Chade on 18/11/2013 at 22:19

---

I don't quite get this. Does this tie into the previous argument in any way? Are you saying that they must be blindly copying other games because the new features add nothing apart from handholding and being cool?

Of course, that's exactly why EM introduced the new features. Handholding. Being cool. EM have a two pronged approach to thief 4. For old players: options, difficulty settings, references. For new players: handholding, being cool, instantly recognizable setting. We all realize that, right?



Regardless of whether you are right or not, you can take each element in isolation, ignore inconvenient differences, and claim it looks like something in some other game out there. The fact that you can do this doesn't provide any evidence that you are right. You need to point out something in thief 4 that wouldn't be there if you were wrong.

If you were to, for instance, arrive at the same game or the same two games every time you did that, it would start to look like a pattern that was unlikely to occur if you were wrong.

We know that EM are making a game that is meant to appeal to modern gamers, so we know that some elements to look more like modern games and less like the old ones. What I don't see is elements that are just blindly copied in without regard to how it's going to work in the new thief game. Focus and swoop are obviously added in to make the process of doing stealth "cooler", and focus also helps the player learn how to sneak around. Contextual movement is obviously designed to take some of the risk out of choosing unconventional paths throughout the level. The action segments are there to break up the pace a bit. Upgrades to provide a less ephemeral sense of progression. I don't see anything that's randomly copied from other games. I see a bunch of stuff deliberately designed to make the game more appealing to new players.



Why? Because that's the premise of the question, that's why! :p

Why ask that particular question? Well, because it's possibly a question that EM had to answer in one form or another. If that's the case, we know what answer they chose. Considering the alternatives, I'd say it's a decent one. The main thing I'd change is to turn the bleakness down to 8 or so. I'm curious what answer other people would chose.



It's all marketing, Springheel. EM come to the press with a game which has a distinguished legacy plus a bunch of changes to suit modern audiences. They have to crow about their legacy. Where possible, they have to make it sound like the changes are good for everyone. Where that's not possible, they have to justify making the game worse for old audiences.



Absolutely. That would be a mistake. It happens. Tempest in a tea cup IMO.

Chade on 19/11/2013 at 21:51

---

I wouldn't say it's about looking like modern titles. Well, partly, of course. But mostly what I see is real concrete changes in the game experience that with any luck, from the side of me that is excited about getting out there and sharing the joys of stealth with the world, will emphasize the process of sneaking. Make it something that anyone can appreciate. Taking that process, of doing actions which just happen to be stealthy when done in certain situations, and reifying that into concrete stealthy verbs.

Thief 1: I slipped between two guards = I waited for them to look away from each other, then walked between them. Thief 4: I slipped between two guards = I waited for them to look away from each other, then swooped between them. Thief 1 listening for the chance to move = well ... listening. Thief 4 listening for the chance to move = listening too ... unless it's really important and then we have a focus power to turn that into an explicit action. And so forth.

As for old fans, we'll see just how much of an issue it when the game is released. I'm sure it will be an issue for many people. I'm not sure just how many. I think many people will be surprised that the game is actually quite focused on sneaking, and not some action-orientated title like a lot of people seem to believe for some reason. Of course, regardless of how stealthy it is, there are a lot of other changes that people won't like. The contextual movement and lore changes will turn off a lot of people. It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.



Of course. Anyone on these forums would say the same thing. Yes, that includes me (which I hope goes without saying, but you never know). That's why keeping the old mix wasn't part of the question ... we already know what the answer would be. It's not an interesting question. Let's say that you had to choose an instantly recognizable setting. What would it be?

Chade on 20/11/2013 at 01:32

---

It's a matter of tuning. Please find me someone who has played the game and says the stealth is too easy. IIRC everyone so far has said it's a challenge.



I wouldn't call it "pumping up the action" myself. As for not making it enjoyable for everyone, well ... that's trivially true, of course, but the question is just how many people can find it enjoyable? I'm certain that you can reach a wide audience with pure stealth: the concept of sneaking past people has mass appeal. I'm less confident that you can find a way to represent that concept mechanically which A) has mass appeal, and B) retains the challenges we loved in thief. But I don't think it's out of the question.

There are two main obstacles, I think. First, what I was talking about before, making the process of proceeding stealthily involve a lot of easily recognizable stealthy verbs. This is pretty easy to solve and IMO doesn't sacrifice all that much.

Second, what to do about all the waiting? This seems harder to solve: off the top of my head I can't think of anything effective without significant downsides. You could:

* encourage level designers to stick to short regular patrols and longer randomized patrols (effective, but a bit of a shame to restrict gameplay that way),
* have a look at ways to keep the player's mind on what he is planning to do, especially if the guard he is waiting for can't currently be seen (I have no idea how that could work),
* add a command to quickly leap back to your hiding spot, making it less risky for the player to take short recon trips out, perhaps to look around that corner (effective in some situations, but not others), or
* add an idle button to speed up time while the player is waiting (effective, but say goodbye to immersion!).


Still, I see no reason to believe it's a fundamentally intractable problem.



That's one obstacle out of the way. There are potentially others: e.g. the people investing in the game. Anyway, I don't want to argue too strongly that this is definitely a question that EM had to answer, and that's why we've got the current setting. I think it's possible, but the main reason I asked the question is that I think these hypothetical situations are interesting. If you don't want to even consider the question, that's fine.

Starker on 20/11/2013 at 10:40

---

It's not a simple matter of "too easy". Swooping in and out is going to have a very different pacing to the gameplay.




Would you call the escaping the collapsing burning bridge sequence stealthy or actiony?

They said they empowered combat, because in the old games it was "game over when you were caught" and the tester's wanted to "prove they are not pussies".

The draw time of the bow is significantly shorter.

Movement is much faster.




Fine... I'd consider using a cyberpunk setting. Happy now?

Chade on 20/11/2013 at 22:24

---

Haha, that teaches me for asking, I suppose. :p Still:

A) These seem to be complaints about how you can be unseen a foot or so away from a guard in deep shadow, which is exactly how thief always worked. My guess is that they their dark shadows aren't as dark, and so now it feels a bit silly. But I doubt it's much different to older games mechanically.

B) It's not the same thing as saying the game is challenging overall, which a few people have said. Hell, even in the very same RPS article, which is pretty negative overall, one of the few positive comments is "Thief was pretty tough in places. When I bent my surroundings to my will and ghosted my way right past particularly well-positioned opposition, I felt like I’d really earned it." That's a direct comment about difficulty (albeit only in "some places", which is true of any game, including older thief games), rather then taking a comment about one mechanic and extrapolating to the rest of the game.



Bow draw time is irrelevant. Movement? Well, crouch movement does seem quite a bit faster. I was a bit surprised that the player seemed to be able to keep pace with a guard while crouch moving in one of the last gameplay videos I saw. Given that crouch movement is guaranteed to be quiet, it's one of my bigger concerns. Swooping? I'm not convinced it makes the game anywhere near as fast-paced and easy as you and some others here seem to think. People who have played the game often call the gameplay slow and deliberate, so we'll see.



I'd call it irrelevant to the rest of the game.



There's been a wide range of quotes about combat. You're picking one of the earlier and most action-friendly quotes as representative? Even back then there were lots of quotes that suggested combat was frowned upon. Lately the pendulum seem to have swung even further in favor of stealth.



Wow ... that does surprise me. I thought I was one of the only people who thought that a futuristic thief could be done well. Most people discard such themes out of hand afaict.