Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Thread: My vision (wish) for Thief IV

My vision (wish) for Thief IV

  1. #1

    My vision (wish) for Thief IV

    Hi there.
    This is one of those "long time lurker, first time writer" posts. I didn’t come here to whine, so bear with me through the first few paragraphs. What criticism there is is intended as constructive.

    The developers need to make a game for the mass marked, they need a "hook". They can’t, and won’t, just remake Thief 2. This is important, both for the future of thief and for the future of their own team. If they choose the right hook, thief IV could turn into a great game.
    But what worries me is that this hook might be (according to an IGN interview*) "light RPG elements and a branching storyline with player choice"

    Now don’t get me wrong. I love that kind of stuff. Some of my favorite games include Arcanum and Vampire:Bloodlines, both of which sacrifices gameplay for a big open ended story where the player choices has great impact. But this is not what thief is about, save it for Deus Ex 3. Thief is about an interesting linear story, with open ended missions that focus on emergent gameplay (wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_gameplay)
    I can understand why the developers would go the "open ended story" route, given the sucsess of games like MassEffect. But what if they found another hook, a hook that would deepen the theif gameplay AND attract the mass marked?

    My idea so far:
    If I was making a Theif game, my biggest worry would be that the mass marked would find the game frustrating. Stealth games can become a puzzle of patrolling guards, where you have to carefully observe their movement paths so that you can blackjack them at exactly the right time. It can become tedious at times, and the previous Thief titles suffered from this.
    A remedy for this problem, the developer says to himself, would be to give the thief a chance to fight back. This way the game becomes less tedious, and you wouldn’t have to load a save whenever somebody sees you!! yay!
    But this would undermine the whole concept of Thief (the real developers of course knows this). Not only the concept, it would ruin what makes thief fun.

    Which brings us to the cornerstone of my idea: What makes Thief fun is the tension (not the action) of infiltration, so why not build a game based on this.
    First we have to have fewer guards per mission, to ease on the puzze/frustration aspect. Next up we have to make sure the player never feels safe, to bring up the tension. This is done by the fact that guards and civilians walk randomly around the house, there are no set paths. You will always have to look and listen if somebody is coming, because you will never be safe, in any room, until you leave the house (no more running around in 1st floor because everybody there is blackjacked). Also: hiding people would be much more important.

    Next up: Guards work as a group and they do not forget. If you are spotted and get away, the guards will know there is/was a Thief in the building and will act accordingly. They might even do a full house search after you. If murder is spotted, the city watch will send reinforcements to the location (guards will spawn at front gate). Remember that because we deal with fewer guards than in previous games, this part will not become a frustrating "guards everywhere" situation. Their new "house search" behavior might even make it easier for a stealthy Thief in some situations. Watching guards and civilians react to your actions in interesting and dynamic ways is amazingly fun. Add the fact that unconscious people can be woken up by guards if found, and we would be in dynamic mission heaven.

    The above is very much the base of my vision for Thief IV. If you can make a dynamic infiltration game where you never feel safe and the guards respond correctly to your actions, If you can make a game where the guards feels like guards and not puzzles, If you can make a game where frustration is replaced by tension because guards are fewer but unpredictable, stronger and smarter: Then you do not need branching stories or RPG elements, because the mass audience will love it. The beauty of Thief is sitting in the shadows and watch guards react to your actions, people love that. So that is what a Thief IV game should build/expand upon. Even 13 missions in a linear storyline would have unlimited replayability if this is done right.

    Next up: Make guards more terrifying by letting anyone with a helmet be immune to blackjacking. With fewer guards in each mission, and with the guards walking around randomly, the blackjack would become OP if you could just hit any loner over the head. The blackjack should mainly be effective against civilians and such. Gameplay would then be more about "slip away like a thief" than "blackjact everyone". This blackjack immunity also means that if you need a key you actually have to pickpocket someone, not just hit him over the head.
    It is also important that guards don’t appear weak, else the tension and atmosphere is gone.

