Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I like the Thief series good Stealth games i like them maybe more then Metal Gear Solid when it comes to Stealth, A 4th one should be good.

u8zQ7trMrXA

Pucker my anus and call me Charlie! This is good news. One of my favorite series ever.

The first two games were very difficult, even on normal settings. And the harder difficulty levels just added absurd goals like "steal everything without killing anyone." I hope it remains difficult without having to jump through arbitrary hoops. But if they retain the flavor of any of the 3 games, it'll be awesome.

The second game made it more difficult with those robot guards patrolling the area, Until i found out how to disable them.

It was more about gear for me. You'd have a set budget for each mission, which was nicely balanced around the difficulty.

In Thief 3, you could accumulate and keep gear between missions which, when played intelligently, made the game easier. You could store and store, then use a bunch of gadgets and arrows during the few intense sections. I never had the feeling of being down to my last arrow or flash grenade or something, with a large chunk of the mission left to tackle. I was always comfortable.

The very last level of Thief 2 was like this for me. It was broken into two chunks, each as large as most other entire levels. And I didn't realize this, and had used up all my stuff in the first half. Sneaking through arguably the toughest section in the game with nothing but my sword and club was f-ing intense.

Scuttlebutt has this being pushed to next-gen consoles, which makes it late 2013 at the earliest (and more likely 2014). I haven't found a source willing to say that the delay to next-gen is official, but the lack of announcements to the contrary is also telling. There's a full dev team working on it though, so it's still very much in the works.

HpRsOQ4MS_8

http://www.shacknews.com/article/78205/thiefs-hero-redesigned-to-be-more-mainstream

heheh

They're saying its a reboot, Then why does it seem Garret still have his robot eye?

Basso's back

7h7llBxd4k4

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/15/thiefs-brutal-hardcore-difficulty-mode-detailed

This sounds like my dream strealth game. Its about time some of these options were introduced to stealth games. I'm especially interested in that detection=death option. Hopefully, other stealth games catch on to this.

I'd rather play Condemned with my screen turned off than do Hardcore mode. I love stealth games, but I don't have hours to perfect one area of the game before progressing, and that sounds like a serious frustration mode.

But kudos to those who succeed.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/15/thiefs-brutal-hardcore-difficulty-mode-detailed

This sounds like my dream strealth game. Its about time some of these options were introduced to stealth games. I'm especially interested in that detection=death option. Hopefully, other stealth games catch on to this.

You do know Metal Gear Solid has been doing this for years, right?

Can't Wait!

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
You do know Metal Gear Solid has been doing this for years, right? I've played every single MGS game on the hardest difficulty (well, the majority of them), and have never found this feature. When I say getting caught=death, I mean getting caught=automatic game over. Not enemies are so strong that you'll likely die.

When I wanted to do a complete stealth playthrough of MGS4 on the hardest difficulty, I always had to reload to a previous game save. The game didn't end automatically.

With this new Thief game wonder if the Hammerites will back.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
I've played every single MGS game on the hardest difficulty (well, the majority of them), and have never found this feature. When I say getting caught=death, I mean getting caught=automatic game over. Not enemies are so strong that you'll likely die.

When I wanted to do a complete stealth playthrough of MGS4 on the hardest difficulty, I always had to reload to a previous game save. The game didn't end automatically.

Sorry for the late reply, but what I meant was the European Extreme mode, where if you are seen by a guard, you get an automatic game over.

MGS4 apparently doesn't have it, but MGS2 and 3 do.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Sorry for the late reply, but what I meant was the European Extreme mode, where if you are seen by a guard, you get an automatic game over.

MGS4 apparently doesn't have it, but MGS2 and 3 do. Its all good. I wish I had found those earlier. Hopefully they port the entire series to next gen and I'll be able to retry all that. That would have been a blast.

I always like more options when it comes to tailoring your experience.

But I also agree its to have a perfect experience from the get go. It goes to show how much thought went into the production of the game.

I know the first Thief game had levels like that "getting caught=automatic game over" which Arachnid1 seems to be after

been a while since i played the second one not sure if that one had them, I'll be surprised if they put something like that in this new Thief game since they like to water down games these days for new folks.

