Briareos H on 15/3/2013 at 17:01

---

Since it was too long for the "rescue our reputation" thread, I'm moving this here. In the light of what Looking Glass Studios created with their games, I think the new Thief will be rescued in my eyes and worthy of the LGS lineage if it keeps all the innovations the previous games brought to the table while adding something fundamentally new, whether on a technical level or on a gameplay level, and if it has a lot of replay value because of that. With the exception of Thief 2, which was more of the delightful same with a few minor additions, every single game produced by Looking Glass brought something to gaming as a whole. Here's a quick list of all the things Origin/Looking Glass games gave to the first-person action game genres (please correct me if other FPSes did it first):

System Shock

* Complex user interface with drag and drop (from UUW)
* Open environment without hub (from UUW)
* Dynamic map with annotations (from UUW)
* Audio logs and emails
* Customizable user interface
* User interface as an implant logically existing in the game world
* Switchable and upgradable augmentations
* Complex weapon modes
* Ammo types
* Inventory also storing written material, passwords, access levels
* Hacking and environmental mini-puzzles, mini-games
* Cyberspace
* Action-exploration without RPG stats
* Database of all in-game objects
* Some non-game related objects can be picked up and interacted with (from UUW)

Thief

* Even more non-game related objects can be picked up
* Engine-generated shadows as a visibility moderator, calculated in an analog way
* Game elements as an audibility moderator (footsteps on different surfaces, noisemakers, broken objects)
* Realistic sound propagation
* Tools as a way to dynamically change the environment (create shadows or distract AI)
* Light gem allowing to evaluate said visibility and audibility
* Limited, but realistic physics engine
* Lockpicking
* Unobtrusive, minimalistic interface with 3D elements
* Loot count (inherent replay value)
* Object and ammo store between missions
* Complex and dynamic AI reaction scripts to the environment
* Scripted and unscripted alert levels and between-AI conversation
* AI factions
* AI knockouts
* Carrying and moving knocked-out or dead bodies
* No requirement (with rare exceptions) to kill or even engage AI
* Wide range of safety, danger and failure states with several degrees of allowance, playing on the edge by design
* Complex, story-advancing objectives that can be tackled in non-linear order
* Minimalistic approach to providing pre-planning, guidance and information, focusing rather on a dynamic understanding of the level
* Additional objectives depending on the difficulty level (inherent replay value)
* Completely player-driven skill advancement
* Mantling and vertical movement through rope arrows and climbing
* Large, architecturally-realistic levels
* Complete freedom of movement and alternate routes in a closed level environment (inherent replay value)
* Disinterested hero with efficient characterization
* Extremely strong audio direction, excellent voices, excellent music and atmospheric auditive backgrounds
* Dynamic weather
* Movable light sources
* Dark universe in a believable city
* An unusual take on steampunk where technology is crude and cold but always retains an element of magic, copper doesn't feature prominently
* Feature-complete level editor (inherent replay value)

Thief 2

* Cameras and turrets functioning as AI
* Even larger levels
* More complex scripting
* More complex objectives, such as tailing someone
* Dynamic, moving lights that affect visibility
* Fogging

System Shock 2

* RPG stats and skills
* Inventory tetris
* Weapon maintenance and modification
* Implants with energy consumption
* In-game stores (replicators)
* Research, and even better database of in-game objects
* Psionic dynamic manipulation of the environment
* Strong story relayed in a dynamic fashion

In my opinion, the new Thief game needs at least to check all of the boxes pertaining to my list of innovative elements that define Thief. As a consequence, I can (and will) criticize the ridiculous looks of the new Garrett, but they are not a show-stopper for me. They are not vital. Having Garrett as a main character himself is not vital, as long as a similarly characterized hero exists. Having some "console gamer hand-holding" elements is not problematic, as long as they don't prevent some of the elements from my list from being in the game. For example, QTEs would go against "Complete freedom of movement" since death or end-level states are the only limiting factors to the freedom in Thief, there are no triggered cutscenes or parts when control is taken from the player.

But in addition, considering the game is a reboot and that so much time has passed since the first games, that won't be sufficient. As I tried to show, every LGS game brought something that we hadn't seen in first-person action games before. Even the recent Dishonored, while faulty on many levels, containing elements aimed at mainstream appeal of which I don't really approve, is in my opinion a game worthy of inclusion here, because never before had I seen the elements of mobility, act and react, strike and retreat in the shadows, teleport quickly and take down before being noticed in a first-person shooter. Such highly dynamic playstyle in an "immersive sim", although often overpowered, was original and should be used as a standard for several games to come. For this, and almost this alone I found Dishonored to be a game of fine Looking Glass descent. As a consequence, I expect something new from the upcoming Thief. Whether it has to do with a new way to create dynamic audio (complex dynamic backgrounds), or AI interactions and scripting, or incredible dynamic shadows (shadow arrow anyone ?), it has to be there or this game will be forgotten soon enough.

It will also be forgotten if there is no level editor. Period. I hope the people at Eidos Montreal and Square-Enix understand this.

june gloom on 15/3/2013 at 19:41

---

You mean you aren't?

nickie on 15/3/2013 at 19:51

---

Well I came to late to gaming so I'm a bit of an ignorant pheasant and have no idea what Origin/LGS brought to gaming, so my thanks for the information.

My feeling is that a level editor is a given but without knowing the exact numbers of fan missions available for T1/G, T2 and T3, will an editor really be enough to keep the game alive if it's on a par with T3. And for the record, I mean no disrespect to T3.

Briareos H on 15/3/2013 at 20:13

---

Nickie, I think part of the reason why there are so few FMs for Thief 3 is that (to be confirmed by someone with more experience) it's very difficult to make a sprawling mission like even Thief 1 or 2 OMs. The editor might be easier to approach than DromEd, but the engine restrictions (level size and performance), along with the design "choices" of not having convincing underwater and vertical exploration tools sound to me like a pain in the ass for any mapper. Playstation 4 and PC memory restrictions are next to non-existent with regards to level size, and I'm sure that taffer tools in the next game will allow much better movement. It's an Unreal Engine game, and I very highly doubt that Eidos Montreal will customize the renderer like Ion Storm did with Thief: Deadly Shadows; basically, everything from rope arrows to swimming including streaming levels and content is super easy to do for Eidos Montreal.

In other words, if (and that's a very, very big if) the game is not completely open-world, if an extensive editor can be released from both technical and legal standpoints, making missions for the new Thief game should be much easier than what we used to know with either game. If the thieving and tools are good, if every core mechanic is in place (or can be edited in), there are reasons to be optimistic.

But then if you ask me, I'd say there's no chance in hell we're getting an editor.

EDIT: By the way, thanks if I was a bit informative. My point in writing this was not as much to start a discussion as it was for me to have a reference written down somewhere listing all the innovations of Looking Glass Studios' first-person games.

Renault on 15/3/2013 at 20:40

---

I don't think the T3 engine had any kind of limitations for large levels, this was mainly caused by the tiny memory on the Xbox. Large levels could be created for the PC. From what I've heard, it's the T3 editor itself that was the problem. I've never used it much myself, but I remember people talking about how there was a lack of flexibility, the artwork and meshes and such were canned and you could only do so much with them. It was kind of like trying to create Thief levels using an overly simplistic game editor like FPSC. It didn't have the features that dromed does like Act/React, conversations, metaprops, scripting, etc.

And of course, if very few people are using the editor, far less people are writing tutorials, creating custom material, or doing any kind of complex scriting, which further weakens the platform. People realized they could just use Dromed and come up with more complex and intricate levels, even if there was a small hit in graphics quality.