E3: Thief Community Interview

Chade on 7/7/2013 at 22:05

Quote Posted by Springheel

Have we? Has anyone who played the game said positive things about combat (other than quoting what the devs say about it)?

Hah, I cockily went off and skimmed all the E3 write-ups (text only) I could find, to give you a few examples, and ...

... you're absolutely right. All the people reporting on combat who actually played the game found it easier then they expected (relevant to discussions elsewhere: including one of EM's E3 players). Everyone else is reporting what they were told.

New Horizon on 7/7/2013 at 23:14

Yeah, some of the behavior with the EM Mods is getting a bit out of hand....and embarrassing. They're not evil-doers guys. I don't agree with how EM is handling things, nor that they're trying to draw more people from here to their forums either, but bullying other human beings is not acceptable.

Ashpolt on 7/7/2013 at 23:58

Quote Posted by Silverwolf

Ashpolt: I'm done listening to your crap (and the EM moderators). Saying Thief 4 is far more faithful to its predecessors (considering all of the things EM has listed that's been removed) than DE:HR is...

...a matter of opinion. From my experience, DXHR changed a lot more of the Deus Ex "formula" than Thief is changing the Thief formula. But I'm willing to accept that the reason I see it like that is largely because I care more about every small change to DX than I do to Thief: you're the equal, but opposite.

Quote Posted by Silverwolf

Your and the other EM people are just writing off much of what the unhappy fans are saying just to discredit them. They aren't going to worship at the altar of EM and praise the almighty Thief 4 as the greatest Thief game ever.

That's fine, I'm not asking them to do any such thing, I'm just asking for reason, rationality and for people to try to understand that there is a big difference between watching / reading about a game and actually playing it, and also that what you've seen so far respresents a game about a year away from release. I'm sorry if you and others feel that I'm "writing off" your concerns - that's not my intention. Your concerns are valid (if somewhat too aggressively stated much of the time) and I don't intend to make it seem otherwise. What I am saying, though, is that I think that once you actually play the game, you'll realise that those concerns, while valid, are quite small when compared to the overall experience of the game. As I've said before, I still strongly dislike regenerating health in DXHR (and argued for a long time with Jean-Francois Dugas about it at E3), and if I were in charge of the next Deus Ex that would be one of the first things I would scrap - but did it ruin the game? No. It detracted from it for me, sure, and so did a number of other issues like the lack of proper melee combat, third person cover system, etc, but even with those faults it was a strong game - not 10/10, but 8.5 or 9. Thief is the same.

Quote Posted by Shinrazero

EM is so lucky to have you guys performing free damage control and PR on their behalf. Playing the game does not automatically invalidate concerns from the press. In the case of the VA change, it still a complaint for a lot of people and the revolving door of devs is a valid concern, no matter how much you downplay, ban, merge threads, etc. The tone has been somewhat combative on both sides of the fence but the EM mods have been quick to label individuals misguided and misinformed and dodge and downplay legitimate concerns and criticism. If if we are misguided, you can't place that blame squarely on us, we ask questions that don't get answered or are just deflected, twisted, or misinterpreted then we are belittled and labeled a minority in our worry. It certainly isn't helping your cause. I can't help but shake the feeling that your repeated invitation to getting us to post on your forums is give you the control you lack here. I've seen how you guys work over there.

A few things to respond to here, so I'll do it in bullet point form for expediency:

-The "revolving door of devs" is an exaggeration, but regardless of that, turbulent development doesn't necessarily mean a bad game, and certainly can't be used as evidence that the game will be bad. At the end of the day, the game will speak for itself, one way or another, and the development history won't matter.
-"Misguided and misinformed" - I believe it's only been me saying that, so don't blame the EM mods for that. But I stick by it. There's a lot of misinterpretation of info out there - some innocent, some deliberate - and most of it ends up getting reported on this board as fact. Case in point: pages 1 & 2 of this very thread. Kurgan states that during the interview Daniel Winfield Schmidt had said fan reaction to the game has been "overwhelmingly positive." Kurgan calls him a liar, and a bunch of other members jump on board, pointing this out. It's not until page 2 that someone (Chade) actually listens to the interview and points out that that's not what D W-S said at all, but that by that point the damage has been done, everyone's already leapt on this piece of misinformation and taken it as fact. That's one example: another is RockPaperShotgun's claim that the burning bridge sequence was "QTE-ridden" when in fact there's only one QTE in the entire section. Small things in themselves, but over time, they add up.
-Questions not being answered: ...are because we don't know the answer to them, not because we're trying to keep you in the dark. Again, just in case it hasn't sunk in yet: we don't work for Eidos Montreal. We don't have a PR crib-sheet. We played the game for one hour (or just over in Master Taffer's case) and we're answering questions from memory. There are plenty of things that we either didn't get time to test, or just weren't present in the demo we played. Obviously B1skit has some more info than us, but bear in mind that he's reporting on a game that's still in development and about a year out from release: things are going to change in that time, and perhaps some of the things he's not answering about are things that haven't been confirmed yet?
-Trying to get you over to the official forums for reasons of control: Well, for a start, I'm not a mod: I have no more "control" over there than I do here. Yet I've been trying to point people in that direction as much as spyhopping and B1skit, if not more so. Why? Because you've got 6 people answering your questions over there, rather than 3. And one of those people is Master Taffer, who is every bit as much a hardcore Thief fan as anyone on here. If you want anything answered from the perspective of a hardcore fan, he's your guy. But he doesn't post over here, so you're missing out on the opportunity to ask him questions.