PNy7zJOwxLw

That looks great to me! Honestly though, I'm more in this game for the atmosphere and stealth mechanics. Hopefully the story surprises me, but I don't see anything amazing. Its still a buy for me great story or not though, I think.

I'll get it regardless, Liked the previous games in the series.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLUkxbIkknLv-kCvdiBJXlVd--kecLUZw

6 new vids.

Most likely i'll have to play this installment on a console

hoping the PS3 version is at least decent.

I understand the need for a challenge, but if they are going to put in a "Focus Bar", there needs to be a way to refill it other than the few they've shown so far. Or have it slowly regenerate or something.

Just looking up that Focus Bar now, Some things it can do just seems to be for noobs

Some of that stuff is unnecessary yeah, but I can see how finding some interactive objects helps. In a game like that, you won't be sure if everything can be used.

But it does do things like instantly let you take down guards to save yourself from a fight that you'd otherwise more than likely die in and have an easier time picking locks and stuff like that. But that drains it to near nothing pretty much instantly. Even small uses like highlighting stuff drains it pretty fast.

Originally posted by KingD19
Some of that stuff is unnecessary yeah, but I can see how finding some interactive objects helps. In a game like that, you won't be sure if everything can be used.


That's why you work it out yourself

too many games nowadays are basically holding your hand.

You can turn it off.

There is nothing wrong with giving players a helpful tool. I like games that allow to do both. Turn off the all the helpful tools or let them use if they want.

Originally posted by Smasandian

There is nothing wrong with giving players a helpful tool. I like games that allow to do both. Turn off the all the helpful tools or let them use if they want.

Yeah because otherwise they'll complain because its too hard

And won't buy it....

I'm one of the guys who doesn't give a shit about difficulty. I don't have a lot of time to mess around with the game so I become good enough to play it. Screw that.

Originally posted by Smasandian
You can turn it off.

There is nothing wrong with giving players a helpful tool. I like games that allow to do both. Turn off the all the helpful tools or let them use if they want.

I agree. I enjoy games that are harder but not everyone does. I like the thought of having something that can make the game easier but you can turn it on or off. This way everyone can enjoy the game and people that like something more challenging don't have to use it.

Originally posted by Smasandian
And won't buy it....

I'm one of the guys who doesn't give a shit about difficulty. I don't have a lot of time to mess around with the game so I become good enough to play it. Screw that.

check yourself you filthy pleb.

Games like the Thief series shouldn't be casualized to cater to people like you, though it looks like it's already too late judging by the what we've seen.

Zane, stop being an idiot.

calm down

i hope the game has competitive online multiplayer

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
check yourself you filthy pleb.

Games like the Thief series shouldn't be casualized to cater to people like you, though it looks like it's already too late judging by the what we've seen.

Oh **** off!

****ers like you expect games to be catered to you. If it was, well, let's just say the industry would not be as big.

But in the end, all developers should have options for the hardcore peeps and the casual players.

That's ironic, considering that the market has been catering to casuals look for a quick, easy to get into fast paced game for over half a decade, and the industry has suffered because of it, with most of the mainstream being hand-holding action games that offer no innovation or variety.

Thief was fine as it was before, it shouldn't be changed into the action game that the developers want it to be. You can keeping say, "But they're all optional", the design choices that have been made to appeal to the casual audience have ruined the game, to the point they've removed jumping because it adds too much freedom and complications for the player, and that it was "immersion breaking".

lol

Get on Skype.

get on dese

The ****, No jumping for this new game

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v484/Ash_ED/Other/BetaRaypalm_zps55ea5a17.jpg~original

Originally posted by Tzeentch
i hope the game has competitive online multiplayer

Jesus, why?!

Originally posted by Kazenji
The ****, No jumping for this new game

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v484/Ash_ED/Other/BetaRaypalm_zps55ea5a17.jpg~original

Wait, really? Is it 1992?

Because people don't naturally possess the ability to jump a few inches. Ivhaaaate that.

To be honest I think the game's going to be dog dick. /shrugs

Originally posted by Digi
Jesus, why?

