Renzatic on 18/2/2014 at 15:04
What's so bad about "being locked in place" that makes it so unimmersive? I loved being able to look through keyholes in Dishonored, and I'm glad to see it in nuThief. Even if it does "lock you in place".
Platinumoxicity on 18/2/2014 at 15:17
Quote Posted by Renzatic
What's so bad about "being locked in place" that makes it so unimmersive? I loved being able to look through keyholes in Dishonored, and I'm glad to see it in nuThief. Even if it does "lock you in place".
I prefer the freedom and consistency. Being able to use
the lean keys to
lean against a door is more immersive because you have the ability to control those body movements with those keys, and it works logically. There's no reason why I should use the "use key" to move in front of a hole to look through it and disable the all the muscles in my body other than the "cancel" -muscle. The controls for the actions required to look through a hole already exist. They are called
the crouch and movement keys, and mouse look. I think a game isn't designed as professionally as it can or should be, when the keys to control it arbitrarily change or do not do what they are supposed to do.
Thief 1 didn't have keyholes. But it did have holes. And you would need to use standard movement and look controls to look through those holes. An improvement on that would have been to have keyholes, that you could look through the exact same way. A mode that locks you in place is a compromise. And if this compromised new feature only compromised itself, by my own logic I couldn't have a problem with it. But are there lean-keys? Can I press my ear against a door and listen? No.
Renault on 18/2/2014 at 15:18
Quote Posted by gkkiller
I also think the third-person takedowns, while they're not very Thiefy, look great, and they're a huge improvement over DXHR's cutscene-esque takedowns.
3rd person takedowns are lame in general, and completely kill immersion. Here, let's abruptly yank you out of first person view, so you can watch yourself melee someone multiple times, and then we'll put you back, all in the matter of about 3 seconds!
In DXHR they were passable, because it's a more of an action oriented game. But now in Thief, in order to make them worthwhile and legit, they're forced to make Garrett beat the shit out of some guard (usually 3 or more hits, whack/bam/smack, just like the old batman series), instead of the normal silent way of taking someone down with a single, soft, blackjack thump. Its completely stupid and doesn't fit the game at all - just as bad as any XP system IMO.
Renzatic on 18/2/2014 at 15:59
I think we'd all be able to understand our respective points better if we understood that what kills immersion is an entirely subjective thing.
Like having to use a button to smack my face against a door to look through a keyhole, then press that same button to go back into normal gamespace doesn't bother me at all because it all feels like an extension of my actions. To me, it's doing what I want to do, and that's the method I do it with. Having some subset of controls in contextual situations doesn't tend bother me all that much so long as it's implemented elegantly enough.
What does bother me is when something takes me out of the game entirely. Like DX:HR changed the controls so you could interact with keypads and computers, but it didn't stop the game around you. You could still look left and right, and guards could still spot you while you were playing around on something. This is the opposite of what old Thief did when you took a second out to read something. I hated that, and thought it actually was "immersion killing".
...and unfortunately, this doesn't seem like something nuThief fixed. But I don't hate it so much I think it entirely ruins the game. It's more like an irk.
Contextual controls for specific situations aren't a game design sin. It's more like a necessary one when you consider the limited form of interaction you have with a gamespace. Their inclusion isn't bad design, just something you personally don't like.
gkkiller on 18/2/2014 at 16:03
Quote Posted by Brethren
3rd person takedowns are lame in general, and completely kill immersion. Here, let's abruptly yank you out of first person view, so you can watch yourself melee someone multiple times, and then we'll put you back, all in the matter of about 3 seconds!
In DXHR they were passable, because it's a more of an action oriented game. But now in Thief, in order to make them worthwhile and legit, they're forced to make Garrett beat the shit out of some guard (usually 3 or more hits, whack/bam/smack, just like the old batman series), instead of the normal silent way of taking someone down with a single, soft, blackjack thump. Its completely stupid and doesn't fit the game at all - just as bad as any XP system IMO.
I did say they were not Thiefy. I was merely commenting that they look cool, i.e. the animations are stylish. Personally, I'd like simple blackjack KOs, but these don't matter since 'you can turn it off'.
Renault on 18/2/2014 at 16:11
@Renz - I'm a bit torn on the readables thing. In theory, I like having to read something without the gameworld pausing around you, it's obviously way more realistic. I recently re-installed TDS, and noticed the Sneaky Upgrade lets you set up readables this way. TDM has this also. Just like with lockpicking, there should be the risk of getting caught while performing some other action.
But in Thief, some readables are sizable, and I really like to read every last page (especially in FMs), and there's something comfortable about being able to sit back and just take it all in. Not realistic, no, but I think otherwise, people would just rush, and half the stuff would just never be read at all.
Renzatic on 18/2/2014 at 18:55
It all comes down to taste. To me, keeping the game from pausing while you read something adds to the tension of the game. Gives it a little more of that "you're there" feeling. Like you're reading through secret documents in enemy territory, and you have glance over your shoulder to see if you're about to get busted doing it.
GodzillaX8 on 18/2/2014 at 20:39
Quote Posted by Platinumoxicity
An improvement on that would have been to have keyholes, that you could look through the exact same way. A mode that locks you in place is a compromise. And if this compromised new feature only compromised itself, by my own logic I couldn't have a problem with it. But are there lean-keys? Can I press my ear against a door and listen? No.
You realize that there is no way they could properly simulate what looking through a keyhole looks like without zooming the camera way into it, right? We'd be left with either keyholes too small to actually see through, or keyholes so big you'd need a key from Kingdom Hearts to open it. The camera essentially HAS to lock into "keyhole mode" if any looking through them is to be done. Splinter Cell's snake cam is essentially the same principal. It's really the best way to implement it.
