Actually, after Seeing the gameplay video, do you think you will buy 'Thief' ?

Hamadriyad on 19/6/2013 at 12:49

@Flavia
First , The Eye blocked Garrett's regular way. Second, "Killing Haunts" is an objective from Brother Murus. You have to help Murus in order to escape.
But stealth is still there:
(http://thief.wikia.com/wiki/OM_T1_Return_To_The_Cathedral)

See? It is possible to avoid Murus and his objectives, possible to escape without blowing the gate.

Now I wonder, If there is another way to reach that window. If there is not, then it is stupid.
There is no excuse to choose such a noisy way. But in Return to the Cathedral, there are pretty valid excuses.

Flavia on 19/6/2013 at 13:31

Quote Posted by Hamadriyad

Now I wonder, If there is another way to reach that window. If there is not, then it is stupid.
There is no excuse to choose such a noisy way. But in Return to the Cathedral, there are pretty valid excuses.

Of course, you can reach that window the other way! You can go through cellar or sewers, traverse the mansion and reach the attic from the other side ;)

As for valid excuses: right now we have no idea what are Garrett's excuses for some of the actions (i.e. bridge sequence), but most folks here seems to dislike them for the sake of disliking, sometimes without even realizing what they actually dislike (like the part with Garrett setting mansion on fire, I mean: are we even talking about the same game anymore?! :rolleyes:). In previous games Garrett proved himself to be pretty skilled and agile and there's no reason to believe he wouldn't pull a "escape sequence" should situation arise.
And yet it causes some people to lose their will to live...
Because it would be sooo much more Garrett-like to sit down and cry: OH NOES, MY STEALTH IS GONE! And wait for mission to end so the problem will be solved "behind the scenes".

And that's the problem: some poeple here don't try to think why something happens or even what exactly happens but assume that it's only because EM are idiots who know nothing about Thief and are producing just another generic title that has nothing to do with the magic of "the oryginal Thief", that often has nothing to do with the Thief itself...

Hamadriyad on 19/6/2013 at 14:24

Quote Posted by Flavia

Of course, you can reach that window the other way! You can go through cellar or sewers, traverse the mansion and reach the attic from the other side ;)

They showed that?
And as Esme said very truly:

Quote:

Garrett is looking for a way in, he spies a wooden crate suspended by a rope and instead of stealthily attaching a rope arrow to the crate, climbing on top, retrieving his rope arrow, quietly shimmying up the rope and agilely leaping across to the flat area without making a sound before re using the rope arrow to gain access to the attic and not alerting a soul.

That way should be possible too.

Anyway, I see your point and personally I don't have any issue about the bridge sequence, I haven't seen it yet.
But I have issues about many other things that EM did. EM probably knows about Thief but apparently knowing is not enough. Thief may be a great stealth game, but most of what I like about Thief is gone. So, I will play that one only out of curiosity, but I don't have hope and I lost my interest long time ago. Absence of factions, especially Hammerites, is the finishing move for me.

Flavia on 19/6/2013 at 15:12

(http://youtu.be/XMqdNzCNl5Q?t=9m31s) :)

I also have some issues with new Thief - but then again, I also had a few with previous games. And it's always better to base such issues on what you actually see and read rather than some weird assumptions ;)

As for a lack of factions, it actually make sense when you think of it.
First thing every tyrant in history did was to fight religion. It's entirely plausible than Baron also banned The Order of The Hammer, closed and robbed their churches and killed holy brothers. Perhaps Garrett will stumble upon such deserted church, maybe some old nut, who used to be High Priest, or small house chapels, hidden from the eyes of The Watch?
Don't get me wrong, I'll also miss Hammers since they were the most charismatic of the fractions. But I don't think it'll be much worse than T2 in that respect.

Pagans by design have very little to do in cities, personally I found their hideouts in parks and ruins in T3 riddiculous. But who knows, maybe they will have some business with the rebels. They have some experience, after all.

The story of the Keepers pretty much ended in T3, so their absence is justified.

... but we'll also have focus ability, which is quite obviously Keeper's power, plus something suspiciously resembling glyphs plus underground hideout of some mysterious guys who use keys as their symbol.
And considering that focus is said to be an important part of the plot, I think it's safe to assume that once again Garrett will be forced to do Keeper's work, even if we won't see Keepers themselves.

