Jhorra on 24/7/2013 at 19:46
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
"Indie" does not mean what you think it means. An indie (as in
independent) game is one NOT produced by a professional, publisher-backed game development studio. Thief was produced by a professional, publisher-backed game development studio. Therefore Thief was not an indie game.
*cough*minecraft
Free from the influence, guidance, or control of another or others; self-reliant: independent
Technically in a business sense sure. But in terms of gameplay it was. At a time when everyone was making generic shooting games that were full of fast action Thief went the other way; it made you hide and wait. It made you think. It did the opposite of what everyone else was doing. That's why it's Indie in its appeal. It made the player someone who was an outsider, an ambiguous hero. In those terms it subverted the narrative of action games by making your character morally vague rather than righteous...
Minecraft is not a typical mainstream game. It's an Indie game that is popular. Popular and mainstream aren't always the same thing.
ZylonBane on 24/7/2013 at 20:40
Quote Posted by Jhorra
Technically in a business sense sure.
Technically in the sense of
that's what it means. You're free to wallow in whatever personal babble vocabulary you want, but if you have any interest in actually communicating your thoughts, you'll have a heckuva easier time if you stick to the accepted meanings of the words you're using. And what do you know, there's a word for what you've been abusing "indie" to attempt to convey: "Niche". "Experimental" works too.
Quote:
Minecraft is not a typical mainstream game.
Good thing nobody said it was!
Jhorra on 25/7/2013 at 01:02
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Technically in the sense of
that's what it means. You're free to wallow in whatever personal babble vocabulary you want, but if you have any interest in actually communicating your thoughts, you'll have a heckuva easier time if you stick to the accepted meanings of the words you're using. And what do you know, there's a word for what you've been abusing "indie" to attempt to convey: "Niche". "Experimental" works too.
Good thing nobody said it was!
i have no interest in actually communicating my thoughts...
Chade on 25/7/2013 at 01:14
Do you want us to read and understand your posts?
Shinrazero on 25/7/2013 at 04:15
Quote Posted by Starker
Not failure. "Failure".
Oh, and Dark Souls almost certainly didn't have an AAA budget. I'd be very surprised if it did.
I would bet that Dark Souls development costs were less than nuThief and easily lower than games like Bioshock Infinite.
I think a game like Dark Souls stands out and is successful because it does not employ any of the gimmicky crap you find in most games these days. It's a very challenging game but is not impossible to overcome. Much like Thief, you have to employ patience, planning, and observation.
Dark Souls
does not hold your hand and I would argue that Thief didn't either. Games like Dark Souls and Thief are genius because the true reward is in the challenge and what is at stake for the player. It is why your successes feel so damn good and your failures are agonizing.
Which brings me to my question...
Many would agree that free form movement is a core mechanic of the series. Why are you guys opting for contextual movement? How can you possibly hope to maintain the "DNA" of your game's predecessors by limiting movement in this manner? Where is the risk for the player if every jump is predefined. Where is the danger or peril in exploration when it is boxed, safe and snug?
Of all the changes, this is the most difficult to rationalize and accept. There is no way you can spin this as something positive. It will gimp free exploration and emergent scenarios. It will completely kill one of the very best things about Thief, exploring and traversing the environment. It simply is not Thief.
Starker on 25/7/2013 at 05:46
Quote Posted by Shinrazero
I think a game like Dark Souls stands out and is successful because it does not employ any of the gimmicky crap you find in most games these days. It's a very challenging game but is not impossible to overcome. Much like Thief, you have to employ patience, planning, and observation.
To be honest, I found Demon's Souls difficulty greatly exaggerated by its fans. I wouldn't even call it Nintendo hard. You just need to be careful and practice a little bit.
Quote Posted by Shinrazero
Of all the changes, this is the most difficult to rationalize and accept. There is no way you can spin this as something positive.
I think you are greatly underestimating the power of rationalisation.
Chade on 25/7/2013 at 05:55
Someone called?
Shinrazero on 25/7/2013 at 06:08
LOL:laff:
Chade, you are one rational taffer. <3
@Starker Agreed, Megaman is more rage inducing than Dark Souls is.
Vivian on 25/7/2013 at 09:21
Ooh, ooh, I've got an actual question: 'Why does it seem like the development of Thief was treated fundamentally differently to the development of Deus Ex'?
ZylonBane on 25/7/2013 at 14:52
Quote Posted by Vivian
Ooh, ooh, I've got an actual question: 'Why does it seem like the development of Thief was treated fundamentally differently to the development of Deus Ex'?
I dunno about that. They both seem to have an unhealthy love of "Press button, cool thing happens" design.
