New Horizon on 17/11/2013 at 02:57
I get the sense that they do realize how much they have screwed this one up though...especially now with 5 years of development costs and a looming release date.
They simply could not have been paying any attention to the discussions on the Eidos forums. I can't see how they could have gotten it so wrong if they had.
GodzillaX8 on 17/11/2013 at 03:53
Quote Posted by Brethren
I've never played Batman and it's been a long time since I've played Zelda, so I don't remember - when the player jumps in a designated jumping spot, are they guaranteed to make the jump successfully? Once you hit that X button, is it only a matter of having the animation play out to reach the other side? That's partially what I'm afraid of, taking all of the skill out of the player's hands and making the game a routine series of button presses.
In Zelda and Batman, you run at the angle you'd like to jump, it automatically jumps when you reach the ledge in the direction you're moving, and you land where you land.
Quote Posted by Too Much Coffee
The people over at EM are not being truthful. If they dumped QTE because of fan backlash, then why didn't fan backlash also make them keep Stephen Russell, keep the supernatural, keep swimmable water, and overall simply be more true to the franchise? I think the playtesters found the QTE to be very bad.
Or could it be that your perception of everything they do/say is skewed because of personal prejudice and you refuse to allow yourself to believe that anyone involved could possibly desire to make a quality product?
Queue on 17/11/2013 at 06:16
Quote Posted by GodzillaX8
Which copy should I play? My copy on Steam, my copy on Gog, or the original discs for Thief: TDP or Thief Gold?
Is that
all?
Tomi on 17/11/2013 at 10:01
Quote Posted by Too Much Coffee
So to sum up this week: no QTE = +1. No swimming = -1.
What? Do you really find these two things equally important?
For me it's more like: no QTE = +10. No swimming = -1.
And since it looks like there won't be a mission editor in the new Thief, the lack of swimming doesn't really bother me at all. I'm not sure if insta-death water is a good idea either, but I'm happy to hear that water won't be an important element in the game. Not only were the underwater areas in T1/T2 ugly and uninteresting, I also hated how jumping into the nearest canal (or whatever pond or puddle) was a foolproof way to escape your enemies, when it
should have meant almost certain death.
Anyway, have they actually said that there definitely won't be swimming in T4? All I've read so far is that water won't be a "big theme", a statement that could mean pretty much anything.
That Miserable Thief on 17/11/2013 at 17:33
Quote Posted by GodzillaX8
Which copy should I play? My copy on Steam, my copy on Gog, or the original discs for Thief: TDP or Thief Gold?
How about the one that starts with a mission in which your best method of infiltration includes dropping into a well and swimming? Or has hidden areas only accessible through deep water? Or provides additional routes through parts of the city to avoid detection?
It's funny that anyone accepting of the omission of swimmable water due to "realism" (soaking wet) would be accepting of the lack of ability to control the character they way they choose due to artificial contextual reasons that directly contradict realism. Why would I want to jump
there? None of your concern. I do. Why would I want to shoot an arrow
there? Don't worry about it, just allow me to do it.
Swimmable water became a core to Thief gameplay when LGS decided to include it in the very first mission. The suspension of disbelief required regarding the realism of it is no more than many other parts of the game. LGS created an extremely immersive experience which had to have elements that required the suspension of disbelief for the game to be fun. They were able to do it in a way that allowed wide player agency. EM, while claiming to retain the "DNA", seems to be striving to limit player agency for their own selfish reasons for a more controlled, cinematic experience which directly contradicts their claim.
I don't blame EM for trying new things, but removing the freedom of movement that was at the core of LGS' design
destroys the DNA.
As for swimmable water, their reasoning for omitting it sucks. I think they simply didn't want to worry about. I could see implementing a little more risk into the choice to swim, like making wet noises or leaving trails when leaving the water, or even the chance of sickness, but it seems EM decided it wasn't worth their time. They were more interested in things that weren't necessary or Thief-like, including lowering the chances of failure for those with bad player skill.
I'm not really upset, because I'm not a gamer. My PC is 11 years old, I have an original X-BOX, and I don't plan to buy anything that could play this reboot, anyway. I'm more inclined to upgrade to be able to play Dark Mod missions more smoothly, and while I am not excited to see how "Thief" turns out, I am interested.
qolelis on 17/11/2013 at 17:47
I really value my freedom of movement in Thief and being able to swim adds to that freedom: When swimming, one can move in any direction, so it's really the ultimate freedom of movement. One might even say that freedom (freedom of oppression, freedom of authority and, of course, freedom of movement) is one of the things that defines the original Thief games, so, for me, being able to swim is an important part of what made Thief such a great experience. One might argue that if I value my freedom so much, what about being able to fly, wouldn't that really be the ultimate freedom of movement!? Uhm, well, that would probably be too much freedom and that is what makes water so great: it gives me freedom, but it also restricts me to balance things out. So, freedom, but also balance is an important part of what made Thief such a great experience.