    Garrets main weapon should be a sword, not a dagger. This is why: A dagger is for murdering people, but Garret is a thief. A light balanced sword is much more useful for Garret as he could, if spotted, block incoming enemy attacks and even try to push them back while he jumps for his escape rope. Robin Hood style!
    A dagger should be featured as a substitute for the blackjack, killing people instead of knocking them out.

    Doors, levers and drawers should be pulled/opened using physics like in the Penumbra games. This adds a LOT to the atmosphere, is useful in stealth, and makes looting that much more fun! (I loved opening and looking through drawers in Penumbra).
    This is another point critical to my idea. Each mission should be very interactive!! Thief is the kind of game it is fun to fool around in, and this is amplified by interactive stuff in each mission (and dynamic AI). That includes drawer physics!


    Phew… I got a lot more, but this post is getting long now. Anyways, this is what I really hopes (but sadly not believes) Thief IV will focus on. Any thoughts, comments or own ideas??

    *http://ps3.ign.com/articles/982/982171p1.html

  2. #2

    Big Grin What a great post!

    First of all thanks for posting, I liked your clarity a lot! Now, I don't believe I'm remotely qualified to stand up your standards here, but I'll give it a go nonetheless:

    1) Totally agree with the fighting back option. Might be more enjoyable but it would lead to a different concept of Thief no true Thief lover wants.

    2) Few guards and more tension: I would add up here that "hearing" rumors is also a great element to increase tension and therefore a good aspect to be improved. If the surrounding gives Garrett more motives to be cautious even if he actually doesn't see danger, then things starts becoming very interesting (use of echoes is also needed). For instance, when in the village of TMA we saw the ghosts of people appearing and we heard them talking we could perceive their tone differently...that created an incredible atmosphere and that intuition should be expanded.

    3) As for the sword vs the dagger, if u are using the sword to stop or block enemies then u go back to the idea of direct confrontation. This is one thing that I never could appreciate in Assassin, for instance. The fact that u're not advised to openly confront people but still it is a considered to be a good option. To be honest, I don't understand why people get so interested in this tool. I only used ever the sword to open wooden doors I could not unlock and of which I did not have a key and out of pure frustration, knowingly that I wasn't playing in true Garrett's style!

    4) Having revived by guards people knocked out is also a great idea as long as this get to something, like a series of up date reports on Garrett's whereabouts and wrongdoing scattered around the City and that make citizens aware and therefore capable of taking precautions.

    5) I'd love to interact with furniture more, but opening the doors using force won't make less relevant the use of lock-pics? Besides, Garrett doesn't want ti be heard.

    6) Finally I wish to add up again here the smell options for the undead who can still perceive Garrett when he's in the dark if within a specific distance range.

    That's it for me!
    "The Essence of Balance is Detachment"
    Glyph07

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    A remedy for this problem, the developer says to himself, would be to give the thief a chance to fight back. This way the game becomes less tedious, and you wouldn’t have to load a save whenever somebody sees you!! yay!
    But this would undermine the whole concept of Thief (the real developers of course knows this). Not only the concept, it would ruin what makes thief fun.
    Originally Posted by glyph07
    1) Totally agree with the fighting back option. Might be more enjoyable but it would lead to a different concept of Thief no true Thief lover wants.
    I don't understand this at all. Garret could fight back in all three Thief games. So how is fighting back a different concept for Thief? How does fighting back undermine Thief? Being able to fight back has been a part of Thief from the very beginning. I love the stealth option, and that's usually how I play, but getting into a sword fight with a haunt is incredibly thrilling. For those of us who like to play without saving, being able to fight back is a nice option to have. Reloading my game every time I get spotted is NOT something I want to have to do. If I get spotted by a haunt, getting away is difficult and it's him or me, I'd like to have the ability to put that haunt down with some well-executed swordplay. Such circumstances break up the monotony of sneaking around all the time, anyway.

    Originally Posted by glyph07
    I only used ever the sword to open wooden doors I could not unlock and of which I did not have a key and out of pure frustration, knowingly that I wasn't playing in true Garrett's style!
    Garrett's style is up to each individual player. That's one of the great things about Thief. Frankly, Garrett's personality doesn't strike me as a ghoster, for example. I doubt he'd take three times as long to rob a mansion, and leave loot behind, simply because he wants to be really sneaky. Garrett also doesn't strike me as a cold-blooded killer, but some people play that way. I don't think anyone can say that the way THEY play Thief is the true Garrett way. I think Garrett has no compunctions about blackjacking someone and just wants to clean out a location of its loot as quickly and efficiently as possible, without creating a bug ruckus. I'd say that's as valid as anyone else's version of Garrett.

