Let's try and rescue our reputation then: Constructiveness ITT

nickie on 8/4/2013 at 16:40

Of course it's serious business! I can perfectly understand the huge disappointment some people feel with the snippets of information we've had so far. It's completely natural. But the only way I've got through extreme shit is by having a laugh. And more often than not, with a line from Thief.

I've said it before but I'll say it again. I lived in an industrial unit (illegally) for a year or so. And there were rats the size of small cats. And I got through that by endlessly muttering 'it must've bin rats'. That and bashing backwards and forwards with a broom while I walked. So definitely yes, there must be humour. For my sanity if nothing else. :)

Curunir on 8/4/2013 at 17:39

I love how I got such a rise out of you, I got a whole wall of text, even though I apologized and made clear that I was not writing my original post just to troll or to annoy someone.

No need to argue over it, I don't think either of us will get much use out of that. Maybe I will just stop by next year and point the finger and laugh at your ridiculously high expectations, or maybe I won't because the game will be awesome and I could still stop by and apologize for being such a close-sighted moron. Right now I just feel completely disillusioned and you seem to be a lot more on the hopeful side.

That's about it.

Myth on 9/4/2013 at 07:38

This is hardly the thread to do so, but Renzatic:

1. Whether hard games sell or do not sell you can't really state because you give no concrete evidence and numbers. However I can state that I see a pattern of a continual dumbing down and making games easier. The suits in the big companies want their bucks, so that apparently means to make the games easier. If you feel that games are more difficult now than in the year 2000 then we simply won't see eye to eye. Example:

"The new Thief makes obvious concessions to players who have been brought up on gaming in the nine years since Deadly Shadows - for instance, when you're navigating narrow beams you will be guided along them automatically and dismounting will require you to press a button." - how taffin' great huh? Remember that rope you had to cross in LOTP? Done automatically now - like Assassin's Creed. No way to fall unless you're too stupid and press X on your console controller. How wonderful.

2. We are special snowflakes and you are not the one to tell us otherwise. We are special by virtue of being lucky enough to play TDP and TMA when they came out (it's hard to get into them now without all the nostalgia from days past when Dark Engine looked pretty damn good), we were the ones in which these games resonated enough to stick with them for 14 years, and since you are posting in TTLG - here are the guys and gals who were so mesmerised by Thief they devoted months and sometimes years into creating masterpiece FMs. So damn right the posters here are special and they should definitely feel superior to oblivous 14 year old console gamers. Like that guy in the Eiods forums who made a thread titled "Garrett vs. Altair". Perhaps he's a great gamer but as soon as someone starts spurting gibberish like that I can't help but feel superior when it comes to Thief related matters.

3. I agree that Eidos shows good intentions. But they also show us that godawful ninja mask, focus and that go-go gadget bow, so I (and many others) have a right to be sceptical and critical. Games are not made on a remote desert island - the developers and especially publishers react to public outcry when it threatens profit. Look at the official Diablo III forums for the past year and check out the patch logs to notice for example. For now I have a feeling we may see Russel back in NuTheif if enough people bitch about it. We definitely won't get them to change their mind and go out of their comfort zone if we sit there clapping at their masterpiece.

Erand on 9/4/2013 at 07:51

Of course "the masses" is a vague term that doesn't really refer to anything in reality, but I think Curunir is right with the argument that making a game so "punishing and dark and full of Eric Brosius" today is way too risky business for a non-indie game studio, let alone Eidos/Square with their million-dollar brand management schemes and marketing et al. The developers are not allowed to do that, i.e. they couldn't get funding for it. I'm not saying that a game like that could never be a successful game even today, but it's highly unlikely to actually get any big company taking such a risk and making a big game title like that for all the consoles and whatnot. Damn, it might even turn out to be a masterpiece instead of just a "pretty good game", but it's not really the critical acclaim that businesses are after.

- I would like the new Thief to be unforgivingly punishing, dark and with a great sound atmosphere

Also:

- AI that cannot easily be reduced to predictable action patterns, rendering the game stupefyingly easy

- Well written missions/dialogue in an immersive, inherently coherent fictional universe

- No achievements popping up for every "oh-so-smart route in" or for 'performing 50 silent takedowns'

- The possibility of tweaking the game (with .ini files or so) if it has too many annoyances for teh tr00 fans.

- Hammerites, they are one of the most recognizable and iconic elements shaping the Thief universe, why would anyone leave them out?

jtr7 on 9/4/2013 at 08:06

And this is exactly why we say, why did they choose to redo Thief, of all titles, unsafe and risky as it is? It's a no-brainer! Don't do it, then. Or make it for those same risks but what they mean today. They don't like it. They aren't talking like fans who are modifying it to remove the risks, they are talking like they don't get it, can't figure it out, and plain don't like it. If they were just saying it was risky, it wouldn't feel so insulting.

It was risky in the 90s, so I don't even know what made the 90s safer than now that people keep bringing that up. Nothing I want in the new game has anything to do with the 90s. Dark Project's unique game-mechanics weren't a 90s thing, they were anti-90s, pro-great underground geeky gaming. I will never expect to see 90s stuff in a new game, but when the hell is someone gonna have the guts to make a game with the thinking behind those mechanics and freedoms, again?

Brian The Dog on 9/4/2013 at 18:06

Quote Posted by jtr7

It was risky in the 90s, so I don't even know what made the 90s safer than now that people keep bringing that up. Nothing I want in the new game has anything to do with the 90s. Dark Project's unique game-mechanics weren't a 90s thing, they were anti-90s, pro-great underground geeky gaming. I will never expect to see 90s stuff in a new game, but when the hell is someone gonna have the guts to make a game with the thinking behind those mechanics and freedoms, again?