Sure, I agree that "running around drenched in water" is not optimal for a thief and I also agree that it's not very realistic to be able to swim fully clothed while carrying a hefty amount of loot and equipment, without sinking to the bottom like a rock, and then getting out of the water without a single drop of water being dripped, but I love the mystique and excitement of exploring under water too much for the broken realism to bother me. Furthermore, if broken realism bothers you, how realistic is it not being able to jump other than in certain locations!?
The originals had a lot of great underwater exploration: Getting inside the Bafford mansion meant swimming through a canal of fresh water and the player was also given the opportunity to explore a hidden cave through an underwater tunnel. Cragscleft offered swimming, both in getting in and getting out (through an underwater river); Bonehoard has swimmable water spread out through the mission (and also makes it possible for the player to jump down from great heights without getting hurt). Assassins has swimmable water (sewers, rivers and canals, with some being underground). The Sword has swimmable water. In fact, all T1 OMs has water in them and all, but two, has swimmable water and three OMs had required swimming. Even the training mission offered swimming, so, yeah, I would definitely say that swimmable water is a big theme in T1. In T2, water isn't as strong a theme, but all, but one, mission has water in some form or another and around half (8) has swimmable water, so I would still say that water is an integral part of Thief.
Not being able to swim isn't the "one wave to tip the boat"; it's rather another nail in the coffin together with all the other changes and limitations that EM has announced (this post is just about water, mind you; don't get me started on contextual movement or Basso, once a fellow being great with locks, but now being a slob who cannot control his own bladder or his wife Jenivere now being a magpie or all the factions building the Thief universe now being gone). Now, if EM were bold enough to remove each and every reference to the original Thief games, then I might be willing to judge this game on its own merits (and, yes, I have seen things that I like (even things not present in the originals), but, unfortunately, the things I've seen that I don't like are still in majority), but seeing that they most likely won't be that bold, I will keep judging it by how it compares to the originals - and it doesn't compare well at all, in my opinion.
My opinion isn't set in stone, though; I will probably watch a let's play at one point or another and only then will I decide - but I will probably never buy it, anyway, since I don't buy that many games these days and it must be something very special for me to make that extra effort.
Edit:
Oh, The Miserable Thief beat me to most of what I said in this post, but, oh well, I think it doesn't hurt repeating it.
Starker on 17/11/2013 at 18:08
Quote Posted by qolelis
Not being able to swim isn't the "one wave to tip the boat"; it's rather another nail in the coffin together with all the other changes and limitations that EM has announced.
This. Any one change I could stomach if everything else was good.
New Horizon on 17/11/2013 at 19:34
Quote Posted by GodzillaX8
I fail to see how the fact that swimming doesn't play a part in the game is somehow a negative aspect. If you ask anyone on earth what they enjoyed about any Thief game prior, swimming would hardly make the list. But suddenly, when it's excluded,
OH GOD I LOVE SWIMMING HOW DARE THEY REMOVE IT.
I guess you haven't asked me then because having usable, swimmable water, was a very memorable factor of the original games.
Right off the bat, Lord Bafford's is infiltrated by way of falling down a deep well. That was incredibly satisfying and not only that, there was a swimming pool. I have had several crazy experiences with that. Once when I was discovered, I ducked around a corner and jumped into the pool and sank to the bottom. The guard lost sight of me and gave up just before I drowned. Another time I was on the second floor. I jumped off a balcony in Bafford's and landed safely in the pool below, swam out and got away. Yet another time, I had a guard chasing me in circles around that same pool, something went wrong and the guard fell in and drowned. Totally unexpected.
There is also the watery entrance to Cragscleft prison, and a few other really neat experiences where I could only get somewhere by swimming.
It's another layer of variety in terms of how a player can get around a level, evade the AI, and gain access to an area. Whether it makes sense for the Thief to be able to get in and out of the water without leaving puddles is not nearly as important as adding credibility to the game world by having the ability to interact with more things in it. It's never going to be a 1:1 recreation of life, but as a simulation it's perfectly fine.
In terms of realism vs. gameplay...there is a balance and in a lot of cases gameplay should trump realism. Swimming is one of them.
What I think it comes down to in this version of Thief is that Eidos Montreal just didn't want to have to deal with any additional physics issues, which I can't really fathom because Unreal Engine should handle this stuff out of the box. We got it working with minimal obstacles in The Dark Mod too.
Eidos Montreal's idea of immersion is kind of messed up if you ask me. Their idea of immersion is to handcuff the player to 'their' idea of what the character should be, rather than let the player run completely free. It's the opposite of what a Thief game should be like.
skacky on 17/11/2013 at 19:44
I'd love a stealth game where you leave trails of water if you come out of it, and would have to either wait a long time or stay close to a heat source for your clothes to dry. This would also apply to rain.