Because it wpuld ellicit a delicious emotional response from fans.

Case in point.

It does suck that the jumping for no reason is gone but....is it a game breaker? Do people feel the need to jump up and down for no reason? You will still be jumping when you are contextually obligated. The only thing that is really being removed is jumping for no random reason. Maybe its important to some but I don't think its that big a deal.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
It does suck that the jumping for no reason is gone but....is it a game breaker? Do people feel the need to jump up and down for no reason? You will still be jumping when you are contextually obligated. The only thing that is really being removed is jumping for no random reason. Maybe its important to some but I don't think its that big a deal.

It's not a deal breaker for me. It's just the fact that in this day and age, adding a simple jump mechanic to any game is simple. And in games like Thief or or action rpgs or other games of that nature, being able to jump would help, and makes sense. I don't expect to see somebody hopping around in a boxing game. But the world's greatest thief should be able to at least leave the ground a bit.

Originally posted by KingD19
It's not a deal breaker for me. It's just the fact that in this day and age, adding a simple jump mechanic to any game is simple. And in games like Thief or or action rpgs or other games of that nature, being able to jump would help, and makes sense. I don't expect to see somebody hopping around in a boxing game. But the world's greatest thief should be able to at least leave the ground a bit. I can understand people being upset but I don't think it would really help the gameplay. If they added it then yes they could have probably added some elements like rooftop runs and jumping over fences or something to that nature but maybe we will still have that. Like I said we will still be jumping when we "have to".

Imo it could help increase gameplay. Like you could make a long jump to get to an alternate route, or jump onto a ladder to get some extra height before you start climbing, etc, etc... But I understand where you're coming from because from what we've seen already not having a standalone jump mechanic won't take away from anything.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
It does suck that the jumping for no reason is gone but....is it a game breaker? Do people feel the need to jump up and down for no reason? You will still be jumping when you are contextually obligated. The only thing that is really being removed is jumping for no random reason. Maybe its important to some but I don't think its that big a deal. You're under the impression that the developers are smart enough to allow a jump prompt in literally every place where it would be feasible.

They're not.

Also Garrett's new design is one of the shittiest I've ever seen.

No jump? That does kill it for me a bit. Not enough to not buy, but that is a pretty massive bummer.

Originally posted by NemeBro

Also Garrett's new design is one of the shittiest I've ever seen.

Your shit.

I'm sorry for not liking emo Linkin Park edgemasters wearing make-up.

First of all which picture of him do you dislike

i've only seen one and he looks decent enough.

I agree. What I have seen he looks fine.

http://www.gmwall.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ThiefOldGarrettVsNewGarrett3_zps2fabf3b9.png

Which looks better?

The person who looks like a nondescript thug or the dude in bondage gear and mascara?

What does it matter? The game is in first person. You will never see the character model.

Nope! Cutscenes, cutscenes everywhere

Oopps, I forgot about cut scenes.

Oh well, I don't mind the look of the model. It looks like a 2013 version of Garrett.

You all have awful taste.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
http://www.gmwall.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ThiefOldGarrettVsNewGarrett3_zps2fabf3b9.png

Which looks better?

The person who looks like a nondescript thug or the dude in bondage gear and mascara?

as far as costumes go...the one on the right looks better. Mainly because I think the cape looks kinda stupid. Although, I would like the hood to extend a little farther. I don't care about the darkened eyes one way or another.

Like I said, awful, awful taste.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
as far as costumes go...the one on the right looks better. Mainly because I think the cape looks kinda stupid. Although, I would like the hood to extend a little farther. I don't care about the darkened eyes one way or another.

http://i40.tinypic.com/qyuuqf.jpg

Originally posted by NemeBro
You all have awful taste.

And you don't need to agree with things

but i forgot were on the internet everyone has to agree to the same thing

No but shit taste will be called out regardless.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
No but shit taste will be called out regardless. And opinions can be wrong, like yours and Nemes. Garret looks fine (except for that horrendous eye shadow, jesus). The outfit itself looks badass, and a lot more practical than a cape.

how

He's wearing a corset (no literally, look at the waist, it's a ****ing leather corset), has painted fingernails, and eye-shadow.