Quote Posted by Azaran

It's just a conspiracy and we can post freely over there? Great. So you guys won't mind if I post a link to our petition over there right?
I mean, it doesn't violate forum rules, and there's no rational reason to suppress it. Is there?...

As above: I'm not a mod, so I can't speak as to whether your poll will get deleted if it's posted over there. I see no reason it would. But looking at the attitudes and general hostility on here, I'd guess if previous attempts have been deleted, it's probably down to the tone of the post rather than the content.

Quote Posted by Bakerman

Guys, I'm not happy with the way EM is treating Thief, but I'm equally unhappy with the way you're treating EM's representatives (voluntary or otherwise). I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but even without that, every person deserves respect. I believe they're communicating respectfully with us, even if not truthfully/accurately/whatever else. Their conduct has been courteous, and if we're not getting our message through to them by responding in kind, then somehow I doubt being rude will help. It just discredits our opinions, valid though they may be.

Now. Can we ask about swimmable water again yet.

Yes, you can ask! Unfortunately I don't have an answer for you: there was no swimmable water in the demo I played, but that doesn't by any means suggest it won't be in the full game. I know B1skit has asked this particular question to some of the devs, not sure if there's been an answer yet though. If there is, I'm sure it'll be posted over at the official forums, and...oops, am I allowed to say that? ;)

As for communicating "truthfully/accurately/whatever else" - we are. I don't think there's much else any of us can do to convince anyone on here of that at this point, your minds all seem pretty firmly set, but it's the truth. And I'll continue to answer truthfully, despite all the accusations to the contrary, until I get bored and stop posting altogether. I won't bother lying to you though, because what's the point? Why would I bother?

But thank you for the level headed and respectful response nonetheless.

Springheel on 8/7/2013 at 00:14

Quote:

some of the behavior with the EM Mods is getting a bit out of hand....and embarrassing

Yes, I'd like to third (fourth?) that sentiment.

Quote:

...So, in summary, I asked you to post links to the "many other" examples of "large sites" who had played the game and posted negative previews. Excluding the GiantBomb video which I admittedly didn't watch, you posted 6 links, of which:

Hold on a second. You asked:

Quote:

if there really are plenty of negative previews from people who have actually played the game... then please link me!

I did.

I posted four links that I found in about 5 minutes, (one of which I admitted was unclear about whether he had just watched the gameplay or done it himself). Yes, you can argue with their views, and yes, they're not necessarily of the same stature as Rock Paper Shotgun. But that's not really the point. They show that RPS and Sneakybastards are not woefully out of sync with what some other playtesters are saying.

Which leaves me back with my original dilemma, shared, I think, by several others. Do we listen to sites like RPS, a site with a good track record, and views that are supported by a significant number of other sites? Or do we listen to the reports of people who are hand-picked by the developers of the game?

The question becomes even more significant when the reports differ so strongly.

EM mods on the lightgem: "the light gem operates as a more comprehensive detection meter and fades through various levels of brightness and darkness, like a gradient."

Sneakybastards: "A light gem is still one of those indicators. [It] exhibits three states: hidden, partially visible and fully visible."

EM mods on combat: "Getting in a fight with more than one guard - especially if you have opted to disable Focus or are running low on its resource - means you most likely won't survive very long."

RPS on combat: "I just kind of weaved in and out while walloping one in the shoulder repeatedly.... My three highly trained foes just kind of stared on in confusion, halfheartedly taking swings.... A few well-placed strikes (shoulders are the seat of all the most vital human organs) felled each of them ...."

