jay pettitt on 14/4/2013 at 09:57
I'm failry sure that I'm the only sane person here. ;)
skacky on 14/4/2013 at 10:01
What? No way, *I* am the only sane person here. Y'all wrong. :mad:
jtr7 on 14/4/2013 at 10:04
Who's sane, who's trying to play sane, who's insane, who's playing insane?
Nuth on 14/4/2013 at 10:33
I've made 4 posts prior to March 28, 2013 that had anything to do with Thief 4. This is the only one that could be considered bitching about it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
7th Mar 2011 06:04 #112
Nuth
Member
Registered: Jul 2002
I want the immersion of 1st person. I'll buy it if there's 1st person, probably no matter how messed up it might be. I really don't want a game that forces a shift from 1st to 3rd for certain actions(such as combat or shooting arrows) either--if there's too much of that I won't buy it. I definitely won't buy Thief 4 if the only way you can play it is using a 3rd person main character pixel doll. If it's 3rd person only, I won't even consider it Thief.
Those Victorian looking streetlights are drab and uninteresting, so I'm hoping they haven't missed the proper ambiance of Thief. Not too concerned yet, though.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My assumption had always been that if Stephen Russell were available to voice act Garrett, he would. I would have placed raising concerns about that in the same category as worrying that EM was going to set Thief on Mars and give us a purple Garrett with 3 heads voiced by Lindsay Lohan, Bill Gates, and my next door neighbor. In hindsight, I'm kicking myself for not bitching about that and everything else there might have been even a lunatic possibility that EM could get wrong. Foolish me for trusting them. Making up for lost time now, I guess, thinking that it's probably too late(if it wasn't always too late.)
Tomi on 14/4/2013 at 10:39
Quote Posted by CloudOJD
Imagine if there was a new Lord of the Rings in which Frodo Baggins wasn't played by Elijah Wood, for no good reason other than "new technology, yay!". That'd be pretty retarded of the moviemakers, wouldn't it? There is simply no way the new technology could ever be good enough to redeem the immersion they have taken away by replacing the actor. That's exactly what EM are doing with the new Thief.
I get your point, but I don't think that the comparison between a movie actor and a voice actor in a computer game really works. The "new technology, yay!" point is a very valid one though, and I don't completely buy EM's reasoning for that to be honest, there must have been some other reasons too.
However, if some new people wanted to film LotR again to make their own version of it, I wouldn't see replacing Elijah Wood with someone else as a problem at all. Elijah Wood
isn't Frodo Baggins, he's just an actor who did a pretty good job at playing that role, but I can't see any reason why some other actor couldn't do the same just as well.
qolelis on 14/4/2013 at 11:16
I'm signing the petition while of course sending a huge thank you to Stephen Russell, but in all other regards, I am more or less following NH's example.
Springheel on 14/4/2013 at 11:16
Frodo is a character from a book that has been imagined many different ways. Garrett is a character that is ONLY known by his voice. Every picture of Garrett is different; there's no way to identify him visually, unlike Batman (with the possible exception of the eye, but even that changes). The only consistent element was SR's voice.
CloudOJD on 14/4/2013 at 11:35
Quote Posted by Tomi
I get your point, but I don't think that the comparison between a movie actor and a voice actor in a computer game really works.
And why not, exactly? These people define the characters they play.
Quote Posted by Tomi
However, if some new people wanted to film LotR again to make their own version of it, I wouldn't see replacing Elijah Wood with someone else as a problem at all. Elijah Wood
isn't Frodo Baggins, he's just an actor who did a pretty good job at playing that role, but I can't see any reason why some other actor couldn't do the same just as well.
This is true. However, it is a lot different in the Thief situation. The LotR movie is based off a book, which means another filmmaker could make their own version of how they perceive it. But no matter who makes the movie, they will always hold what the book claims as true. The book gives the filmmakers the core elements, and the rest is up to the them to add and interpret.
In the book, it is stated that Gandalf's beard is white, for example. Even though everyone imagines it in a different way, the beard will always be white, because the book says it is.
Now look at this situation. LGS
made Thief. They didn't base it off a book that is free for anyone to make their own vision of it. They already defined the elements of Thief, and these elements were in there throughout the first three games. Stephen Russell is one of those elements that Eidos is changing. They are pretty much replacing the foundations that made the series what it is. (And it's not just Stephen Russell either. Take Hammerites and Pagans for example.)
Basically, what Eidos are doing is making a LotR movie in which there are no elves, dwarves, and the main character is Frodo, who is now an orc instead of a hobbit. It might as well be called something else entirely, if they're going to change so many things.
Quote Posted by thiefessa
Simply asking means just that, you simply ask. So now that we have established that you've asked (and received an answer); what are you doing now?
Repeating the question until they realize how idiotic what they are saying sounds.
Quote Posted by thiefessa
Did you not focus on the salient points of his post?
Yes, I have. In summary, he said "You guys are bitching", and you said you would frame it. Can I get an answer to
my question now?
Vae on 14/4/2013 at 11:38
Quote Posted by Renzatic
People. Congratulations. You've turned TTLG into the new NMA Fallout boards.
No, that's just your own hysteria talking.
Quote:
A bunch of overly hysterical, self entitled know-it-alls griping about each and every little thing you can come across, because...
...why?
Because you all love being victimized. Of course they're not going to understand
us.
You fail to understand the situation...There isn't any victimization, whatsoever.
Quote:
We're special, oldschool gamers with
taste.
No, it's called standards, based on objective evaluation...This is something that eludes you.
Quote:
Additions to the game like making a character agile is against Thief.
Actually, yes it is...If you understood the core design of THIEF, you would realize that making Garrett super-capable, goes against the fundamental principal of character vulnerability...as it is this essential vulnerability that continually sustains the appropriate tension.
Quote:
We'll say we're open minded, and we only want the best game possible, but when we treat a goddamn developer saying something as simple as "games aren't designed by committee" as a personal insult, like they spit in our faces..well...it kinda proves all our supposed good intentions and claims of "hoping for the best" are just lip service.
You have just demonstrated a collapse in logic...Witnessing an excuse for close-mindedness, and holding out hope for the best, are two entirely separate matters.
Quote:
We're bitching just to bitch.
No, we're commenting constructively on what has been given.
Quote:
We don't want to like this game. And we never will.
Yes, we do want to like this game, that's why we've invested so much into it.
Quote:
I really need to quit coming down here.
I agree...Your personal projections are nonconstructive and unwelcome.
thiefessa on 14/4/2013 at 12:24
Quote Posted by qolelis
I'm signing the petition while of course sending a huge thank you to Stephen Russell, but in all other regards, I am more or less following NH's example.
Fair shout. :thumb:
Quote Posted by CloudOJD
Repeating the question until they realize how idiotic what they are saying sounds.
I thought the petition was to get them to change their minds, rather to repeat a question.
My bad. Sorry, what is the petition for and what is the question?
Quote:
Yes, I have. In summary, he said "You guys are bitching", and you said you would frame it. Can I get an answer to
my question now?
I gave you an answer; read everything Renz said, not just the bitch reference, and you'll understand. :)
