Nuth on 28/4/2013 at 08:16
Speaking as a disgruntled fringe lunatic, I don't have an issue with you being here.
thiefessa on 28/4/2013 at 08:17
Hehe. Thank you most graciously. :cheeky:
Vivian on 28/4/2013 at 08:26
I dunno man, accusations of a faked-up demo, which does seem a plausible explanation of why we cant even see the videos of it, the lead quit only a few months ago... Its not a good look is it? I mean, call me a hypocrite, but I think some actual working demo would be needed to prove this isnt in the same dev hell-hole as the one Aliens: Colonial Marines so memorably failed to crawl out of. There is now a precedent for exactly how badly an AAA game can be screwed, and Thief seems to be sounding a little similar. Which is annoying.
thiefessa on 28/4/2013 at 08:51
Quote Posted by Vivian
the lead quit only a few months ago... Its not a good look is it?
I like to keep things in perspective and watch carefully the words used in journalism. The article said the Lead "left"; not that he "quit".
Not saying your interpretation is wrong... he could very well of quit. Otherwise it could be that his particular work is complete... not that he threw his arms up in the air and resigned.
Vivian on 28/4/2013 at 09:06
If the lead designers work is complete, doesn't that mean the game is complete? In which case why are they showing the press a bootstrapped demo? In particular, the accusation that the AI, basically the most important part of the game, doesnt actually work yet is dodgy sounding. Very dodgy sounding.
New Horizon on 28/4/2013 at 11:16
Quote Posted by Vivian
If the lead designers work is complete, doesn't that mean the game is complete? In which case why are they showing the press a bootstrapped demo? In particular, the accusation that the AI, basically the most important part of the game, doesnt actually work yet is dodgy sounding. Very dodgy sounding.
Some former co-workers of mine are now working in the industry up in Montreal. I'll ask them if they're hearing anything through the grapevine.
retractingblinds on 28/4/2013 at 12:18
Quote Posted by jtr7
I didn't know that TDP experienced major trouble during development, let alone TMA. Sure Thief II Gold and Thief 3 under LGS did.
There's an interesting article I read recently from a ways back. Lots of interesting stuff about the metal age's development. Lots of scary stuff. I don't like John Romero much any more.
(
http://www.salon.com/2000/06/20/dark_glass/)
Quote:
As Neurath describes it, “Eidos told us that it was not an option for us to slip … Despite our pleading for more time, Eidos stood firm on the date, with suggestions of dire consequences if [we] missed by even a day.”
Quote:
One of Looking Glass’ senior developers, speaking anonymously, fumes more pointedly: “We ended up … spending the company’s sanity and morale by throwing together this thing so [Eidos] could have a product in that quarter, when Ion Storm hadn’t shipped a product in all that time. While Daikatana was busy not shipping, and while they were writing blank checks to John Romero to do Daikatana … they told us basically to ship [Thief II] by their fiscal quarter or die.”
Just some of the highlights.
jtr7 on 28/4/2013 at 12:29
Oh, financial trouble from other teams and companies...
heywood on 28/4/2013 at 12:36
Quote Posted by Starker
I think it went something like...
If it ain't broke, try to bring it to multiple platforms and multiple audiences so it could sell umpteen million copies.
That's what happens when you have companies who make games to make money instead of companies who make money to make games.
I don't see the problem with bringing Thief to a wider audience. If we want more Thief and/or Thief-like stealth games to be made, the fan base needs to grow. And if we expect these games to have high production values, they have to sell in the millions. It's a simple consequence of the rising cost to make games.
Despite the bad news, I'm still giving EM the benefit of doubt based on what they achieved with DX:HR (a mainstream successful game with the core elements of DX intact).
jtr7 on 28/4/2013 at 12:53
I wouldn't mind them bringing Thief to a broader audience, but they aren't. We can only hope that more people than not will be curious about Thief enough after checking this new title out, that they will go looking for the originals. This new game isn't Thief enough to say. The fanbase for one gmae is not the fanbase for another. The fanbase that favors TDS doesn't mesh well with the fanbase that favors the older titles. NuThief will be even less relatable between fanbases. This has nothing at all to do with increasing costs of game development. They aren't making this game for the same reasons as LGS to begin with, except for general reasons that apply to groups of people making games and hoping to profit. LGS wasn't a new company when they made the Thief games. EM has one title under their belt since 2007 and has already chucked out many fundamentals of the Thief games that they don't get or find embarrassing or inconvenient.
The people making Thief didn't make DX:HR, so you have faith in a nebulous name to make a product with a name you are familiar with.
