean creating another game.
I'm a big fan of big main menus with a lot of toggleable options. However, one huge problem with them is that many people feel intimidated by them. Another problem is that every combination of rules should be tested for balance and possible exploits. That's a lot of work, and work is expensive in this industry.
SubJeff on 29/7/2008 at 22:11
Can I just butt in here as the voice of reason and remind everyone that using a blackjack or a sap properly will cause long-term unconsciousness certainly lasting over an hour, likely lasting half a day, probably cause serious injury requiring weeks or months to recover from and can even kill.
If you want to be strictly realistic about blackjacking Garrett knows how to use it and no-one is waking up during the mission after a BJ KO.
Realism problem solved.
Chade on 29/7/2008 at 22:23
Sorry to take so long to reply to you, SneaksieGarrett ... hectic times ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anyway, in regards to guards waking up, New Horizon and Zillameth have said most of things I wanted to say. I will add a few things though.
Consider that thief currently places no long term time restrictions on the player. There are, of course, plenty of short term ones (primarily guard patrols), which is what gives thief its tension. However, the player is free to initiate these short term challenges on their own terms and in their preferred timeframe, dictating the overall pace and direction of the gameplay.
The ability of the player to choose their own pace is important if the player is going to feel "in control" of the game, which I believe is one of the core aesthetics of thief (more on that later).
Sticking strong long term time restrictions on the player mucks about with some of the fundamental stuff that makes up the "thief experience". This is one area where the developers should tread with care.
Does this apply to guards waking up after a time delay? I think most believable implementations will strongly penalize the player, and screw around with a core part of the thief experience.
Another important consideration metioned by others, is that blackjacking is an important bridge between violent and less violent styles of play. I think it's important to encourage this style of play, as it's probably the easiest style of play in which the player will really start to feel "like Garrett".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Moving away from the "should guards wake up" debate, I've also been doing some thinking about the feeling of "being Garrett" over the past few days. Most of this is based on my experiences years ago at the Gamespy forums.
First off, Garrett is something of a rock star figure amoung a certian segment of gamers. This segment is not huge, but it is much wider then our niche audience here, probably more so then is commonly appreciated on these forums. I find this somewhat curious, as Garrett is not at first glance a "cool" character. But appearances are deceptive.
It was not uncommon for "Garrett vs Solid Snake/Sam Fisher" type arguments to occur. The general argument in favour of Solid Snake/Sam Fisher were the cool gadgets/moves/whatever they would use, whereas those in favour of Garrett would argue that "Garrett doesn't need those moves".
Garrett is a rock star, not because of all the cool things he can do, but because he doesn't have cool moves. Garrett chooses to go into some extremely hazardous situations of his own free will (he is always in control), and sneaks through them: not because he possesses this gadget or that move or this bonus, but because Garrett doesn't need them. Garrett's lack of special abilities is what makes him feel like the ultimate master thief.
Or at least, this was my experience years ago on the Gamespy forums. I joined hoping that my conversations there would generalise decently to a wider circle of gamers, so hopefully these thoughts about Garrett accurately capture his appeal.
Of course, Garrett does in reality have some extremely helpfull special abilities. In particular, he has the ability to hide in shadows (courtesy of some very favourable level design), and the ability to hear guards well in advance (courtesy of the guard's loud mumbles and grumbles, and a good sound propogation engine). Garrett has the ability to be in control of the direction and pace of the gameplay (courtesy of some favourable game play mechanics). Finally there are also the special tools of the trade which Garrett does use, but IMO these do not play as central a role in thief as they do in other stealth games.
Note that while Garrett is given plenty of special abilities with which to get around a level, the really fundamental abilities are not actually presented as special moves or the like ... they are tied into the surrounding game mechanics and level design. Aesthetically, Garrett does not have many important special moves, even although from the point of view of the game's mechanics he has plenty.
This indicates to me that if the developers are to preserve Garrett's unique take on being a rock star figure, they need to be very careful about any changes they make to the gameplay. I suspect Thief's unique aesthetic is easily broken. This isn't to say that they shouldn't make any changes. They just need to be carefull to make changes which will compliment Garrett's image, rather then take away from it.
Garrett needs to stay in control. Garrett needs to appear to be solving most problems he encounters using his intrinsic mastery of stealth. Anything which Garrett uses to solve problems on a regular basis should preferably be implemented within the game mechanics or level design ... BUT it also needs to be implemented in such a way that Garrett "does something" to take advantage of it (even with sound propagation, the player has to listen).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, that's a bunch of theory, anyway. I must admit however that I find it easier to talk about theory then imagine ways to put it into practice ... :o
Maybe later I'll have some actual ideas, as opposed to a lot of hot air!
Jah on 29/7/2008 at 22:26
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Which again punishes the player for being stealthy, since now they still have to contend with the guard they 'properly' removed from the play field.
I already suggested possible ways of penalizing the player for using violence, thereby making violence a less desirable option. How exactly are you "punishing" the player for being stealthy, if the alternative is even worse?