    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    Add the fact that unconscious people can be woken up by guards if found, and we would be in dynamic mission heaven.
    If someone gets knocked out with a blackjack, he's not going to wake up because somebody shakes him. Smelling salts probably won't help, either. Blackjacking someone is a vicious, violent attack that damages the brain. The lights go out and the brain goes unconscious and takes time to recover. Often a very long time.

    As for your other ideas, I think you have a lot of good ones.

  4. #4
    To glyph07:
    1) Totally agree with the fighting back option. Might be more enjoyable but it would lead to a different concept of Thief no true Thief lover wants.
    Sorry if I didn’t make myself clear. I don’t want to see Garret "fighting back" at the guards. What I meant was that Garret should be able to use the sword as a defensive weapon when things go wrong. He should be able to parry and block enemy attacks in an escape attempt, not kill anyone using force. This is not possible with a dagger since it is a purely offensive weapon.
    What I am saying is: Bring back the sword as it was in T1&2

    5) I'd love to interact with furniture more, but opening the doors using force won't make less relevant the use of lock-pics? Besides, Garrett doesn't want ti be heard.
    The physics system in Penumbra gives you the ability to pull and push objects in the environment using your mouse (like opening a drawer). Other games have tried this, but Penumbra perfected it. It has nothing to do with opening doors by force (but the player should be able to do that as well, if he wants to...)

    btw, I totally agree with you on 2, 4 and 6. Very good ideas

    To ClashWho:
    I don't understand this at all. Garret could fight back in all three Thief games. So how is fighting back a different concept for Thief? How does fighting back undermine Thief? Being able to fight back has been a part of Thief from the very beginning. I love the stealth option, and that's usually how I play, but getting into a sword fight with a haunt is incredibly thrilling. For those of us who like to play without saving, being able to fight back is a nice option to have. Reloading my game every time I get spotted is NOT something I want to have to do every time. If I get spotted by a haunt, getting away is difficult and it's him or me, I'd like to have the ability to put that haunt down with some well-executed swordplay. Such circumstances break up the monotony of sneaking around all the time, anyway.
    Im all for emergency fights and self defence. Im also for more adventure inspired pagan levels with lots of fighting. But you shouldt be able to kill guards en masse with your daggers like in T3! If you look at my first post you will se that I have some ideas for how to avoid the "Im seen, time to load" problem.

    If someone gets knocked out with a blackjack, he's not going to wake up because somebody shakes him. Smelling salts probably won't help, either. Blackjacking someone is a vicious, violent attack that damages the brain. The lights go out and the brain goes unconscious and takes time to recover. Often a very long time.
    Realism is not so important to me in this regard. For me the gameplay impact is the important part, as features like this can lead to some very interesting situations.


    That middel qoute of yours was not said by me ClashWho
    I agree with you though: How you play is up to the Player. I still think we need smarter, stronger but fewer guards that are harder to mass murder. Makes it more exiting.

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    If you look at my first post you will se that I have some ideas for how to avoid the "Im seen, time to load" problem.
    I'm not sure you do. It seems like things become even more unpleasant if Garrett is seen in your version, which would just increase the incentive to reload an earlier save point. Not that I'm against the idea of a more challenging game. I like that. More intelligent and more unpredictable enemies would be wonderful. I just want to be able to fight my way out of a tough situation if I'm unlucky or unskilled enough to find myself in one! Doesn't mean fighting has to be easy, just not impossible.

    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    Realism is not so important to me in this regard. For me the gameplay impact is the important part, as features like this can lead to some very interesting situations.
    That's a good point. If we were going for total realism, Garrett would be wearing quieter shoes! But about waking guards up - I do like the potential for silently clearing out every enemy. Wouldn't want to see that option disappear. So as long as the guards aren't waking up on their own, I wouldn't mind if they can be woken up when found unconscious by another guard.

