Official: No Hammers. No Pagans. No Keepers.

Silverwolf on 18/6/2013 at 14:51

I do see EM as giving the community the middle finger. They are stripping out most of the iconic things and replacing them (for some things) and mostly changing what is left. This is not a Thief game to me. It is Thief-wanna-be game.

fett on 18/6/2013 at 14:59

Re-read my post. Very. Slowly. ;)

bukary on 18/6/2013 at 15:01

I do not mind the changes. I was hoping for some changes regarding my tools, the variety of opponents and impressive level design (bigger and more open areas), the story (obviously!), even the gameplay.

Unfortunately, many of the changes are for the worse. Right now EM is simply taking control over Garrett (eg. with the use of 3rd person view, some "sticky" horizontal and vertical surfaces, the swoop) and guiding the player every step on the way through the level (eg. with the use of hot spots for weapons). I hope this will change.

demagogue on 18/6/2013 at 15:12

I'll boil my last point down in a more general way to get to my thinking.

I think some groups are very rich fodder to be a game faction, and the Hammerites & Mechanists fall into that.

And I think other conceivable groups are (my instinct tells me) shallow fodder for a game faction, the Keepers & pagans TBH, the City Watch and a Baron (an individual does not an entire faction make; Karras needed fanatical followers, not just people on the payroll), and any group of bandits like the Downwinders or what I'm guessing "The Ravens" are.

As for Dishonored, I loved the gameplay (sans a few pop-uppy things), but most of their factions were a bit on the shallow end too ... the religious guys, the assassins, the resistance ... I don't even remember their names. (The lesson there is having forgettable factions doesn't kill the game, but it doesn't make the story memorable either; only the gameplay.) Dark Mod BTW has an "Inventor" faction that I'm still on the fence about... They could be great & memorable, the pieces are there, but AFAIK no one has made an FM introducing them that way yet.

But this observation is completely independent of the deeper stuff, e.g., fett was talking about, none of which I disagree with really. I just hope at least this Ravens faction has some depth to them to make for a good game world & story.

Renault on 18/6/2013 at 15:16

Fett, it's interesting how with the new Star Wars films that are being worked on, you're vehemently against their existence, even without any real tangible info to go on at this point, yet with Thief, you have this laid back, Greenpeace type attitude of well, they're artists, let them interpret things how they will. Even with pretty solid evidence that they've deviated in many places from the core elements of the original.

The two situations are very similar, as we have completely new groups working on old school, beloved franchises. Yet, for some reason you're giving EM a pass and not cutting Disney any slack. I'm kind of the reverse at the moment, and am very interested to see what a new vision for SW without Lucas can be.

Springheel on 18/6/2013 at 15:34

There's nothing wrong with putting some factions in the background and focussing the story on other ones. It's probably necessary. There is, however, a good way and a bad way to do that. The good way is the way T2 handled it. Hammers were still around, zombies were still around; they weren't ignored or written out; they just weren't the focus of the game. I'd have no problems at all if the Hammers didn't play a significant role in the T4 story, as long as they're still running the Churches, and people still pray to the Builder.

The bad way to do it would be to completely eliminate the factions from the game, and reinvent the city as if they hadn't existed. Churches are run by common priests, industrial technology comes from generic factories, etc. Throwing a few bones to the hardcore fans, like including a couple statues in the background, or a reference in an obscure readable, isn't enough.

The little we do know about the story _suggests_ that they are going the second route. The fact that magic has been removed probably means pagans, as they were in T1, have been written out. It's hard to imagine the Trickster or Viktoria in a low-magic world. The goal of "the baron" is apparently to industrialize the city. In the original lore, it would be inconceivable for that goal to be pursued without some kind of connection to either the Hammers or the Mechanists. Is the city no longer industrialized already?

Now, I could be wrong, and EM might have some brilliantly-planned explanations for how this all fits into the lore of the original world. But given statements like, "There may be some references back to keep the following happy," I'm not holding my breath.

fett on 18/6/2013 at 15:58

Quote Posted by Brethren

I've thought about that too (navel gazing ftw!). All I can say is that I view SW as a more prominent and pervasive cultural touchstone that is being continually watered down. Thief isn't nearly as well-known, quoted, or reverenced as SW, except for in this community.

But my reservations about SW is the fact that they're trying to use the same characters 40 years later. I don't want to see Garrett in his 60's either. I'd rather have new characters - and honestly, I wish EM had gone with the little girl from T3, rather than Garrett. Also Thief is an admitted "reboot" and even if it were a proper sequel, nothing past T3 has yet been canonized. Not the case with SW - there is a 20 year expanded universe considered cannon by most fans, and the new SW is going to trample it, without question. So I don't think the situations are exactly the same when you consider that the more rabid fan base has a vested interest in the events following RotJ, while there has been nothing official beyond T3. If Star Wars was rebooting - telling a different story in the same universe, I would actually be frothing at the mouth excited - there are many colorful characters to draw from in that universe. For Thief - the story of The City (the universe) is largely the story of Garrett. I have no interest in exploring that from anyone else's viewpoint. The blandness of The City is largely what makes Garrett a more colorful characters (which is why it sucked sucked sucked for there to be so many other "thieves" running around the place in T3).

I think I'm rambling.

btw - I've really missed hanging out here and discussing Thief with you guys. Seems like there's been nothing to talk about for so long, but now I'm reminded why I like this place. Even though many people are freaking out, you are passionate and articulate, and it's comforting to have these conversations again.

Renault on 18/6/2013 at 16:13

Quote Posted by fett

For Thief - the story of The City (the universe) is largely the story of Garrett. I have no interest in exploring that from anyone else's viewpoint.

You know, you probably should have been up front with Raen and Avalon about that.

(thank you everybody, good night...)

fett on 18/6/2013 at 16:33

:o :laff::laff::laff::laff::laff:

Hindsight, my friend. Hindsight. (*cough*copyright issues*cough*)

Queue on 18/6/2013 at 18:25

Quote Posted by fett

btw - I've really missed hanging out here and discussing Thief with you guys. Seems like there's been nothing to talk about for so long, but now I'm reminded why I like this place. Even though many people are freaking out, you are passionate and articulate, and it's comforting to have these conversations again.

EM stooge! Let's stone him, guys!!