SubJeff on 30/10/2013 at 21:54
If there is contextual movement jay, what stops you mantling when you are close to the wall?
And why would you jump close to the wall to see what's just over it in a stealth game where the sound should be propagated from you to enemies closer to the wall.
That wasn't even my point. Your example is just ridiculous because it misses the main point totally - there is no need for contextual movement.
Chade on 30/10/2013 at 21:58
Hey, contractual movement could be pretty interesting. :p
jay pettitt on 30/10/2013 at 21:58
Quote Posted by yxlplig
Just because freedom of movement is always restricted to some degree doesn't mean we should be accepting of further restrictions.
It does mean that we should accept some restrictions though. Because if we don't we'll be bumping up against practical limitations and we'll be disappointed. Biting our noses to spite our face so to speak.
As things stand, we don't really know if we're accepting more limitations. Or if we're swapping some low value freedoms (like the ability to lean in the middle of a room) for higher value freedoms elsewhere. T4's peek system might be really nice. Swoop might be quite good. Cover mechanics might actually work well in a Thief game.
This isn't about EM denying you your rights. EM have designed a system. You get to play the game with that system. That's the exact same paradigm as every game ever made. he reference to bunny-hopping wasn't EM declaring their aspiration to police bunny-hopping, rather trying to communicate that the intention for system they've designed supports more high value actions at the expense of low value actions. So the ability to do stretching exercises in the middle of a room or to jump and and down as been switched for actions that EM hope will be more useful.
Time will tell how successful they've been.
Quote:
Song of the Caverns for example would be a completely different mission if you couldn't jump from carpet to carpet....
All games have their restrictions and limits. T4 is a different game to T1 through T3. We yet don't know what T4 entails. What the challenges are. What the tools and abilities to overcome those challenges will be.
Criticising a game for being different to the game that it's different from is kinda, well duh!
What will matter is how the systems and challenges intertwingle.
Starker on 30/10/2013 at 22:22
Quote Posted by Chade
I think that with the right implementation, the new style of leaning could be better overall then the old style.
Now this I have to hear. How can peeking in select spots be better than leaning everywhere? The old system allowed you to angle your shots while staying in the shadows, for example, while the peeking system only lets you look around a corner.
Also, while we are on the topic, the new shooting looks crap. In the old one there was the joy of mastering a skill, here you just aim and fire.
Quote Posted by Chade
Afaict, falling down has not been uncommon, and most people do it because they jumped in the wrong spot.
My point was that there are apparently invisible railings in the game. Immersion shmersion.
Chade on 30/10/2013 at 22:55
Quote Posted by Starker
Now this I have to hear. How can peeking in select spots be better than leaning everywhere? The old system allowed you to angle your shots while staying in the shadows, for example, while the peeking system only lets you look around a corner.
Being able to shoot out light sources while not being in their line of sight is the biggest thing you lose. But is it actually a negative thing for the gameplay? Is it really bad to force you to either shoot them from a longer distance, or briefly put yourself in light? Arguably it takes something that's not all that interesting and makes it a bit more interesting.
Being able to put your head at any position and any angle could be quite useful. Most obviously you can peek under furniture, chairs, tables, etc. You can also smoothly track guards through small cracks without having to move your feet, which always feels a little silly, and isn't always possible. You can take loot hidden in small cracks and under beds and so forth, and make the cracks smaller and the beds closer to the ground, improving the loot hunt aspect of the game. I'm sure there's other things I haven't imagined because I haven't played with this theoretical system, too.
Quote Posted by Starker
Also, while we are on the topic, the new shooting looks crap. In the old one there was the joy of mastering a skill, here you just aim and fire.
Were we on that topic? I hadn't realized ... but agreed. :p
jay pettitt on 30/10/2013 at 23:27
I'd be very very surprised if T4 didn't let you shoot from cover. Given that it has a cover system.
yxlplig on 30/10/2013 at 23:45
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
It does mean that we should accept some restrictions though. Because if we don't we'll be bumping up against practical limitations and we'll be disappointed. Biting our noses to spite our face so to speak.
We're nowhere close to bumping up against practical limitations and I don't understand why you think it's reasonable for a game coming out in 2014 to have less freedom of movement and interactivity than a game from 1998. You make these declarations that we shall accept Decision A, with no compelling reason as to why. What practical limitations are we coming up against?
Quote:
As things stand, we don't really know if we're accepting more limitations. Or if we're swapping some low value freedoms (like the ability to lean in the middle of a room) for higher value freedoms elsewhere. T4's peek system might be really nice. Swoop might be quite good. Cover mechanics might actually work well in a Thief game.
There is no uncertainty about it. We know that we can only interact with the environment in ways that level designers have specified. The game is more limited. The freedom to climb or lean at predetermined hotspots is a "high value" freedom? And being able to lean whenever you want is a "low value" freedom? Might be, might be, might actually work -- why might it?
Quote:
This isn't about EM denying you your rights. EM have designed a system. You get to play the game with that system. That's the exact same paradigm as every game ever made.
I guess I agree with that. I don't see why you saw fit to include this idea in your post. Who would dispute that?
