**EM in interview : 'It's easy to fall into the trap of trying to please everyone

henke on 12/4/2013 at 06:03

Quote Posted by jtr7

Is there anybody who thinks the controls are bad for all the Thief games?

By todays standards there were a lot of controls to T1/2. Movement speed modifiers and drop keys and block keys that made me have to play keyboard-tetris with in the setup for a while before I had everything I needed comfortably within reach of WASD. Ultimately, the number of keys you have to press to do what you want in the game is irrelevant. If the controls work perfectly, you shouldn't even have to think about them. Your intentions should automatically translate to your characters actions in the game without you having to pause and think about which key to press. If they can deliver a system that won't feel restrictive when compared to T1/2 but uses less buttons/keys, then more power to em.

Since it'll be made to be playable on a gamepad I'm guessing that for the Lean functions they'll go with the same contextual 1-button system that Far Cry 3/Fear 3 had. Hope it works better than FC3's though, because that one was a bit wonky. And for weapons/arrows I'm guessing there'll be a selection-wheel, which I'm not opposed to since even by the end of T2 I was still having trouble remembering which numberkey to press to access my lesser used arrows. "Let's see, which key was it for firearrow again? 6, 7, 8?"

Nuth on 12/4/2013 at 06:03

I'm trying hard not to give up on NuThief, as people may have noticed from my willingness to twist myself into a pretzel to try to get past the things I know I won't like about it. I'm still torn about the game, so much so that I haven't even voted yet in that poll I created about how satisfied people are with the game so far. I keep vacillating between giving it maybe a 7 or 8 (taking the optimistic view that my fears are unfounded or at least exaggerated) and giving it a 0 (which is what my gut tells me to do.) I think I need to just let go, stop worrying about it, and see what we get when it comes out.

jtr7 on 12/4/2013 at 06:37

If it was all that good in your mind, you wouldn't be torn and trying to give a company product a chance. I understand. A lot of us are not happy feeling left out of another epic (in the true sense) gaming experience in the Thief universe, a game that shakes the industry up, and we want in very badly, not just a great game that actually doesn't rock the industry boat. I already know myself enough to know where things stand between myself and Thief[4]. You know what to do, really, and you should commit. You can change your mind as you learn more, and there's nothing wrong with that. You shouldn't feel guilty for your feelings at all.

SilenTaffer on 12/4/2013 at 06:53

"Oh yes! A very easy example is the famous question for Thief about whether it's a first-person-game or a third-person-game. We gave it a try in the third person because there are a lot of amazing games in the third person and they sell a lot of copies."

"So we have a short demo version with a third-person perspective from A-Z and it's pretty interesting. But according to us it's not Thief - it's another game. Another big thing we tried at the beginning was based on feedback we saw from the play-testing. For a lot of players - not old guys like me but from the newer generation of players - they were play-testing the game and they had a lot of testosterone and I guess they wanted to play fast. Very quickly they're like, "Oh shit, they saw me!"

Maybe people would think I'm over reacting by picking out the words they choose to say but the fact that they said it, shows that some thought process has gone into what they chose to talk about. Very simply, EM does not truly know what a Thief game is like or how they plan to develop it. The idea of turning a first person game into a third person game just because there are many amazing games in third person and sell a lot of copies show that firstly, they have already been influenced by many other games and secondly, they are profit oriented. It is definitely not wrong for placing a target on how many sales you want to hit but if they are creating a game just for the money and to alter the game to their whim and fancy, then they are not really respecting the initial design and legacy of the game. Sure, of course they can experiment and let their creative juices flow but Thief has always been a first person game and changing something that is so fundamental in the game is a big taboo. Thankfully, they came to realize that after testing the game. Imagine, setting Assassin's Creed as a first person game, it would of course be a totally different feel to the game.

So they mentioned that it will be a first person game because they feel it's not Thief - it's another game. I wonder whether that same thought process has gone into all the new features they are going to implement, focus, parkour, and lol ironically 3rd person perspectives (on ropes, sequences etc).

From what they said, they are also trying to cater to the "newer generation of players who wanted to play fast" which shows that their priorities for the reboot of the Thief game is somewhat different. It is of course natural that the overall game would be different but I hope the end product would not stray too far from the original games or be overloaded by many new features that are there to appeal new players.

jtr7 on 12/4/2013 at 07:05

What's crazy to me, too, is how the things that the PR guy thinks is a-okay for the devs to tell us...are things I and others don't ever want to hear about a Thief game! They say it's Thief, and the fans will be able to play how they want, yet both statements are less and less true with every single interview, no matter how nice some other thing they say really is and is good to hear. I know I will not be able to play even half the way I want, which I can almost take for granted in the LGS titles, and even in TDS, missing things!

Beleg Cúthalion on 12/4/2013 at 07:06

Quote Posted by New Horizon

I'm just going to go hide in the Dark Mod forums and enjoy the sanity there.

You mean they don't dissect every small released detail about T4 to find something worth complaining? I really have to check out these forums.