His design objectively has zero positive elements. How can you alledgedly heterosexual males actively defend a character who looks like he should be selling drinks at a gay sex Halloween party?

Originally posted by Arachnid1
And opinions can be wrong, like yours and Nemes. Garret looks fine (except for that horrendous eye shadow, jesus). The outfit itself looks badass, and a lot more practical than a cape. Only if you grew up on terrible Cable comics in the 90's could you find his outfit "badass" or "practical".

That Blax is actually making a post that isn't trolling (<3) is evidence enough of that fact, but let's really analyze Garret's outfit.

As Blax has touched on, Garret is first of all wearing a corset. A corset is famously uncomfortable to just stand around and walk in. Garret has to run, fight, jump, climb, and steal while wearing it. Old Garret has no corset, so in this regard his outfit is more practical.

Now let's look at a pretty similar problem, namely, how tight the outfit is. Look at the legs, torso, and especially the arms, and see how impractically form-fitting the entire ensemble looks. Once more, this would be very uncomfortable and seriously limits Garret's range of motion. Old Garret's outfit is not overly loose, but is loose enough to give him a considerably greater range of motion, so it wins over the new one as well.

Let's see, what else... Ah yes, armour. New Garrett is clearly unarmoured, you can't bullshit me and say that his skin-tight bodysuit provides anything resembling decent protection. Old Garret, while not exactly wearing full plate, has armguards, and wears full leather armour. So, while not impervious to damage, old Garret can take glancing wounds more gracefully than new Garret.

Now let's address the popular criticism of old Garrett. Namely, his cloak. Popular perception of capes and cloaks as impractical is unfortunate, though not entirely unwarranted, admittedly. As seen in Incredibles or Watchmen, cloaks can snag, and cost you your life. But that criticism has far less relevance in a Medieval society, where there are no turbine engines or revolving doors to get your cloak caught on. Furthermore, they add to old Garrett's anonymity, adding to his nondescript appearance (Will elaborate on this later). It hides his full arsenal from being seen at a glance, and in the shadows makes his shape less human so he can blend in better. Also it keeps him warm. The cloak is perfectly practical.

Next let's cover how much new Garrett stands out. I mean really, just ****ing look at him. Eye shadow, painted nails, corset, gimp-esque outfit, new Garrett if actually seen sticks out like a sore thumb. He's very distinct looking, whereas old Garrett basically just looks like a nondescript commoner or thug. The very first level in Thief involves to some extent exploiting the fact that you can just walk the **** up to guards when not on private property without being apprehended because, well, you just look like a regular dude. The same can not be said of new Garrett, who looks exactly like an edgemaster doing edgy, disreputable things. There is literally no practical purpose toward dressing like that.

The final criticism that comes to mind is simple aesthetic. The older Thief games were fantastical, not a real-world mediaval equivalent, but the differences were so subtle at first that you don't even notice. New Garrett shits on the subtlety, he's obviously a cartoonish caricature of a rogue who exists in an equally cartoonish caricature of a medieval stealth game. It looks ****ing stupid. It would be like if, in Game of Thrones, rather than wearing her practical armour, Brienne charged into battle wearing a bikini she stole off the set of Heavy Metal.

tl;dr the new outfit sucks and is impractical.

Edit: Oh hey another criticism came to me.

New Garrett's lack of fingered gloves. This would make swordplay, archery, and really a multitude of tasks involving his hands quite a bit more painful than it need be. A fairly short criticism but, well, icing on the cake.

inb4"b-but its just a video game!"

They lost all right to use that argument when they attacked the practicality of Garrett's cloak.

So i'm guessing there also won't be no rope arrows with Jump disabled for certain sections.

There are rope arrows.

WTF???

You didn't see the video? It's the latest one posted up. I think you posted it.

I just find it that its strange

they disable Jump only to be used for certain sections and yet let you use the rope arrows

Oh I wasn't disputing that it's weird. Especially considering the fact that the best thief in existence should be able to hop about like a god damned bunny if he so pleases. Just pointing out that they do have the arrows.