    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    That middel qoute of yours was not said by me ClashWho
    Whoops! Fixed.

    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    I agree with you though: How you play is up to the Player. I still think we need smarter, stronger but fewer guards that are harder to mass murder. Makes it more exiting.
    I'm all for smarter and tougher guards. Not sure about fewer, though. I guess it depends on the level and the difficulty setting.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by ClashWho
    I'm not sure you do. It seems like things become even more unpleasant if Garrett is seen in your version, which would just increase the incentive to reload an earlier save point. Not that I'm against the idea of a more challenging game. I like that. More intelligent and more unpredictable enemies would be wonderful. I just want to be able to fight my way out of a tough situation if I'm unlucky or unskilled enough to find myself in one! Doesn't mean fighting has to be easy, just not impossible.
    Yes things do get more unpleasant in "my version" if you are spotted. This is because I want my actions to have a real impact on the game world. I don’t want everything to go back to normal after a few mins. I want the guards to do their best to stop me, it makes thievery and infiltration that much more exciting. It also makes it important to savor the element of surprise.

    The reason why I think we get rid of the "load a save" problem is because there are fewer guards. The levels are not puzzles with guards at every corner anymore; they are manors with guards that respond dynamically to threats. If I am spotted the guards will put out a house wide search after me, but because the guards are fewer and I have much more room to maneuver, I can slip into the shadows and observe the search, maybe even take advantage of their movement.
    The idea is that unpredictable and dynamically responding guards will make the atmosphere and tension of the game much higher, because you will never feel safe, you always have to stay alert. On the other hand: the guards are fewer so you won’t have to sneak zigzagy past them in close proximity and get killed all the time.

    I agree that fighting your way out should be an option, but I don’t like the blackjack everybody idea. I know why you like it, I myself am a fan of games like Commandos, Desperados and (of course) Thief, where you slowly work your way through the level killing/stunning guards one by one until you’re done. But this is the kind of stealth puzzle thing that gets tedious after awhile. Its time stealth games (Thief IV) evolve into something more dynamic where the gameplay is about knowing your surroundings and staying hidden from a smart enemy, not disposing of static path defined threats.
    That’s why I think guards should be fewer, smarter and unpredictable. And that’s why I think blackjacks should mostly be effective against civilians and lesser guards. ((I would like to see more civilians in Theif IV btw))

    I realize I come off a bit strong here. Note that these are just my humble wishes for Theif IV, I dont think I`m God or anything, and I do love to read others oppinions

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,004
    I fully support the penumbra interaction idea.
    till now, in all 3 games, you could do two things with a door:
    • open it
    • close it

    now that list might just cover every functional aspect of a door but a thief needs to be able to peek through a door, and I'm not talking about the keyhole, but opening the door just far enough to lean trough and take a look inside the room without opening the whole door at once . The only way to achieve this in the original games, was to open the door, but stand in front of it to prevent it from opening fully, which should be much better implemented.

    So yeah, for those who don't know penumbra, here's a presentation about the physics we're talking about:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux4OwkS9ybA&NR=1
    Hello EM!
    *akward silence*

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    Hi there.
    The developers need to make a game for the mass marked, they need a "hook". They can’t, and won’t, just remake Thief 2.
    The hook could simply be to make a game that actually has stealth gameplay that works (unlike 99.999999% of the games out there or in the foreseeable future) and AI that is more realistic and better than T2's without getting annoyingly random. Unexpected AI behavior will help replayability, yes, but there is fun with pattern observation and solving, too. Balance between the two is key. If you lean too far toward realism, the gameplay becomes frustrating as every action might have reactions that last an entire mission through. Not sure about you, but this would annoy me (quickload, quickload, quickload). I don't want every guard in the house alerted, or on high alert, or searching everywhere just because they saw a KO'd body, a piece of loot missing, or me running across a room. I want a reaction, but contain the reaction somewhat so it doesn't make a frustratingly boring game.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    Yes things do get more unpleasant in "my version" if you are spotted. This is because I want my actions to have a real impact on the game world. I don’t want everything to go back to normal after a few mins. I want the guards to do their best to stop me, it makes thievery and infiltration that much more exciting. It also makes it important to savor the element of surprise.