EM said they respect previous Thiefs and will reference old factions, even if don't center game around them; why don't we give them a chance and see what they'll come up with?

Springheel on 19/6/2013 at 15:15

Quote:

You must agree it is great that character uses his hands while interacting with environment, though

I don't. Seeing hands interacting with the environment takes away my freedom to move the way I want.

It's already been confirmed that the door-opening animation "slides" you into position. It HAS to, otherwise your hand won't line up with the door. So no leaning down to open a door from above, like you can in the other games. No leaning out from a shadow to open a door that is otherwise lit up. And you're stuck there until the animation finishes, so you can't quickly shove open a door and hop back into a shadow. And I bet you won't be able to open a door just a crack or catch a door that's about to close, like you can in TDM, because that would require an entirely new set of animations.

When flash and function collide, function should _always_ win. Game design 101.

Renault on 19/6/2013 at 15:59

It doesn't bother me as much as some other things we've seen, but I just don't get the "hands" thing. Do we normally walk around with our hands out in front of us? What purpose does it serve in the game? I'm fine with seeing your hands open a door or pick a lock or any action like that, but when you're just walking around, why do they need to be there? It just doesn't make sense.
IMO, it just takes up screen space which is already getting crowded with the Shroud.

Springheel on 19/6/2013 at 16:29

Quote:

What purpose does it serve in the game?

According to the devs, it's a crucial part of "characterization". :rolleyes:

Quote:

which is already getting crowded with the Shroud. .

Another thing that makes absolutely no sense. You've already got a tiny icon in the corner that tells you the exact same information.

Renault on 19/6/2013 at 16:42

It's somewhat frustrating, because both the shroud and the hands are either unnecessary and/or redundant, and if you get rid of them, the UI is actually nice and minimalist. It's like they're close to a nice setup, but they just can't help themselves with all sorts of optional, gimmicky, consolized bullshit.

Balliol on 19/6/2013 at 17:00

Quote Posted by sterlino

Balliot made just this poll, but after the E3 gameplay video i think it's time to update it.

I'm just curious... :sly:

"Balliot"? I think I shall use that as a nickname from henceforth. :cool:

Thank you, Sterlino, for making this thread. I was thinking about reposting this after the gameplay video came out to catch up on the new collective opinion of "Thief", but you beat me to the punch. Personally, I don't think I can say anything that someone else hasn't said here on this thread already. I think Starker nailed it on the head for me as far as what I dislike based off of what I've seen.

Quote Posted by Starker

Gameplay:
-- Blink-like dashing between the shadows.
-- Sticky beams you can't fall off of.
-- Designated rope arrow shoot spots.
-- Timed parkour/escape sequences.
-- RPG progression.
-- QTEs.
-- Loot glint.
-- Creep hands.
-- No forward lean.
-- Third person sections.
-- Inner monologue based directions/clues.

Thematic stuff:
-- Garrett seems to be have been morphed into some kind of an edgy emoninja.
-- The magic has been taken out of the series. Literally.
-- Modern swearing... taff the taffing taffers.
-- Ultraviolence.
-- Absence of Eric Brosius's awesome music.
-- Absence of Stephen Russell's awesome characters.

I would add the "PRESS X FOR TAKEDOWN" and the shroud to the list of gripes as well.

I was on the fence leaning toward the "no" side prior to the gameplay video, but now I'm even farther into "no" territory. That doesn't mean that I've written this game off completely, but I am much more uncomfortable with the direction they're taking. Time will tell where this is going, especially since we have a year or so before this game hits the shelves, but I can say this with certainty: EM has changed the Thief world forever, and I wouldn't say in a good way.

SubJeff on 19/6/2013 at 17:08

Quote Posted by Brethren

It's like they're close to a nice setup, but they just can't help themselves with all sorts of optional, gimmicky, consolized bullshit.

You know, I've somewhat of an academic interest in what "consolisation" actually is and I don't think the hands qualify.

The Shroud is, by my reckoning, certainly a consolisation compromise being as it pushes the player/simulated skill need towards the simulated.

I can't see how the hands do this though. They seem to have a different role that is about context and not skill, or rather communicating a context without altering skill per se.