Have you actually played the previous games?

because the point of the rope arrow is that you could fire it somewhere and then climb it so you could reach higher ledges or places you can't get to by walking.

Yes. I've played all of them.

I know how the rope arrow works.

Originally posted by KingD19
You didn't see the video? It's the latest one posted up. I think you posted it.

I posted the latest set of videos.

Jerkass. uhuh

I'm sorry....can you ever forgive me?

Hang on....

Demonic Phoenix wants to jerk your ass now

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
http://www.gmwall.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ThiefOldGarrettVsNewGarrett3_zps2fabf3b9.png

Which looks better?

The person who looks like a nondescript thug or the dude in bondage gear and mascara?

Haha.

That looks like a rejected alternate costume for Noob Saibot or Smoke or something. Wtf.

I hate how everything is automatically better because it's darker, has more edges, and adds unnecessary accessories (Like eye shadow, fingerless gloves and a bondage costume) nowadays. That and stupid hipster garbage is the the biggest problem plaguing western society.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Only if you grew up on terrible Cable comics in the 90's could you find his outfit "badass" or "practical".

That Blax is actually making a post that isn't trolling (<3) is evidence enough of that fact, but let's really analyze Garret's outfit.

As Blax has touched on, Garret is first of all wearing a corset. A corset is famously uncomfortable to just stand around and walk in. Garret has to run, fight, jump, climb, and steal while wearing it. Old Garret has no corset, so in this regard his outfit is more practical.

Now let's look at a pretty similar problem, namely, how tight the outfit is. Look at the legs, torso, and especially the arms, and see how impractically form-fitting the entire ensemble looks. Once more, this would be very uncomfortable and seriously limits Garret's range of motion. Old Garret's outfit is not overly loose, but is loose enough to give him a considerably greater range of motion, so it wins over the new one as well.

Let's see, what else... Ah yes, armour. New Garrett is clearly unarmoured, you can't bullshit me and say that his skin-tight bodysuit provides anything resembling decent protection. Old Garret, while not exactly wearing full plate, has armguards, and wears full leather armour. So, while not impervious to damage, old Garret can take glancing wounds more gracefully than new Garret.

Now let's address the popular criticism of old Garrett. Namely, his cloak. Popular perception of capes and cloaks as impractical is unfortunate, though not entirely unwarranted, admittedly. As seen in Incredibles or Watchmen, cloaks can snag, and cost you your life. But that criticism has far less relevance in a Medieval society, where there are no turbine engines or revolving doors to get your cloak caught on. Furthermore, they add to old Garrett's anonymity, adding to his nondescript appearance (Will elaborate on this later). It hides his full arsenal from being seen at a glance, and in the shadows makes his shape less human so he can blend in better. Also it keeps him warm. The cloak is perfectly practical.

Next let's cover how much new Garrett stands out. I mean really, just ****ing look at him. Eye shadow, painted nails, corset, gimp-esque outfit, new Garrett if actually seen sticks out like a sore thumb. He's very distinct looking, whereas old Garrett basically just looks like a nondescript commoner or thug. The very first level in Thief involves to some extent exploiting the fact that you can just walk the **** up to guards when not on private property without being apprehended because, well, you just look like a regular dude. The same can not be said of new Garrett, who looks exactly like an edgemaster doing edgy, disreputable things. There is literally no practical purpose toward dressing like that.

The final criticism that comes to mind is simple aesthetic. The older Thief games were fantastical, not a real-world mediaval equivalent, but the differences were so subtle at first that you don't even notice. New Garrett shits on the subtlety, he's obviously a cartoonish caricature of a rogue who exists in an equally cartoonish caricature of a medieval stealth game. It looks ****ing stupid. It would be like if, in Game of Thrones, rather than wearing her practical armour, Brienne charged into battle wearing a bikini she stole off the set of Heavy Metal.

tl;dr the new outfit sucks and is impractical.

Edit: Oh hey another criticism came to me.