Chade on 8/7/2013 at 01:19

My previous attempt at giving Springheel moderating "facts" went so well that I can't resist diving in again. :p

To be fair, RPS probably used focus during combat (at the very least they referred to it), and they also mentioned that they were almost dead after the combat was over. The EM mods mentioned a fight in which one of them beat three guards, and said they thought they should have lost that fight. Their reports aren't as contradictory as you're making out. Certainly a change in emphasis though.

Vae on 8/7/2013 at 02:02

Quote Posted by Brethren

It's very sensible. The most positive comments about the demo are coming from people who are directly associated with Eidos. It doesn't matter that they aren't paid employees, they are moderators. And because of that, they potentially stand to gain or lose based on what they say. My apologies to you, I know you're the odd man out here Ashpolt, but I think if you look at it objectively from our point of view, you should understand how the whole thing looks more than a little crooked. Even if they're all being 100% truthful, it still looks questionable. Especially considering the contradictory opinions on the web from all the non-Eidos people.

Just like it looks a little odd that suddenly, out of the blue, you, b1skit, and skyhopping have all decided to start posting here in the last 3-4 days, defending EM. Just coincidence, right?

Of course, it is plain to see.

This is a coordinated PR maneuver from EM...an attempt to alter community disposition from the rightfully unfavorable sentiment...It is a desperate move, for a desperate time...and they have no one to blame but themselves, for having to resort to such disingenuous measures.

Have fun with it, everyone...Just never forget the purpose of their presence.

Azaran on 8/7/2013 at 02:16

Quote Posted by Ashpolt

I don't know about that. I think it was more than one person posting it, and the campaign was pretty consistent if I remember. They also deleted posts from their Youtube video from people complaining about the SR thing, and not because they contained profanity, simply because they were popular:
(http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141216&page=3&p=2177001&viewfull=1#post2177001)

Quote Posted by Vae

Of course, it is plain to see.
This is a coordinated PR maneuver from EM...an attempt to alter community disposition from the rightfully unfavorable sentiment...It is a desperate move, for a desperate time...and they have no one to blame but themselves, for having to resort to such disingenuous measures.
Have fun with it, everyone...Just never forget the purpose of their presence.

I think the point of deleting links to the petition, negative comments from their videos, etc. is the same. That way they can say the feedback was positive, and they can ignore the concerns of nearly 5000 fans on the core issue. Then they'll say "Petition? What petition?"

jay pettitt on 8/7/2013 at 09:05

Quote Posted by Chade

Srsly?

Quote Posted by "Master Taffer"

(http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1928890&postcount=280) While parts of Nathan Grayson's article tells me he's at least heard what was shown, the number of inaccuracies in his article are fairly numerous. This isn't his opinion points I'm talking about, but flat out inaccuracies of facts as well as the particularly vague nature of some of the article and tendency to exaggeration.

Really, it reads like someone [RPS] pretending they were there from second hand knowledge. I don't know if it's true, but the game I played and the one he described in his article do not seem like the same game.

Let's be clear - RPS were talking about playing the game without knowing the controls and still being able to take down multiple guards in a confrontation by spamming at them with the blackjack while whistling the Benny Hill music.

Chade on 8/7/2013 at 10:53

jay: seriously.

I'll get some quotes. Look at the tone of RPS vs EM players: completely different. Now look at the actual facts presented: they are basically identical.

Here's RPS.

Quote Posted by RPS

My Experience: After a flawless tippy toed dance right over the mansion level's first courtyard, I hit a snag when I dashed out from behind a bush a bit too soon. Almost immediately, I found myself face-to-face with not one, not two, but three fairly miffed electro-club-wielding guards. I hadn't figured out how to block yet, so I just kind of weaved in and out while walloping one in the shoulder repeatedly.

To my shock (and, let's face it, horror) this tactic proved exceedingly effective. My three highly trained foes just kind of stared on in confusion, halfheartedly taking swings like someone playing whack-a-mole after hearing that their childhood pet box turtle just bit the big one. A few well-placed strikes (shoulders are the seat of all the most vital human organs) felled each of them - a simple step-forward, step-back hokey pokey formation scrambling their years of advanced combat training into mushy, cold eggs.

Admittedly, I did take a couple hits, and a third definitely would've finished me off. Garrett's still no titanium-bodied man-tank, so he wheezes into his grave without too much pushing. But again, I spent half that battle entirely incapable of blocking. Kind of a big handicap, right?