Don't know what the control fuss is about. It's not like Thief was made better by having three different keys for leaning instead of e.g. one that works together with mouse look. It's not like Thief was made better with a sword hacking option instead of a Focus takedown/stun option; both is contrary to the original idea and in both cases you can probably re-load anyway if it's not your style. If you complain that it's for lazy/dumb players, then why is the sword in T1/2? For the lazy stupid RPG players who didn't care to adapt to the new gameplay?

Obviously the more encouraging statements were not quoted:

Quote Posted by DWS

And I'm a pretty hardcore player. But I want the challenge to be in the game and this is something that with today's technology we can do. What we don't want to lose is the hardcore fans. We don't want to alienate; the fact is you can play our game (on really high) difficultly. [...]But we also want you to say, "I'm gonna take a day off from work and I'm just going to play through this game and have an awesome experience. I want to disable all the help features and I want to figure it out myself." So the debate we are having is about wanting to give the players the opportunity to disable and customise their play style the way they want to play. That's very important for us. [...]A lot of Dishonored is about having a lot of different ways to play and combine powers. We're more about the nuanced options: how do you affect the environment with the tools you have? How do you manipulate the NPCs to circumvent them? So it's more about the nuances as the immersiveness of that experience. To really feel immersiveness you need to have relativity.

Curunir on 12/4/2013 at 08:06

I am truly sorry, Renzatic, but if you thought the original Thief games had an 'obtuse control scheme', I think you're better off going back to Pong.

Melan on 12/4/2013 at 08:15

I thought a lot of the previous discussion threads were overreacting, but this interview just hit all the wrong notes.

Quote:

Today's gamers are a lot less patient. They expect a lot more from the developers in terms of features and so on. Even for menus that are easy to use. For a lot of things that weren't as extensively developed back in the day. For example: control inputs.

It took a while to learn the complex controls. Numbers 1,2,3,4... There were different types of peeking: peeking forward, peeking sideways, peeking upside down... They had all these things that were very complex and it worked for the hardcore gamers, but a lot of people backed off early on because it was very difficult [to learn]. So our focus has been to say, "we want the same amount of challenge, but within the game and not within the inputs." I don't personally have the patience to learn the super, super old games and all their fidelities and hard-learned lessons. I want it to be more streamlined.

This is basically the opposite of the LGS design philosophy, which strove for complex simulation via very high player agency, particularly in movement. For that task, Thief offered a complex, but not very hard to learn control scheme. Good job, guys!

Quote:

So we have a short demo version with a third-person perspective from A-Z and it's pretty interesting. But according to us it's not Thief - it's another game. Another big thing we tried at the beginning was based on feedback we saw from the play-testing. For a lot of players - not old guys like me but from the newer generation of players - they were play-testing the game and they had a lot of testosterone and I guess they wanted to play fast. Very quickly they're like, "Oh shit, they saw me!"

The areas were really aggressive and, BANG!, they were dead. People said, "woah, wait a minute. I did my best but it's not game over [when I'm seen]. Give me the possibility to do something. It's not true that I'm going to restart it when I'm seen - I want to prove that I'm not a pussy." So that's a big thing we had to work on a lot.

I love the implication that people who play stealthy are pussies. Not that you couldn't engage enemies in previous titles if you were seen - of course, it meant a challenge, but I'd assume someone who is the Dude of Dudeness (and definitely not a pussy like those girly stealth fags) would cherish that kind of thing.

Or maybe you shouldn't target every game at hyper-caffeinated little boys in testosterone overdrive. Thief had always appealed to a slightly more mature demographic (not necessarily age), and this demographic is actually a majority in gaming nowadays.

And of course, if there is a "heart" or "DNA" to Thief, is that it is to a large extent an anti-action game where success involves a whole lot of observing and not acting, and then acting quickly and decisively. It subverts the original FPS formula, and generates tension through the need to stay hidden (and alive) vs. the need to move (and progress with the mission). Thief is about moving through hostile environments to small zones of safety. Observe --> plan --> make your move --> find safety --> observe --> plan... I am not sure they are getting this.

bikerdude on 12/4/2013 at 09:05

Quote Posted by Melan

Thief is about moving through hostile environments to small zones of safety. Observe --> plan --> make your move --> find safety --> observe --> plan... I am not sure they are getting this.

Exactly.

jay pettitt on 12/4/2013 at 09:08

It's possible that the guy just isn't very good at interviews. The controls on T1 are cookey 1990s controls and first impressions with that game would probably suffer today as a result. If people were going to check out the original Thief games I'd want to say the controls in my new game are going to be tidier.

And the difference in the speed that failing happens ~ instant or very close to it in stealth games, gradual in shooters ~ is a known, err, feature of the stealth genre. It's not unreasonable to want to make sure that doesn't lead to the wrong kind of frustrating in your game design.

What the guy is saying isn't necessarily problematic. What they actually end up doing.... we'll see.