New Garrett's lack of fingered gloves. This would make swordplay, archery, and really a multitude of tasks involving his hands quite a bit more painful than it need be. A fairly short criticism but, well, icing on the cake. Except corsets don't attach to armsleaves or hoods. The entire upper body part (with the exception of the gloves and the face cover) seems to be one part. It looks formfitting, but and somewhat tight. It makes up for this in that the entire outfit looks like its made out of cloth and leather which bends and wrinkles. That entire outfit also looks super lightweight. That combined with the fact that its formfitting seems a lot better for a guy who has to keep in motion. No, it doesn't provide protection, but neither does old Garrets costume. They're thieves, not knights.

The old Garret, on the other hand, has a bunch of loose, baggy, and overall heavier looking clothing. The loose arrows he keeps in the quiver on his back would also be all over the place. The massive cape he would have fluttering and trailing behind him doesn't help either. You say it makes him look less human, but it doesn't make him any less visible. It makes him bigger and easier to spot. The warmth aspect and the fact that it adds a degree of an anonymity are true enough though. The new Garret has that long thick string that keeps the knife (or whatever that is) tethered to his waste, so even if it fell out of its sheathe, it would stay on him. Everything, overall, seems to be strapped down perfectly for a guy who has to stay on the move.

The darker colors and the fact that the only part of skin showing on his body is his eyes (and the gloves, which I actually agree are stupid) seems a lot better for staying out of sight. Old Garret, on the other hand, has the light brown quiver, the light brown vambrace, the uncovered face (although he rocked a face cover sometimes too), and a loose hood that would catch wind and blow off any time he picked up momentum or a gust came through. He's also an overall grey/brownish color.

I agree with you're points about the gloves. I agree that it does look too cartoony, but if this fits the world, its not a big point. Would a WoW player complain about their armor being cartoony? Corvo from Dishonored fits his world too. I agree that old Garret looks more inconspicuous for Hitman's disguise type stealth. I agree that these aesthetics would look f*cking stupid in Game of Thrones. I agree that the painted nails and eyeshadow look f*cking stupid anywhere.

I still believe that new Garret would still be better suited for stealth that involves actually keeping out of site in shadows and staying on the move (Metal Gear type stealth). He looks sleeker, darker, and lighter with no loose articles flinging about due to everything being strapped down. Taking everything you said into account, old Garret seems better suited for a kind of hiding-in-plain-sight type stealth, but not making quick, shadowy escapes. Old Garret is more Hitman, while new Garret is more Metal Gear.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Except corsets don't attach to armsleaves or hoods.

Nor does Garrett's.

http://www.gameranx.com/img/13-Mar/thief-garrett.jpg

It is not attached.



Ever wear a T-shirt too small for you? Remember how raising your arm lifted it above your navel?

Imagine that, only due to the corset and the straps keeping it in place, there is nowhere for it to go, so it just severely limits your range of motion.



So was old Garrett's.



It wouldn't actually allow him to keep up that motion.



Old Garrett has armguards and is wearing full boiled leather. Protection.



No.

Want to know who did wear loose and baggy clothing, because it suited their job best?

Ninjas.

Old Garrett's clothing isn't even particularly loose or baggy mind you. Heavier? Only marginally.



Old Garrett also has a quiver on his back, lol.



You've seen too many movies. Unless he is in the middle of a hurricane, it won't billow and flutter behind him while sneaking, nor is it even a particularly heavy cloak. In-doors, there is no issue at all.

This is all of course ignoring the fact that if he does indeed have a job where the cloak isn't viable, he can... Take it off. Easily, lol.



The cloak is as wide as he is, it just conceals his limbs and his weaponry (Which can reflect light) better.



I didn't even notice the string. Know what else it does though? It would get caught in something far more easily, it limits his range of motion, and in combat could be grabbed, giving his opponent leverage over him.



Actually his cloak is dark blue, and it covers most of his body.

Dark blue is actually far better for stealth within shadows or night time than black is. Black would actually stand out if you tried to hide while wearing it, because you'd be darker than the darkness around you (So edgy). Old Garrett actually has less showing than new Garret, only his mouth and chin.

A hood doesn't come off just from running, not when it's covering most of your face.



