Thread: "Hub Play" - can it add to the Thief experience?

"Hub Play" - can it add to the Thief experience?

  1. #26
    ^^There are many ways to find that flow of immersion. I always liked how I had to store excess ammunition and tools in a separate backpack that could only be opened by taking it off my back, when playing Hidden and Dangerous 2. But I agree that this is not fitting for Thief and that Garret should have an unlimited purse.

    I feel I need to point out that IMO thief should keep its focus with laser precision. And that means keeping linear mission progression inn.
    Still, as I said earlier, I support a daytime "hub" level to relax and explore between missions. Just imagine one in TDP, the "hub" would slowly evolve from grassy summer to snowy winter as the story progressed. Also, different weather conditions each time.
    Keep in mind, I’m not talking about a large city hub here. Instead imagine something like the UNATCO HQ from between the first missions of DeusX, except of course more lonely and Garrety

    But please EM, Garret is a loner thief! Just because we propose a hub does not mean we want any of that designer made choice/consequence-dialogue-cutscene-RPGish-stuff. Leave that to DX and leave real gameplay choice/consequence to Thief!

  2. #27
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    875
    I wouldn't mind a hub system if the whole city was open from the start. None of this unlocking sections at certain points in the game garbage as with TDS. It would also leave an open city for modders to do their work.

    Of course, the game design would have to be more like T2 with a limited amount of supplies available. No notching up thousands of coins to by a full inventory every time you go out, no matter how much money you have, you can't buy any more gear than is on offer. Also a single shop for gear, no walking all over dozens of zones to buy from different shops, this also allows the gear limits to be set.

    Done well, it could be like a quest based game and modders can just add new quests rather than having to design entire levels and maps. A smaller map of the internal building, a link to where the building is in the city and a way in and that's it.
    A bird in the hand is... Lunch tonight.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,540
    If the devs would make the whole City, they would need to remake all the previous districts too. All the streets surrounding such places as Bafford's, Shoalsgate, the streets of the highrise Dayport district, the entire New Market, and the whole City combined would need to be large enough to surround the Closed Section of Old Quarter. It would be a lot of work. The area of Dayport alone is larger than the entire City hub of TDS and all it's areas combined.

    TDS did good by not including places like Eastport, North Quarter or any area in the western limits of the City. So all that was explored was a tiny 2-block area in the southernmost part of the City, near the docks. So TDS didn't ruin the continuity by depicting the entire City as being the size of a parking lot. It depicted an area of the City the size of a parking lot, as being the size of a parking lot.

    All right, the Old Quarter was patheticly small, and there's no way the Sealed Section could fit between it and South Quarter...

  4. #29
    How about having Garrett return to his neighborhood between missions? A compromise.

    Just a small strip of the City. No expanding, no opening up new areas. Kinda like the safe-house concept Hitman has. Same idea, only expanded.

    We would have only one or two shops available in the hood. Those shops would provide mission specific goods between missions and buy stolen goods.
    There could also be several houses to be robbed, and they would have their unique reflecting stories. Much like we had in TDS. Only this time around there would be not even an attemption to create the whole City.
    Mission locations could be chosen from an interactive, sprawling map of the City which would be placed in Garrett's home, for example.

    This is just a rough sketch, feel free to work it better or point out flaws in it. What do you think? I think this way much of the City's mysterious intrigue would be preserved.

    Another idea derived from the one presented.
    After few missions, the safe-housing-neighborhood would have to be relocated. Just like Ambush in TMA. The mission would work around with a big chunk of the City, Garrett should move his refuge across the town. Then we finally would settle in another one of his safe houses, working similar to the first neighborhood.
    ~You reap what you sow~

  5. #30
    --

  6. #31
    Originally Posted by DarknessFalls

    I just prefer to not see Thief 4 become yet one more open world RPG quest-based affair, or anything close. Mission-based is the formula for Thief. That's it's foundation, and it's what I prefer because I thoroughly enjoy it for Thief. I would never ask for Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim, and Red Dead Redemption, etc. type games to become mission-based like Thief (separate areas for each mission without seeing what distance you've traveled in-between). That's their style of game, and it works for them. It's their foundation, why mess with it. It makes them unique. If I want to play an open world game, I'll play those. I don't want to see Thief going down that path at all. And if they do, it should be called something else, separately funded, and come only after they've made two more solid normal (faithful) Thief games. It's been 10 years since an official decent Thief game was made, on the scale and caliber of T1/T2. I don't want to see my hope for a faithful sequel squandered by open world, city hub, RPG, quest nonsense.

