jtr7 on 5/4/2013 at 14:00

---

Hard to say, of course, since we have no idea what mandates came down from above that the team had to work under. There are many factors, such as how after Square-Enix bought them up, ideas were injected that would not have been there otherwise, and while we were told that Squee was not imposing any control (Yay!), people at EM also didn't mind what was being suggested, or more importantly, what new resources and burden-shifting became available. There are odd factors like that and a bunch of them.

But in discussions amongst gamers and Thief fans for EM's next title, it's primarily an issue of DX:HR's subjective success being seen as indicative of what T4 might end up as. DX:HR was built by one team, T4 another. The core teams were held at 20 members, with additions along the way starting with acquiring 40 more, and eventually hitting 150 total, which was nearly double the 80-member cap the original mission statement stated was the goal, and was used for recruiting purposes, after finding dissatisfaction with Ubisoft's practices. There was some unknown level of overlap between teams when employees switched teams after awhile, sometimes because the development stage they were hired for was complete, and sometimes because they wanted a change, and sometimes because someone left EM, and there was also the unknown influence of several members of the DX:HR team moving over to help out the T4 team after DX:HR was released. We don't know how that influenced anything.

T4 had the Producer change halfway through, and a significant vision correction that DX:HR never had. DX:HR was granted two extensions of their deadline, publicly stated to the press. T4 may possibly not have that, or if they have, it wasn't put forth in the news. We already see that they seem to have never had a fixed deadline until they reached a certain milestone (the idea of reaching a milestone was stated in 2011), which they have, and now the 2014 deadline seems set. Events have unfolded differently in many areas for each title, and not necessarily only because DX:HR was their first game and T4 benefits from what was learned, but they seem to be handled very differently, perhaps because of the what the games represent on every level.

I personally don't see a strong enough connection between EM's first two titles to give most concerns or votes of confidence any weight. Like I said above, what is mandated from above is what they have in common, and also the general idea about "today's console market". Their shared target ideals and audience values are what's getting too much consideration for my taste. I do wonder if the success of DX:HR influenced the T4 teams decisions on, say, view-switching, and failed to realize until way too late that it doesn't work in the very different game that is a Thief-based design.


There's more and more, but we know how that'll go...

Renzatic on 5/4/2013 at 17:29

---

I'm expecting a lot less orange.

van HellSing on 5/4/2013 at 18:31

---

...and a lot more teal.

demagogue on 5/4/2013 at 20:18

---

And smoke everywhere it seems.

Renzatic on 5/4/2013 at 20:21

---

That's river fog! :mad:



This is one thing I do NOT want in Thief. Experience points work in DX, and I'm glad they rewarded stealth far more than the ass kicking approach. But...

I don't want experience points in Thief.



You could ghost without them. I rarely ever used any of the stealth augs in the game, and I only got spotted occasionally. Just like any stealth game, all it takes is patience and planning.