Why did they turn Thief's setting into a cartoon setting? Why make a new game in the series if you won't adhere to the themes and tones of the original?



Yes actually, a lot of people do complain about WoW's stupid looking armour. One of my best friends is one such person, and he dislikes it because WoW armour used to look like this:

http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071228011903/wowwiki/images/a/ac/Auduin_Lothar.jpg



Yeah but his world was always like that, it wasn't altered to appeal to a newer, more mainstream crowd like Thief is.



Good.



Naw dude, dude naw.

Old Garrett is just better, and he's better because more genuine thought was put into his design. New Garrett was made to edgify the series and make him and his setting more mainstream and easily accepted by new players.

I for one hope the game bombs and that everyone involved is out of a job. Also I'm a communist.

Also, new Garrett has twelve belts.

Why does new Garrett have twelve belts?

**** if I know.

This game's gonna suck, isn't it?

If you can get past playing as a gimp moonlighting as a thief who can't jump unless QTE!, then no, it won't suck.

Or maybe it will.

Originally posted by BackFire
This game's gonna suck, isn't it?

It will be if you've been a fan of the previous games.

lol This has been an all out war. If you don't like the look thats cool...If the jumping thing bothers you then ok thats fine but even combined I don't think that will decide if the games going to be good or not. Wait for it to come out and give it an unbiased try...rent it if you don't wanna buy it.

3_2cAbijZVc

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
lol This has been an all out war. If you don't like the look thats cool...If the jumping thing bothers you then ok thats fine but even combined I don't think that will decide if the games going to be good or not. Wait for it to come out and give it an unbiased try...rent it if you don't wanna buy it.

Well if you have a decent PC rig, Go and track down the other Thief games.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Well if you have a decent PC rig, Go and track down the other Thief games.

They were pretty cheap on steam a while ago but I didn't buy them. I would like to though.

Watched one review for this game

6/10 & a 7/10

the 6/10 person is like me and everyone else who have played the previous games, Says it didn't capture that magic of the original Thief games

also points out that there is one level later on in the game which harkens back to the earlier games

the 7/10 is from someone that's new to the franchise

and from what they showed the game basically hand holds you through the entire game pretty much gives you a objective marker.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Watched one review for this game

6/10 & a 7/10

the 6/10 person is like me and everyone else who have played the previous games, Says it didn't capture that magic of the original Thief games

also points out that there is one level later on in the game which harkens back to the earlier games

the 7/10 is from someone that's new to the franchise

and from what they showed the game basically hand holds you through the entire game pretty much gives you a objective marker.

That's a shame. Hopefully you can turn such options off.

I preordered this, something I almost never do. Will be DLing it from Amazon later this evening.

Originally posted by Digi
That's a shame. Hopefully you can turn such options off.


Well you can turn it off from what i seen in the custom settings, Cept you can't turn it off on the go as your playing it

also they've put in a new thing called "Focus" which basically lets you see where all the traps are and vases.....you can knock over accidentally and catch the attention of gaurds, More baby sitting.

So my auto-DL email never came, and Amazon isn't showing the pre-order. I'm looking into it before I break down and repurchase it, but I haven't dug in just yet.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Well you can turn it off from what i seen in the custom settings, Cept you can't turn it off on the go as your playing it

also they've put in a new thing called "Focus" which basically lets you see where all the traps are and vases.....you can knock over accidentally and catch the attention of gaurds, More baby sitting.

Ridiculous. I want a patch with "Classic Mode" that removes all that nonsense and adds in the original voice actor for Garrett.

I'm sure someone in the modding community will do something like that.

I demand that everyone in this thread apologize to me and admit that I was right.

I hate when you can't change difficulty, game play settings during the course of single player.

I hate it soooo much.....

Originally posted by NemeBro
I demand that everyone in this thread apologize to me and admit that I was right.

Why? It's game of the year. Maybe even decade.

What was Neme's point again? *reads last few pages* ...so, that the new outfit is sh*t?

Sure, agreed. But it's meant to be played in first person. What's the big deal?

Finally got around to buying this late last night. Going to finish DLing it tonight. I'm excited to dive in.