Quote:
The reference to bunny-hopping wasn't EM declaring their aspiration to police bunny-hopping, rather trying to communicate that the intention for system they've designed supports more high value actions at the expense of low value actions. So the ability to do stretching exercises in the middle of a room or to jump and and down as been switched for actions that EM hope will be more useful.
How are those mutually exclusive in any way? Policing bunnyhopping is exactly what they are doing, or at least it is one of the main justifications they've given. And again, I completely disagree with which actions you deem to be low value.
Quote:
All games have their restrictions and limits. T4 is a different game to T1 through T3. We yet don't know what T4 entails. What the challenges are. What the tools and abilities to overcome those challenges will be.
Criticising a game for being different to the game that it's different from is kinda, well duh!What will matter is how the systems and challenges intertwingle.
I'm tired of having my arguments distilled down to "he doesn't like it cause it's different". If you respond in the same way to this post as you did the last one, pulling two little quotes that you think will be easy to swat down, I'm not going to respond to it.
Starker on 30/10/2013 at 23:59
Quote Posted by Chade
Being able to shoot out light sources while not being in their line of sight is the biggest thing you lose. But is it actually a negative thing for the gameplay? Is it really bad to force you to either shoot them from a longer distance, or briefly put yourself in light? Arguably it takes something that's not all that interesting and makes it a bit more interesting.
Being able to put your head at any position and any angle could be quite useful. Most obviously you can peek under furniture, chairs, tables, etc. You can also smoothly track guards through small cracks without having to move your feet, which always feels a little silly, and isn't always possible. You can take loot hidden in small cracks and under beds and so forth, and make the cracks smaller and the beds closer to the ground, improving the loot hunt aspect of the game. I'm sure there's other things I haven't imagined because I haven't played with this theoretical system, too.
It feels very thiefy to do things from the shadows. Being able to lean and shoot gives players a way to overcome obstacles and adds more variety to how you can interact with the environment in an organic, non-scripted way. With free leaning you will still have to get into the light sometimes to shoot. You don't lose that.
Now with this hypothetical contextual leaning system, I still can't see how restricting it to specific spots makes it better than being able to do it anywhere. First of all, with peeking being restricted to only certain spots, the value of looking under beds and other things is greatly diminished as it will feel more like a contrivance than a simulation -- something that the designer put there, rather than a part of the world. Oh look, here's a spot where you can interact with things.
Chade on 31/10/2013 at 00:11
Quote Posted by yxlplig
If you respond in the same way to this post as you did the last one, pulling two little quotes that you think will be easy to swat down, I'm not going to respond to it.
Responding to specific parts of a post is normal forum discussion, and is generally easier for others to follow then quoting the whole post and responding in one big unorganized blob.
Quote Posted by yxlplig
We know that we can only interact with the environment in ways that level designers have specified. The game is more limited.
We could only interact with the environment in previous games in ways that the level designers specified, too. However, we like to think that we can combine those predetermined interactions in ways that the level designers did not think of*.
When it comes to moving around the level, what does it mean to say that you combined movement commands in ways that the level designers did not think of? Maybe you twisted around in mid air and leaned forward and mantled onto some ledge? It seems unlikely you'll do the same in thief 4.
However, when it comes to sneaking around, it's not so clear. You've got swooping, slowing down time, lots of distraction opportunities, AI which will permanently change guard patrols in response to stimulus, all the normal sneaking tools, etc ... if you have any imagination at all, you should be dreaming up all sorts of the creative things you might be able to do with these ingredients.
* "ways the level designer did not think of" is a silly benchmark, really ... maybe we should just hire insanely stupid level designers and every game would be awesome! We really just care about the player's creativity, not whether the designer happens to be more or less creative then the player.
Chade on 31/10/2013 at 00:24
Quote Posted by Starker
It feels very thiefy to do things from the shadows. Being able to lean and shoot gives players a way to overcome obstacles and adds more variety to how you can interact with the environment in an organic, non-scripted way. With free leaning you will still have to get into the light sometimes to shoot. You don't lose that.
You are certainly right that it feels thiefy, and that's an unambiguously good thing. You are also right that it gives you more variety. That doesn't automatically make it better (every game is better with noclip on!), but perhaps should bias us towards believing it is better. However, you most certainly
do lose the challenge arising from not being able to lean from shadows in some situations! You can't have it both ways, man. Either leaning from shadows gives you helpful thiefy abilities, or it doesn't. You can't claim that it simultaneously gives you helpful thiefy abilities while also claiming that you don't lose the interesting challenges arising from not having those abilities.
Quote Posted by Starker
Now with this hypothetical contextual leaning system, I still can't see how restricting it to specific spots makes it better than being able to do it anywhere.
I never said that restricting it to specific spots makes it better then not restricting it to specific spots. I described two systems: the old one which is absolutely free in where you lean, but only gives you a few discrete lean options, and a hypothetical new one which allows you to freely move your head around while leaning, but limits the positions from where you lean. They are both limited in different ways. If you want to imagine a third system which let's you do everything, well, that's a different kettle of fish altogether.
Quote Posted by Starker
First of all, with peeking being restricted to only certain spots, the value of looking under beds and other things is greatly diminished as it will feel more like a contrivance than a simulation -- something that the designer put there, rather than a part of the world. Oh look, here's a spot where you can interact with things.
That "spot" could be every single edge in the game world. That is not a contrivance.
