Beleg Cúthalion on 25/5/2013 at 14:15
Quote Posted by jtr7
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
The sort of "humour" that comes up lately seems to be like that of a bunch of racists making racist jokes or radical creationists making creationist jokes. It's not funny IMHO and neither does it relax the tense climate.
Quote Posted by Blue Sky
The new Thief is deliberately not a continuation of the previous games, and has substantially altered the look, feel, and tone of the location, speech, and character from the previous games. Even just the way it's called "Thief" without a subtitle or anything... EM haven't used the word 'reboot' but that is effectively what this is.
EM really only talks about re-inventing but I wonder if there's any point in trying to find a distinction. Also, concerning "deliberately not a continuation of the previous games": (
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/15/the-history-of-thief-39-s-long-walk-out-of-the-shadows.aspx) the video here at 1:43. Unless you only copy a game and its look, you will never have continuation by your definition since it
will be different due to technology and what not. Heck, it would probably be different already if reproduced on the same engine with the same assets. In this case we would have three different Thief games with hardly any continuation (aside from one recycled map in TMA). They all deviated from each other. If you, however, adopted a more pragmatic perspective and tolerated cosmetic differences for the sake of keeping basic elements, you'd find that T4
deliberately placed itself in the history of the previous games right from the beginning. The only thing to which we will probably have no connection is the old story (although I feel that this Keeper statue thing might be hinting at a larger recourse). And finally, FFS, saying that leaving out the subtitle and only keeping "Thief" was a substantial deviation from...well..."Thief" does require a bit of empathy to take seriously. :erg:
Dia on 25/5/2013 at 15:13
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
They all deviated from each other. If you, however, adopted a more pragmatic perspective and tolerated cosmetic differences for the sake of keeping basic elements, you'd find that T4
deliberately placed itself in the history of the previous games right from the beginning. The only thing to which we will probably have no connection is the old story (although I feel that this Keeper statue thing might be hinting at a larger recourse).
The only way in which EM has 'deliberately placed itself in the history of the previous games' has been to call the game 'Thief', to name their protagonist 'Garrett', and to refer to the area where NuGarrett lives (and steals) as 'The City'. After that, their premise that T4 is just like the old Thief falls apart, imo. Haven't you read any of the information released by T4, or seen any of the video interviews with D'Astous, Cantin, and Roy? They've made it pretty clear that their NuThief will be different in just about every way possible; and yes, they've also indicated that they've changed the 'history' of Thief to suit their reboot, reinvention, or whatever you choose to call it. Oh but wait: T4 will be called Thief and Garrett The Master Thief still likes to steal stuff in The City. Yeah, that's about the only 'history' of the original games EM has chosen to keep in their T4 game.
The first three Thief games deviated from each other only in, as you call them, 'cosmetic differences' and improved gameplay and graphics, but the
continuation of the main arc set forth by TDP
was there. I.E. The Keepers, their prophecies, the involvement of the Hammerites, Mechanists, etc. The 'connection to the old story' is the very continuation of which I'm referring. Granted there were new aspects introduced in TMA & TDS, however the continuation of the main storyline (from TDP) was still strongly evident in the latter two games. But in T4 EM has changed all that as has been revealed in the T4 information released to date. EM has 'hinted' that they'll be providing an entirely new story as to how NuGarrett lost his eye, that in their NuThief world, the Keepers, Mechanists, and Hammerites are things of the past, and that the magic will be replaced by the mechanical, that which is more realistically functional. Though they've been more cagey regarding the Keepers, I'll admit, and may still choose to include that faction in T4, EM has already stated that they intend to make their NuThief more realistic, as in minimal magic (which is played a major role in the first three games). It's a pretty fair bet that the Keepers won't have any major roles to play in NuGarrett's quest to defeat the evil Baron. So just where is the continuation of the main arc of the first three Thief games, then? How can T4 be deliberately placing itself in the history of the first three Thief games if the continuation of the Thief saga is absent, along with the factions that contributed to that saga? If the magic of glyphs is reduced to nothing more than signposts and lipservice to that which contributed to the mystique of the first three games, then the only way in which T4 can be termed a Thief game is by its title and the name of the main character. If EM has indeed invented an alternate history for their NuThief (as indicated by their hinting about the NuReason NuGarrett lost his NuEye in T4), then it can't really be steeped in the history of the first three games, can it?
In the first three Thief games Garrett played the major role in prophecies to be fulfilled; in T4 he gets to fight an evil Baron. Where's the continuity from the first three games in that?
Llama on 25/5/2013 at 16:36
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
The sort of "humour" that comes up lately seems to be like that of a bunch of racists making racist jokes or radical creationists making creationist jokes. It's not funny IMHO and neither does it relax the tense climate. EM really only talks about re-inventing but I wonder if there's any point in trying to find a distinction. Also, concerning "deliberately not a continuation of the previous games": (
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/15/the-history-of-thief-39-s-long-walk-out-of-the-shadows.aspx) the video here at 1:43. Unless you only copy a game and its look, you will never have continuation by your definition since it
will be different due to technology and what not. Heck, it would probably be different already if reproduced on the same engine with the same assets. In this case we would have three different Thief games with hardly any continuation (aside from one recycled map in TMA). They all deviated from each other. If you, however, adopted a more pragmatic perspective and tolerated cosmetic differences for the sake of keeping basic elements, you'd find that T4
deliberately placed itself in the history of the previous games right from the beginning. The only thing to which we will probably have no connection is the old story (although I feel that this Keeper statue thing might be hinting at a larger recourse). And finally, FFS, saying that leaving out the subtitle and only keeping "Thief" was a substantial deviation from...well..."Thief" does require a bit of empathy to take seriously. :erg:
Jtr laughs and then you say he's like a racist. You're silly
Beleg Cúthalion on 25/5/2013 at 17:31
Quote Posted by Dia
The only way in which EM has 'deliberately placed itself in the history of the previous games' has been to call the game 'Thief', to name their protagonist 'Garrett', and to refer to the area where NuGarrett lives (and steals) as 'The City'. [...] Oh but wait: T4 will be called Thief and Garrett The Master Thief still likes to steal stuff in The City. Yeah, that's about the only 'history' of the original games EM has chosen to keep in their T4 game.