    The reason why I think we get rid of the "load a save" problem is because there are fewer guards. The levels are not puzzles with guards at every corner anymore; they are manors with guards that respond dynamically to threats. If I am spotted the guards will put out a house wide search after me, but because the guards are fewer and I have much more room to maneuver, I can slip into the shadows and observe the search, maybe even take advantage of their movement.
    The idea is that unpredictable and dynamically responding guards will make the atmosphere and tension of the game much higher, because you will never feel safe, you always have to stay alert. On the other hand: the guards are fewer so you won’t have to sneak zigzagy past them in close proximity and get killed all the time.

    I agree that fighting your way out should be an option, but I don’t like the blackjack everybody idea. I know why you like it, I myself am a fan of games like Commandos, Desperados and (of course) Thief, where you slowly work your way through the level killing/stunning guards one by one until you’re done. But this is the kind of stealth puzzle thing that gets tedious after awhile. Its time stealth games (Thief IV) evolve into something more dynamic where the gameplay is about knowing your surroundings and staying hidden from a smart enemy, not disposing of static path defined threats.
    That’s why I think guards should be fewer, smarter and unpredictable. And that’s why I think blackjacks should mostly be effective against civilians and lesser guards. ((I would like to see more civilians in Theif IV btw))
    I like your idea, but believe it should be part of an options panel to customize the game to the player's taste. Perhaps sliders for each level that determine how many guards there are and how random their patrols are. And perhaps another slider to determine how long they will remember what they saw.

    The trouble is, I see every poster’s points and you are all correct. Some people do find blackjacking 60 guards in a level to be tedious while others finish the level wishing there had been more guards. Some people love the idea of guards that never forget what they saw and react accordingly, others will never see how the guards react more than once because after that they will reload 100% of the time when they are spotted (when they wouldn't have if the guards behaved as they did in the old games). Customizable play settings would allow everyone to be happy, but any one setting is going to leave some pleased and some bored/frustrated. And honestly, even the individual player wants variety. Sometimes you might want to ghost your way through a level with 20 intelligent guards and other times you may wish to blackjack 100 guards in a single level. Variety works for everyone.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,632
    Thief was designed by geniuses who made one game with built-in variety needing no sliders--only a choice of level difficulty. This is a strength that should be carried over, and any further variety is best left to mods and tweaking the INI/CNG files, which will be worked out in less than a month of release. Those who buy the game immediately are the ones who have to struggle the hardest and discover the bugs that patches are released for. I don't wanna be one of those taffers. When I purchase and install the game well after initial release, I will have a hundred fans' contributions to make the game work best for myself (unless it's hopelessly botched or I find I have no interest in getting the game--both worst-case scenarios). Since messing with the gamefiles is more of a positive aspect of owning Thief on PC than the negatives of OS and hardware clashes, I'll have no qualms about digging into the gamefiles to personalize the game. Since I'm one who likes story and character, I would expect to only tweak HUD and other visuals, maybe speed if it feels oddly calibrated. Leave AIs and stuff to mods and fan-tweaks and back EM on making a solid game built on the foundation of the genius design. Variety is inherently available when the basic game is built right, and that variety needs to stay, without adding more and more to cater to the few or the mainstream types that find it too weird anyway.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    14
    I like your ideas - except the 'helmets for all guards to make the blackjack useless so that they have to use stealth', this would be forcing a style of play upon a player that they might not want, many people like the 'blackjack happy' style of play.

  12. #12

    u're right...

    ...I haven't specified that (and with this I hope to reply all your observations) to me Thief, even if gives players several options in terms of how to deal with difficult situations and enemies should really guide as much as possible the players towards a ghosting way of playing the game.

    I do understand that practically having a sword with which defend yourself is the same that having any tool Garrett might use during direct confrontation. To me, though, there is a massive amount of difference in knowing that the main purpose of that weapon has been designed to give Garrett that option, because it goes on the opposite side of the game philosophy that should underpin the devs ideas.

