New Horizon on 26/3/2010 at 01:03
Quote Posted by teacher_1
The first thing they could do would be to NOT include THIEF anywhere in the offical title.
That worked really well for paramount with the show "Enterprise"...oh wait, they added Star Trek back in the title because they realized it was a really bad idea to remove franchise association.
If they're not going to include "Thief" in the title, what's the point? Go way out on a limb and do something fresh and original if their goal is to mix things up. If sequels are what they intend to do, make a damn sequel and stop screwing around by trying to infuse sequels with features from every other successful mainstream game currently on the market. It reeks of desperation an a lack of originality.
Yandros on 26/3/2010 at 03:24
Quote Posted by teacher_1
I would be in favor of something odd like
Garrett's Twilight or
The Dark City or
The Dawn of Steam. If they feel they need to, they can add a small blurb like
........Chapter four in the ongoing saga of Garrett the Master Thief.Bear in mind that it is quite possible that Garrett will not be the player character/protagonist/anti-hero of T4. He might show up as a NPC, or make a cameo appearance, or even be completely absent (which I think is highly unlikely).
piln on 26/3/2010 at 11:00
3us 3x (part 3): M3tal Arms: Glitch in the Syst3m
and
Thiefour
pls Eidos thankyou
GlasWolf on 28/3/2010 at 15:44
Quote Posted by New Horizon
If they're not going to include "Thief" in the title, what's the point? Go way out on a limb and do something fresh and original if their goal is to mix things up.
Or they could always take the halfway house and call it a "spiritual successor". Then you can capitalise on the franchise's incumbent fan-base without having to make the game anything like the original.
Namdrol on 28/3/2010 at 16:59
Bioshock anyone?
Tenkahubu on 29/3/2010 at 08:20
I hoped that we wouldn't have to go through with all this bullshit again after the success of Fallout 3.
Matthew on 30/3/2010 at 12:15
Quote Posted by WrEcK
Ever read Roger Ebert's review to Sunshine? It makes fun of the idea that they would send a ship called Icarus I because it would already reveal the fate of the ship.
I suppose it would depend on whether they were developing Icarus 'II' in parallel as a backup plan or not.
WrEcK on 1/4/2010 at 18:30
That was the joke Ebert was making.
Although I am pro continuity, I have to add to the 'change the title to anything' argument that
The Dark Knight has no mention of Batman and did just fine.
Quote Posted by teacher_1
Well, if anything, my argument DOES hold up as much as is DOESN'T hold up. To simply say it doesn't hold up because the first game has NO number ignores the fact that the third game ALSO has no number. I see where you're going, but my argument for NO number is valid.
Nothing personal, but your argument was that 2 out of 3 games weren't numbered. I argued it made no sense the first would be numbered leaving it at 50/50 for the numbering. There isn't a consistency to show that we do or don't need a number. Sequencing would have the third game numbered and the fourth as well and so on due to the second one. I agree with everyone there is a bit of laziness in not giving a subtitle but my guess is it's more a question of 'too soon to tell'.
I'm just glad they thought of making a fourth.
Yandros on 2/4/2010 at 02:37
WrEcK, if you're trying to posit a rational argument with him, you're wasting your time.
WrEcK on 2/4/2010 at 12:55
I've been looking through Thief: The Circle for years but I'm not familiar with the forum personalities. I guess I'll just lay off then :). Best not to start off on the wrong foot.