If that'd be the case there would be no special arrows, no baron, no blackjacking of AIs etc. At least be honest enough to admit that while their interpretation of Thief might not be yours, they attempt(ed) to adhere to the basic principles/whatever they called it in that first GI video. This branding of something as NoThief (sic) followed by striking up the mockery game does not only miss the point in quite some instances, it also narrows the supposed "orginla Thief" down to something so strange and cranky that I probably wouldn't like it. Concerning my phrasing of "history":
Quote:
If EM has indeed invented an alternate history for their NuThief (as indicated by their hinting about the NuReason NuGarrett lost his NuEye in T4), then it can't really be steeped in the history of the first three games, can it? [...] Where's the continuity from the first three games in that?
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
[...]you'd find that T4
deliberately placed itself in the
history of the previous games right from the beginning. The only thing to which we will probably have no connection is the
old story [...]
So I was talking about the...well...development tradition rather than the in-game story arc.
Quote Posted by Llama
Jtr laughs and then you say he's like a racist. You're silly
I wanted to fix this for you but you're apparently not getting what he was actually doing, left aside the context of recent discussion "culture" here in which his post should be seen and if you cannot even tell the difference between calling someone a racist and comparing the wicked "humour" of people in awkward situations to that "humour" which racists might develop (a not fully waterproof comparison, I admit), then it would probably take up as much time as writing these few lines here. :erg:
Goldmoon Dawn on 25/5/2013 at 18:19
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
I won't go into the going-in-paranoid-circles/elitist-arrogant thinking/people claiming what Thief is without having properly played it/ex-post glorification stuff that disgusts me for some weeks now and really put me off this sub forum
Fret thee not. Sooner or later this abomination shall see the light of day, and the hordes will once again be upon us. Like in the old days... of Deadly Shadow! Just like then, the opportunity to convert even more mindless noobs to Dark Project will be great! Mwahaahahaaaa
Thief: The Dark Project
:ebil:
Dia on 25/5/2013 at 18:52
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
Concerning my phrasing of "history":So I was talking about the...well...development tradition rather than the in-game story arc.
Ok. I took 'history of Thief' to mean the whole Thief saga and continuity of same, not the fact that EM is going to include certain types of gear/weapons that were found in the first three Thief games. I understand what you're saying, but sorry Beleg;even there (concerning the gear/weapons) EM has merely paid lip-service to the original games. Example: though NuGarrett
will have mechanical-type arrows that perform different functions, there won't be water arrows - at least TMA & TDS did seem to follow a certain development tradition in regards to remaining true to TDP. So though EM may have continued the 'history' of the fact that the original Garrett had different arrows, they've bastardized the arrows themselves, changing the basic premise that the original arrows were originally constructed by using 'magical' elements to the fact that the arrows in NuThief which have now become mechanical devices. Imo that's not T4 deliberately placing itself in the history of the previous games; more like EM taking certain elements from the first three games and using those elements to further their claim that NuThief is just like the Old Thief ('but different' - their words, mind you), even after bastardizing the idea of the original elements/aspects. EM can claim their T4 is rooted in the original history of the first three Thief games, but EM has taken that history and twisted and distorted it in the name of modernizing and updating so that it only bears a vague resemblance to the old world of Thief. Sadly, T4 also seems to bear vague resemblances to several other popular games as well. However, it may yet turn out to be a decent game which many gamers end up enjoying. But imo it just won't be Thief. A Thief wannabe, but not Thief.
@Q: I love you.
xxxoooxxx
Beleg Cúthalion on 25/5/2013 at 21:04
I'm probably out at the point where the nature of elemental arrows is a "basic premise" while having different sorts of arrows for gameplay reasons is merely a "certain element", which, if preserved, is at least "paying lip service". You could simply imagine it was the other way around, mechanical arrows first, elemental crystals afterwards, and the only argument you'd have to criticise the change would be your getting-used-to-it/it-has-always-been-so. If they e.g. introduced systems that guide the player, you could always argue that a former challenge was removed. But well, strictly speaking this is about canon elements, not those of gameplay (which has a canon nonetheless).
I still think you could argue the same about TMA: They took away the magical locations and monsters, they butchered the original Thief experience of darkness and mythology and replaced it with disdainful Victorian stucco. Having one forest mission was merely a superficial reminder of Thief's former awesomeness. What was broken about rope arrows that they had to "fix" them with stupid vine arrows that could be shot anywhere? Since when did Garrett need dozens of different mine types and ridiculous potions? That's not the Garrett we knew who relied on skill and simple tools instead of thousands of gadgets! Sorry, but hence TMA can never be considered canonical. Oh, and they re-introduced Basso, now how lame is that?
But nobodys says that, well, except for Goldmoon Dawn. It's applying double standards, ex-post romanticisation etc....
Shinrazero on 25/5/2013 at 21:33
With the information EM has given us, there is very little to discern what is canon or not but I hear...
Quote:
..this time you'll be playing as a Burrick in '70s New York.
Goldmoon Dawn on 25/5/2013 at 21:33
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
But nobodys says that, well, except for Goldmoon Dawn.
I have traditionally maintained that while Thief II is certainly no Dark Project, it was a pretty fair forgery. :) Now, Deadly Shadow on the other hand! The beginning of the downward spiral...