    That style of gaming is not nonsense to Oblivion, Skyrim, etc. And chances are good that I'll buy Skyrim (despite being burned by Bethesda many times in the past). But it is nonsense for Thief, imo.
    Agreed Full heartedly. EM doesn't need to try and make Thief something it's not. We dont want to play an open world game, we want to play missions in a world that we can imagine as being far bigger and better than level designers can physically create.
    Calls The Serpents To The Heels Of My Foes! Calls The Ravens To Pecks Their Eyes!
    Calls The Jackals, Carry Thems Away. Their Children To Gnaw Bones In The Night!

  7. #32
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,518
    I think one full quarter of the city is more than large enough if they went an open world/massive hub route. Intelligently placed missions and shops could avoid forcing the player to retread ground for those who just want to get on with it and don't want to explore or do some extra-curricular taffing. Non-respawning loot, tools, and NPC's, along with having shops that have limited supplies would keep things better in perspective, and make it so inventory caps on items aren't necessary. What's most important is that, design wise, the city needs to be high density when it comes to playing material - everything should be able to be traversed through and around by some means.
    signature image
    signature image

  8. #33
    --

  9. #34
    Originally Posted by Hypevosa
    It's far more immersion breaking to be trying to pick something up and momentarily be going "WHY THE HELL ISN'T IT... oh. My inventory is full..." Than it is to pick it up, not give it even a second thought, and continue taffin about.
    This is opinion, not fact

    Originally Posted by Hypevosa
    Creating the illusion of immersion isn't about realism, but much more about the game avoiding breaking the user's flow and concentration as much as possible. Having a mantle button not work 4 times is immersion breaking. Needing to jump into your very game like UI to clear up inventory space is immersion breaking. Pausing the game is immersion breaking.

    I think you're confusing immersion with realism and, while there may be some overlap, they are very much two different things.
    I think when your character does something highly unrealistic, it does break immersion so imo, they aren't two very different things and instead closely related.
    FACT: I am definitely without a doubt........ the Truest Fan of the Thief franchise.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,632


    For a sense of scale, and a collective attempt to reconcile the inconsistencies between games.

  11. #36
    Originally Posted by BigBoss
    This is opinion, not fact

    I think when your character does something highly unrealistic, it does break immersion so imo, they aren't two very different things and instead closely related.
    Highly unrealistic in terms of carrying an infinite amount of heavy or cumbersome items, or unrealistic in terms of jumping off a 15 story building into a cart full of hay perfectly.

    Realism doesn't need to be the main goal if the reasoning behind it makes sense in the world. Immersion should simply mean that the game is consistent in it's components.
    Calls The Serpents To The Heels Of My Foes! Calls The Ravens To Pecks Their Eyes!
    Calls The Jackals, Carry Thems Away. Their Children To Gnaw Bones In The Night!

  12. #37
    Originally Posted by Nephthys
    Realism doesn't need to be the main goal if the reasoning behind it makes sense in the world. Immersion should simply mean that the game is consistent in it's components.
    Then by that logic, if the game was consistently in 3rd person, then people couldn't argue that it does not have immersion so I don't think that definition is right.
    FACT: I am definitely without a doubt........ the Truest Fan of the Thief franchise.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    490
    I like the hub idea rather than the "open world". It would allow a section of the City to be be explored at leisure. Loot need not be carried over but explained as way of paying "the rent".
    Missions can continue to be single building focused (where appropriate). There can be a sense of the "everyday" rather than goals being purely set by story requirements. The Deus Ex comparison was pretty good as you don't visit there between every mission and have the choice to leave when ever you like. I've used this example before but if you started in Garrett's room, exiting through the door takes you to a mission, exiting via the window takes you to a thieves highway and portion of the city

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,632
    How does that sound like a good idea?