    As I said, as far as I'm concerned the blackjack is the limit of manual weapon I'd like Garrett to have. I never used a sword or dagger and I find its possession useless (well, except for TDP where in any case it was the very thing Garrett had to steal).
    "The Essence of Balance is Detachment"
    Glyph07

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,632
    Yes. Though the sword only seemed to encourage fighting, when in fact, Garrett was made clumsy with it, and only very dexterous players, or silly circle-strafing and running away/chopping back cyclers, could make it effective with more than one opponent. Dropping undead I have no qualms doing, and the games sensibly encourage ridding the City of the plague. The fact that the sword was actually less about combat and more about a sword-shaped machete tool, means the devs agreed with encouraging non-combat--not to mention all the other clues they kept reminding the player with. "Yes, you can fight and kill and maim, but your a Thief, not a murderer, don't leave a mess. Kill no non-combatants. Robots and undead are fair game."

  14. #14
    Unfortunately, all three games have very exploitable combat systems, which allow you to kill absolutely anyone in melee without taking a single hit. Fortunately, the games are much better not played that way, but I have done it on occasion.
    But I'm right.

  15. #15
    negative_Ien, I like ur signature....whatever happens in the forum u can always get away with the last winning and self-reassuring word, either deserved or not!

    I doubt this would make people u'll talk with happy all the time, but as far as your position is concerned, u really got it right!
    "The Essence of Balance is Detachment"
    Glyph07

  16. #16
    Thanks! Yep, I think I nailed this one cold.
    But I'm right.

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by jtr7
    Leave AIs and stuff to mods and fan-tweaks and back EM on making a solid game built on the foundation of the genius design.
    I'm not sure what AI mechanics you want to leave to mods and fan-tweaks, but if it's most of the AI mechanics, then I'd have to disagree.

    If EM were to release the game with AI that gets immediately triggered by you opening a door (like every other game on the market), and relied on fans to fix things so AI act more like T2's AI, then that wouldn't be good.

    That's an extreme, I know -- and I'm sure it won't happen -- but just wanted to mention my fears of 'leaving AI to the fans.' I want EM to deliver good AI.

    My apologies if I misunderstood your post.

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by DarknessFalls
    The hook could simply be to make a game that actually has stealth gameplay that works (unlike 99.999999% of the games out there or in the foreseeable future) and AI that is more realistic and better than T2's without getting annoyingly random. Unexpected AI behavior will help replayability, yes, but there is fun with pattern observation and solving, too. Balance between the two is key. If you lean too far toward realism, the gameplay becomes frustrating as every action might have reactions that last an entire mission through. Not sure about you, but this would annoy me (quickload, quickload, quickload). I don't want every guard in the house alerted, or on high alert, or searching everywhere just because they saw a KO'd body, a piece of loot missing, or me running across a room. I want a reaction, but contain the reaction somewhat so it doesn't make a frustratingly boring game.
    I don’t know about the hook. Theif 2 did stealth really good but it didn’t sell as well as LookingGlass had hoped. "Perfect" stealth mechanics as they are today is not enough for the mass marked. They want evolution. We fans can only hope EM chooses the right kind of evolution (no RPG hybrid please!).

    I agree that having all the guards in the mission on alert because they found one dead body sounds frustrating. But this is because you think of the term "on alert" as it is in thief 1&2. I’m not saying that guards should be running around screaming "where are you taffer?" all the time for the rest of the mission.
    I’m saying that guards should respond to your murder by doing things like:
    - send a few to search the entire house
    - wake up sleeping guards
    - tell all civilians to go to their rooms and lock the door
    - Position guards at all posts, especially to protect the lord
    - change random speech from stuff like "what a boring night" to things like "To think there is a murderer here somewhere"
    - send someone to light all torches and candles in the building
    - maybe request reinforcements from the city watch if needed
    - etc etc

    Note that the only reason you where always impatiently waiting for the guards to go off "on alert" mode in previous thief games, was because of the stupid "Guards get more health and better immunity when on alert" thing. But if the guards didn’t get this bonus when on alert, then it wouldn’t be as frustrating having them alerted more often. Garret should be able to sneak up on and kill guards that are looking for him. Guards could instead use shields to block arrows, this would avoid overpowered bow spamming in a direct confrontation. They could also learn to take cover if one of their friends was sniped.