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Binding them up essentially cancels out any need for the guard to wake up since a guard who finds an unconscious guard is going to go up in alertness anyway and notify other guards.
IMO, some features can be justified simply because they add to the atmosphere or general
feel of the game. Not everything needs to have a revolutionary effect on gameplay. I would like this feature, because it would feel more realistic than the permanently unconscious guards and increase my immersion by reducing the need for suspension of disbelief. Others may feel differently, of course. Feel, atmosphere and the importance of realism are highly subjective matters.
SubJeff on 29/7/2008 at 22:37
As I've stated 2 posts above - guards waking up is NOT realistic, regardless of how you feel.
Jah on 29/7/2008 at 22:40
Quote Posted by Zillameth
I'm a big fan of big main menus with a lot of toggleable options. However, one huge problem with them is that many people feel intimidated by them. Another problem is that every combination of rules should be tested for balance and possible exploits. That's a lot of work, and work is expensive in this industry.
This would probably be my preferred implementation - making some of the less central gameplay features optional. Instead of toggleable options for each feature, I would rather have the difficulty levels affect a broader range of things than just the objectives (T1/2) or loot requirement/AI awareness (TDS), i.e. have each difficulty level add a new "layer" to gameplay, to use Zillameth's term - a few pre-defined rule settings would be easier to test and balance than the plethora of combinations brought by being able to toggle features on or off individually. Bringing new features and more complexity gradually would probably also be the best way to satisfy both casual gamers new to the genre and hardcore Thief veterans.
And as for scouting orbs... I never use them, either, but that's because I felt they were poorly implemented, in that you can only look through the orb once. I thought they could have been useful, especially for ghosters, if it was possible to switch between normal view and orb view and use them to keep an eye around the corridor behind the corner.
New Horizon on 30/7/2008 at 03:14
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
As I've stated 2 posts above - guards waking up is NOT realistic, regardless of how you feel.
Yup, I think that was something oDDity or someone else on the team brought up too. There were certainly enough nails in the casket of this idea that we haven't thought about it again.
I would like to remind Jah...or anyone who might share his view of my statements...that I and the rest of the team are not simply approaching this from an 'I feel' perspective, we're approaching this as people who have been working together on recreating a Thief-like experience in the D3 engine over the last 4 years. We have grown from enthusiastic, naive, 'we're gonna outdo T3' ranters, to serious developers. We've discussed and argued almost every point imaginable by now. The experience has been enlightening at times....you have moments where you think..."wow, LGS must have felt like this...or Ion Storm probably had these same discussions". You begin to see how all the pieces fit together to achieve the ultimate goal. :) Our goal has always been to stick to the LGS spirit set in T1/2. So far, I think we're succeeding....but you will all be the judges when we release. When I play a test mission in our latest builds, I am now seeing AI that are feeling more like Thief AI every week.
electrikcar on 30/7/2008 at 04:23
Garrett needs a SACK for gameplay and realism reasons, this is Thief after all.
The sack starts empty but as it is filled with loot it becomes large and cumbersome, slowing the player down and producing more noise while moving. The individual loot items have size and weight which affects the sack dynamics, making small valuable items more attractive than bulky ones. The player has the option to drop the sack and leave it in a discrete location to free them up for stealthy scouting, the player can only carry a small amount of loot without the sack and this needs to be manually deposited in the sack before more loot can be collected. Moving the sack is risky, so the player needs to have already scouted ahead for a new sack hiding place. If the sack is found by a guard it is picked up and carried to a secure part of the map where the contents are emptied onto the floor. If Garrett doesn't stop the guard doing this, he needs to pick-pocket the sack back off the guard and recollect the loot off the floor. Once the mission objectives are complete and the player is satisfied with the size of their sack they are faced with the challenge of leaving the map carrying the large noisy sack. So basically the greedier you are and/or the less discerning you are about the size and weight of the loot, the harder the game becomes.
New Horizon on 30/7/2008 at 04:32
Quote Posted by electrikcar
Garrett needs a SACK for gameplay and realism reasons, this is Thief after all.
The sack starts empty but as it is filled with loot it becomes large and cumbersome, slowing the player down and producing more noise while moving. The individual loot items have size and weight which affects the sack dynamics, making small valuable items more attractive than bulky ones. The player has the option to drop the sack and leave it in a discrete location to free them up for stealthy scouting, the player can only carry a small amount of loot without the sack and this needs to be manually deposited in the sack before more loot can be collected. Moving the sack is risky, so the player needs to have already scouted ahead for a new sack hiding place. If the sack is found by a guard it is picked up and carried to a secure part of the map where the contents are emptied onto the floor. If Garrett doesn't stop the guard doing this, he needs to pick-pocket the sack back off the guard and recollect the loot off the floor. Once the mission objectives are complete and the player is satisfied with the size of their sack they are faced with the challenge of leaving the map carrying the large noisy sack. So basically the greedier you are and/or the less discerning you are about the size and weight of the loot, the harder the game becomes.
Wow, sounds a lot like oDDity.