  15. #40
    --

  16. #41
    Originally Posted by Hypevosa
    I think one full quarter of the city is more than large enough if they went an open world/massive hub route. Intelligently placed missions and shops could avoid forcing the player to retread ground for those who just want to get on with it and don't want to explore or do some extra-curricular taffing. Non-respawning loot, tools, and NPC's, along with having shops that have limited supplies would keep things better in perspective, and make it so inventory caps on items aren't necessary. What's most important is that, design wise, the city needs to be high density when it comes to playing material - everything should be able to be traversed through and around by some means.
    I agree. But even a full quarter might be too big. I think the content matters more. Just like you said, most if not all of the buildings in this "sandbox area" should be able to be infiltrated.
    I think just a small piece of the City would suffice. Big enough to keep it interesting, but small enough to keep it tight and consistent.
    It should be optional, tho. Nothing should force the player to traverse enormous distances to get to the next mission. I'd like it.
    ~You reap what you sow~

  17. #42
    Originally Posted by BigBoss
    Then by that logic, if the game was consistently in 3rd person, then people couldn't argue that it does not have immersion so I don't think that definition is right.
    and some people argue that the immersion is not defined by the perspective. I'm not saying that it's always right in third person, but games like Dead Space and Fable were fine. Fable started off third person and has remained that.

    my only point is that realism shouldn't define immersion.
    Calls The Serpents To The Heels Of My Foes! Calls The Ravens To Pecks Their Eyes!
    Calls The Jackals, Carry Thems Away. Their Children To Gnaw Bones In The Night!

  18. #43
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,540
    Since Garrett is always talking about picking pockets on the street, maybe there could be some semi-mission where you're walking around in some City district during the day and you need to pick pockets in the crowd. The main theme of the City stroll would be to gather information of the next job, by reading newspapers, listening to the ramblings of a deli worker or by snagging some blueprints from a planning department. We have never seen what goes on in the City during the day and it would be a nice change when you get to see the sun once in a while.

  19. #44
    Originally Posted by DarknessFalls
    If T4 is one giant connected map that I can just walk across or speed-teleport from one location to the next to save time, what a travesty.
    I have never understood this argument. There is not a single point in any game that gives you the option of fast travel, a part that necessitates it. Every time you have used it, it's been your choice. If you don't like it......don't use it! The only thing that stands to happen by removing it is that parts of the game become inconvenient for other players. What's the point in that?

    Originally Posted by DarknessFalls
    Fallout 3, Oblivion, etc. lands are fairly large maps. But I'm not in awe. To me it's just a big bounding box and I'm free to roam wherever in that box. But if I hit the edge, that's it; it confines me and I feel confined. There is a finite end to the world. There's nothing more to explore. Everything I want to learn, see and know about the land is within that box and so the world becomes far less mysterious. I know the boundaries. My sense of wonder is shut down. My imagination can't fill in any gaps because the game filled in all the gaps for me.
    This exact argument can be word for word used against mission and level based structure.

    Originally Posted by DarknessFalls
    Note: For Bethesda, they come close to making games I would like, but then when I actually get them, the poor AI, animations, load zones, etc. bother me way too much. I really hope Skyrim fixes some of the things that typically bother me with Bethesda games because I want to get it and enjoy it. I'm hoping they can prove they can evolve because I'd really like to get Skyrim.
    Why do you keep buying their games then? The elder scrolls has kept the core values of the game since it's inception, and fallout is mechanically a clone. If you don't know what you're buying yet, then don't be surprised if you are burned a 5th time. I've never purchased more than one game in a series if I didn't like it, I don't see the point in that.
    FACT: I am definitely without a doubt........ the Truest Fan of the Thief franchise.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,632
    No pick-pocket mini-games, no mini-games, no side-quests presented as side-quests, no retread, no grind, no customizing, no hoarding on top of hoarding, no level-ups, no power-ups presented as power-ups, no do a favor/get a favor/make the game easier crap, no encumbrance, no TDS-type overpowered protagonist, no dubious justifications for hand-holding, no hand-holding, less HUD, return small buttons and items, smaller and less commonly known fontfaces, player skill over character skill increases, build a world that seems bigger than the places and events experienced. Tell a story and live the chapters.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,518
    Originally Posted by BigBoss
    This is opinion, not fact
    No. If I made you play a game that required you to enter a menu ever 5 minutes, or had a hud that took up half the screen, or had such unintuitive controls that it forced you to recognize the fact you were playing a game, you'd have your immersion broken.