    Also note that my idea is based on the fact that there are fewer guards in each mission. This gives Garret more room to maneuver and the frustration level would be lesser as a result. The difficulty level would still be around the same, simply because of stronger and more unpredictable guards.

    What I’m saying is: Image guards and civilians with a “The Sims” like AI. They go around eating food, sitting down, standing up, reading, talking to each other, go to the toilet, maybe take a stroll down in the basement to look for something etc etc. Then give them a competent security and guard AI (and the ability to remember and respond to crimes).
    Now try to steal from them...

    I know many people here disagree, but I still think most guards should be immune to blackjacking. Simply because in my vision of Thief4 the blackjack would be overpowered if not for imune guards (fewer but stronger guards and a dynamic walk pattern? In such a case it would be too easy just knock them all out).

  19. #19
    I would consider myself something of a Thief purist, but I actually quite liked quite a few of your ideas here.

    EM needs to make this game successful, I just hope they can do that without compromising the gameplay. So some change to appeal to new players is not inherently bad, because that's what game development is all about. I just hope there's enough to keep veterans of the series hooked.

    I'd like to see T4 do what Star Trek (2009) did for the Star Trek franchise - it pleased veterans of the series (including myself) and brought in a bunch of new fans who would never have gotten in to Star Trek otherwise. Sure, some ST purists might complain it didn't remain true enough to the formula, but IMO it remained true enough to please those of us who grew up with Star Trek, and bring in new fans at the same time, which is exactly what it needed to do. Abrams and the other filmmakers weren't making a movie just for established Star Trek fans, they were aiming for a bigger market. And they succeeded in reaching a wider audience without severely compromising the source material. Thats what I want from T4. It shouldn't be exactly the same, its been 10 years now. But it should still feel like a Thief game. Change is going to happen, whether we like it or not. We just need to hope it's good change.

  20. #20
    So true Telex!
    I want EM to expand on the game, but it still needs to feel like a thief game as you said. That is very very important (yet another reason to keep the undead )

    I hated star trek btw, until I saw the new movie. That one was brilliant! Now I consider rewatching the old ones

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    5,865

    Cool

    Originally Posted by GepardenK
    Now I consider rewatching the old ones
    My guess is that you won't like them. IMO, the new ST movie felt nothing like Star Trek. It actually felt more like Star Wars with Trek characters.

  22. #22
    At first I didnt expect much from this idea but as I continued to read I actually thought it was a good idea and it takes away lots of problems and solves some major threads on this forum. It is kind of a revolutionary change and I think it would make the more intense ideed. It is only one problem; If the guards walk randomly there is a change that you find yourself cought in a uplight corridor with one guard at each side walking towards you in the middle. If this happens it is not because you are a bad player this could actually happen to everyone depending only on luck. I dont know about you, but I dont wanna play a game where you have to just be lucky to succed.

  23. #23
    Originally Posted by Yaphy
    At first I didnt expect much from this idea but as I continued to read I actually thought it was a good idea and it takes away lots of problems and solves some major threads on this forum. It is kind of a revolutionary change and I think it would make the more intense ideed. It is only one problem; If the guards walk randomly there is a change that you find yourself cought in a uplight corridor with one guard at each side walking towards you in the middle. If this happens it is not because you are a bad player this could actually happen to everyone depending only on luck. I dont know about you, but I dont wanna play a game where you have to just be lucky to succed.
    You have to play smart...and use the quicksave button. If you save often then using your lightening reflexes to hit the quickload button will save you every time.

  24. #24
    Lot of people like to use skill, not saves.

  25. #25
    Originally Posted by Namdrol
    Lot of people like to use skill, not saves.
    The example given was one where skill could not protect you. If the random movements of guards results in you being trapped in a light area with two guards approaching you from opposite directions then you are going to be caught. It is true you do not have to reload, but can simple run (or fight), but your ghosting for that mission is ruined either way unless you reload. No amount of skill changes that your ghosting of that mission was a failure.

Page 1 of 2 12 Last