There is, however, a much larger reason I don't imagine we'll see too many players turning this into Thief: Night Of A Million Furious Bonkings. Put simply, the combat's terrible. There is no weight. No heft. I understand that Garrett's got noodle arms and twig legs, but come on: it felt like we were sparring with toothpicks. The system's also incredibly simplistic, with basic swings and blocking pretty much forming the whole of it. Entering focus mode (more on that soon) allowed me to deal slow-mo, location specific blows, but that was the only real curveball. Arrows from afar and stealthy takedowns up close all the way. I know it's Thief and all, but there's no excuse for melee that's this creaky.

Tone? Extremely negative. Subjective information like "satisfaction"? Negative. Factual information? Crazy running around and swinging blackjack beats three guards, plus almost killed after two hits, plus used focus to beat them. Should have lost the fight.

Now here's Spyhopping in his summary:

Quote Posted by Spyhopping

I also somehow managed to knock out 3 guards attacking me at once in the mansion which was great fun- whacking them with the blackjack [while crazily running around? pretty sure I remember skyhopping saying that in another post, but could be wrong] was satisfying- but I thought I probably should have lost that fight.

Tone? Quite positive? Subjective information like "satisfaction"? Positive. Factual information? Swinging "somehow" blackjack beats three guards. Should have lost the fight.

So actually, if you completely ignore any of the subjective comments made by either source, the two quotes are pretty much identical. The RPS article actually makes combat sound harder (probably only because it goes into more detail). It's only once you take all the subjective opinions into account that the two sources wildly diverge.

Now of course there were five EM players, and there are other quotes saying combat is tough. I haven't bothered to go check whether those other quotes came from actual experience finding combat hard or not, but I thought I did remember that being the case. So at the very least you have two experiences from RPS and the EM players that mirrored each other, and then possibly other experiences from other EM players that were different.

Chade on 8/7/2013 at 11:37

Double post, because as luck would have it, Spyhopping's next paragraph is another perfect example of this. (Ok, admittedly this one involves some level of speculation on my part.)

First, VGS24/7 and RPS talking about shadows and blind AI respectively. My speculation is that these complaints are one and the same:

Quote Posted by vg247

What did I do then? I ran away, of course, and hid in a corner that the orb told me was totally dark. Except it wasn’t because I could see the ground I was standing on and the wall behind me very clearly. Because, I repeat, I was not in a corner that any sane person would hide in thinking his pursuers would not be able to see him there. Alas, the guard I riled up followed me to that corner, stared right at me from a couple meters away, and shouted that he knows I’m around here somewhere and that he will find and gut me.

Quote Posted by RPS

Guards proved respectably eagle-eyed in a few cases, but stultifyingly blind in just as many others. My favorite was when I found myself right outside the mansion’s basement entrance in a labyrinthine mess of crumbling walls, barrels, and dog cages. I used a water arrow to put out a torch on the other side of the, erm, expansively constrained area as a distraction, then slyly rounded a crucial corner while a guard struggled to understand what could possibly make all the pretty lights go away. Mistake. I miscalculated and nearly slammed mascara-ed-eye-first into two more guards. ‘Welp,’ I figured, ‘that’s curtains for me, then. May as well see how far I can get before they bop me into festive goth ribbons.’

They never did. I just crouched and weaved between them, nearly brushing against their engorged wallet sacs (Garrett views human anatomy a bit differently than the rest of us) as I passed right by, almost entirely undetected. One shouted, “Hey, did I just see something?” after I’d almost made it all the way downstairs and into the basement. He, of course, proceeded to do absolutely nothing (meaningful, at least) about it. Admittedly, my light/darkness HUD indicator told me I was well-hidden, but I refuse to believe that even Garrett could find a way to be that invisible while mere inches away.

Tone? Extremely negative. Facts? Was well hidden according to light gem and AI behaviour, but being well-hidden didn't seem realistic as dark areas looked too light.

Now here's Spyhopping:

Quote Posted by Spyhopping

Sometimes I couldn't tell whether I was planning to enter decent shadow or not. It occasionally felt too well lit when completely concealed, but this might have just been to do with the brightness calibration needing a tweak.

Tone? Slightly negative. Facts? Was well hidden according to light gem, but being well-hidden didn't seem realistic as dark areas looked too light.

Again, if you ignore the subjective comments, the actual facts reported about the game are very similar. It's only when you start looking at how they reacted to those facts and extrapolated from them to the rest of the game that their posts diverge.