    We aren't talking about Garrett suddenly jumping a 5 story building, or taking 50 bullets to the chest and then rapidly healing once he turns a corner, or anything amazingly unrealistic. We're talking about not forcing the player into the game's UI whenever they want to pick up something new and are already toting a bag of full loot. Managing an inventory is not conducive to immersion, for anyone. Similarly, forcing the player to hang on to the 5 copper they picked up when they'd rather pick up the 5 gold, is just being a dick. If you're going to limit someone's ability to pick up loot, you won't be doing them any favors, ever.
    signature image
    signature image

  22. #47
    Originally Posted by jtr7
    No pick-pocket mini-games, no mini-games, no side-quests presented as side-quests, no retread, no grind, no customizing, no hoarding on top of hoarding, no level-ups, no power-ups presented as power-ups, no do a favor/get a favor/make the game easier crap, no encumbrance, no TDS-type overpowered protagonist, no dubious justifications for hand-holding, no hand-holding, less HUD, return small buttons and items, smaller and less commonly known fontfaces, player skill over character skill increases, build a world that seems bigger than the places and events experienced. Tell a story and live the chapters.
    So what innovations of the last ten years do you want? I'm not talking about things to refine, just brand new ideas to bring to the table

    Originally Posted by Hypevosa
    No. If I made you play a game that required you to enter a menu ever 5 minutes, or had a hud that took up half the screen, or had such unintuitive controls that it forced you to recognize the fact you were playing a game, you'd have your immersion broken.

    We aren't talking about Garrett suddenly jumping a 5 story building, or taking 50 bullets to the chest and then rapidly healing once he turns a corner, or anything amazingly unrealistic. We're talking about not forcing the player into the game's UI whenever they want to pick up something new and are already toting a bag of full loot. Managing an inventory is not conducive to immersion, for anyone. Similarly, forcing the player to hang on to the 5 copper they picked up when they'd rather pick up the 5 gold, is just being a dick. If you're going to limit someone's ability to pick up loot, you won't be doing them any favors, ever.
    Dude, I'm sorry but this is totally opinion. And please don't speak for everyone. I, and many people I know, find managing inventory conductive to immersion, because it adds a layer of realism. Don't make such sweeping comments like this as fact when they are clearly not.
    FACT: I am definitely without a doubt........ the Truest Fan of the Thief franchise.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,518
    You and your friends are the only people I know then, of the dozens of gamers I know, who find that staring into a menu of text makes you feel more like you're standing in the character's shoes than like you're on the other side of a screen... reading text.
    signature image
    signature image

  24. #49
    the system they had in the first two games was simple, and even if we had to imagine Garret toting around Santa's infinite bag in order to carry all the stuff he stole, there was no system for the inventory besides "you have it, or you don't have it" for objects, and valuables were just turned into a monetary value. It meant that it wasn't important what you got, as long as it was worth something. And if it was a special item it was it's own item, not lumped in with the rest. TDS is about as far as I want to see the game go as far as inventory. But I really liked having the ability to get items right before a mission rather then running around between levels to go get stuff.

    on the note of text, I really hope that it was time restraints that forced EM to do the text briefings in TDS, and not just laziness. ig time was the issue, they have plenty of it now to do it right.
    Calls The Serpents To The Heels Of My Foes! Calls The Ravens To Pecks Their Eyes!
    Calls The Jackals, Carry Thems Away. Their Children To Gnaw Bones In The Night!

  25. #50
    Originally Posted by Hypevosa
    You and your friends are the only people I know then, of the dozens of gamers I know, who find that staring into a menu of text makes you feel more like you're standing in the character's shoes than like you're on the other side of a screen... reading text.
    Yeah, it just so happens that I know all the people in the whole world who are ok with managing an inventory instead of a limitless bag. Are you really going to go with an argument as flimsy as that?
    FACT: I am definitely without a doubt........ the Truest Fan of the Thief franchise.

Page 2 of 6 First First 123456 Last