It's to do with the development costs. If you develop a game for $1m and it only makes back 60% of the investment, you've only lost $400,000. Since development costs are much higher now, you are banking on much larger sales - and if you screw up the sales, then you lose mega-bucks for the publishers. Of course, if you get everything right and it sells 40% more than you were expecting, then the profits rocket. Which begs the question...

Quote Posted by jtr7

And this is exactly why we say, why did they choose to redo Thief, of all titles, unsafe and risky as it is? It's a no-brainer! Don't do it, then.

which is the one I don't get. Why re-do Thief? Whilst sales have been OK for the series, they haven't been on the same level as Hitman, Tomb Raider or other series that have been rebooted, which are a far safer set of games from a technical point of view.

My constructive comments:
- Make it about good level design and a tight story.
- Make the engine as flexible as you can, so that tweaking for different platforms can be done for a minimum of cost.
- Make it possible to modify all sort of things in the game via the Settings menu. If you want hand-holding for beginners, then please go ahead (especially if it brings in new fans), but have the ability to turn it all off.
- Make each level/area possible in a multiple of ways, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.

Renzatic on 9/4/2013 at 18:12

Quote Posted by Brian The Dog

On a guess, I'd say it's because Thief and Deus Ex are almost like Eidos' "Criterion Collection" of games. While they won't set the world on fire or break any records, they're solid sellers, have a good reputation with the more hardcore set, and are guaranteed to net them good review scores...provided they're done well.

They're like their prestige line of games.

Erand on 14/4/2013 at 21:00

Quote Posted by Brian The Dog

Indeed, the graphics alone require far more resources than in the 90’s. For example, an average AAA-title includes so many high-detail 3D-assets that it takes heaps and heaps of concept artists and 3D-modelers stacked on top of each other in order to ever get it all done. It can be argued that this often leads to a loss of one cohesive directive vision, as so many people on different departments are working on one single project. Simply managing it all becomes an enormous task. Some game might have a brilliant storyline with witty dialogue and all, but if the environment models differ from that vision (like some stereotypical fantasy buildings with chains hanging everywhere, just because everything has to be breathtakingly awe-inspiring to look at, you know, with the moonlight shining through the chains with those awesome light shafts everywhere) and if the level design isn't in tune with everything else, it can become difficult to get seriously immersed in a game. The City in TDP wasn't exactly beautiful, and that is partly what made it seem so believable.

In addition to the graphics and other things, serious new-gen console development requires a ton of money (licenses, rigorous testing and all) on its own, so basically one has to have quite a lot of money accessible before even dreaming of developing, let alone releasing, a game of that scale. Along with that money come the marketing people, investor interests, Non-disclosure-Agreements, Risk Analysis's and all kinds of inspiring things. Also, in the '90s games weren't such a big thing, it was a rather basement-dwelling thing to do; now new games are being advertised everywhere and the Internet spreads the (marketing) word faster than ever.

And yes, developing Thief was risky in the '90s too, and sadly LGS is no more, partly due to that, perhaps. Now, I'm sure there are some great people at EM who are really doing their best and who try to maintain a positive attitude regarding this new game they are pulling together. I honestly think we should give them a chance and try to understand their point of view, since after all, a new Thief game will not magically delete all the existing FM:s and mods or destroy the community (Oh Builder, just let the hordes of console kids wander off to Eidos Forums though), so we have no real reason to feel threatened by it. It's true that LGS people had the genius and the curiosity to wander where no one had gone before, and that's how they made my favorite game. It's rare that such talented and enthusiastic people get together to do something like that.

I see that Thief is being thought of as a brand, and they want to introduce that to new audiences. Thief-series has brought us something we don't really see in any other game, and I believe that they don't want to make it all Assassin's Creed or water it down too much, since then it wouldn't be Thief anymore. That being said, I wouldn't consider the new Thief "canon" per se, since the development team is different and the times have changed. If it was the original team making it, it would be a whole different story. So, maybe it's a good thing they're rebooting it, since that somewhat prevents them from 'staining' the original games. I'm really curious on what they are going to come up with. While I seriously dislike some trends in gaming nowadays, I still think that this new Thief could be a game to look forward to, especially after a treatment from the tweakers here.

Kovitlac on 15/4/2013 at 17:11

I, frankly, find it sickening how negative some people here are. We get it - you liked the old games, and because the reboot isn't 100% similar, you throw up your hands and cry to the world that all hope is lost. That's your right, but no one needs, or cares, to see that kind of negativity in a thread that is supposed to be about constructive criticism.

Stop trying to bring down the entire project with your poison and maybe, just maybe, a decent game can be created.

jtr7 on 15/4/2013 at 17:34

No. You don't get it at all. We're saying something other than what you think. The fact you will not look past a certain perspective to see what it is we are saying is the reason the negativity is even stronger. The lack of perspective makes more things to contend with and personal on the forums than just the game industry's continual risk aversion. The only reason some of us liked the old games is because we didn't like many of the games in the years before them, along side them, and were sad to see new games developers didn't pick up what LGS started. We'd like more games today if there were titles worth it. We hoped LGS would lead to a new trend. What we don't like in games are the adherence to the tried and true for money, and new "trends" that aren't improvements that become typical and common. It can't be explained simply, sorry.

Also, it's really interesting you think we have the power to change the game from over here. Boy, wouldn't that be something. You gotta hate Thief a lot to call what Thief does best "poison", but I'm betting that's displaced anger. Maybe you think your post isn't negative, or maybe you can now understand how passion for something one believes in can look negative but come from positive motives. From this side of the coin, your post looks grossly negative.

Dangit! My wifi cut-out while editing, and before auto-restore could make save.