Originally posted by Digi
What was Neme's point again? *reads last few pages* ...so, that the new outfit is sh*t?

Sure, agreed. But it's meant to be played in first person. What's the big deal?

Finally got around to buying this late last night. Going to finish DLing it tonight. I'm excited to dive in.

Originally posted by NemeBro
To be honest I think the game's going to be dog dick. /shrugs

Have you played through it yet? I can't really get into it with you...I've played all of the Benchmark test so far, but that's about it. So I don't have an opinion. But reviews seem muted but generally favorable. Most of the griping revolves around fans of the classic series not liking some departures they've taken. I'll probably jump on board with some of those kind of complaints, but if it remains atmospheric and exciting, it should be decent.

Preorder was worth it. You get a few issues of a comic that provides background information, the soundtrack, and an exclusive in-game level. Unless Neme's prophecy is completely true, I doubt I'll regret it.

The game is getting around 70%. The new Casltevania game is getting around 60%.

But according to fans, Castlevania isn't that bad but Thief 4 is a piece of shit.

We live in the age where a game getting 70% is considered garbage.

No we live in an age where garbage gets rated at 70%

Originally posted by Digi
Have you played through it yet? I can't really get into it with you...I've played all of the Benchmark test so far, but that's about it. So I don't have an opinion. But reviews seem muted but generally favorable. Most of the griping revolves around fans of the classic series not liking some departures they've taken. I'll probably jump on board with some of those kind of complaints, but if it remains atmospheric and exciting, it should be decent.

Preorder was worth it. You get a few issues of a comic that provides background information, the soundtrack, and an exclusive in-game level. Unless Neme's prophecy is completely true, I doubt I'll regret it. I could have gotten you everything but the in-game level for free if you gave me time.

Maybe even the in-game level, who knows?

Suppose it's an eye of the beholder thing. Some might say the industry has improved, and even mid-level games are fun. Others might say criticism has softened. Still others might say neither is true, and this game is simply deserving of its rating.

Anyway, that nonsense aside...

Finally got some play time in. The expected gripes - lack of jump at any time, hand-holding with usable objects - are all valid. But the game's atmospheric qualities and production values are quite stunning. It still feels like a Thief game (having played all of them in the series). It just doesn't necessarily have the same level of freedom. If they fixed those two problems, I'd be quite excited at this point. Hell, I even died a couple times after being careless (though to be fair, I'm still getting used to the combat system). The problems are problems, but it's so far enjoyable despite them.

I suppose it's too optimistic to have the kind of freedom from some of the earliest games. I haven't played enough of the game to know for sure, but it seems like even with choice over how we approach a situation, you're still given at most 3 linear options. In the first couple games there were times with 2-3 linear options past a situation. But many, many more where they just sort of put you into a spot with no real "solution" and you just had to improvise. There would be dozens of ways to skin a level. I call that 'organic' freedom for lack of a better term.

To be clear, Thief isn't alone in this problem. And not everyone considers it a problem. I disliked the original Deus Ex (one of the best-reviewed games ever for its time) for much the same reason. Their supposed choices usually amounted to three choices among correct solutions, not a playground for your imagination like many Thief levels turned out to be. Some of my best memories are from improvised guard traps or rope arrow shenanigans (rope arrows have much more limited use in this game), or the "OH HOLY ****" moments as the sprawling levels and inherent difficulty met with my chaotic approach to many situations. If this Thief can recreate a few such moments, it'll go a long way to sating my nostalgia for the series.

Originally posted by NemeBro
I could have gotten you everything but the in-game level for free if you gave me time.

Maybe even the in-game level, who knows?

Probably true, but it was cheaper with the preorder. I actually paid less than if I had bought the non-extras version after it came out. Even if you get the other stuff via some other means, it was $5 less. I'm aware of torrents and such; I can get what I need too. But the preorder was a good deal

I'll probably just wait and play this when it comes out as a free game on PS+ in a year.

I just dislike how they decide to do a new game in a certain game franchise, Then decide to put in "baby sitting" gameplay systems to make it easier for new people to get into it

Originally posted by Smasandian

but Thief 4 is a piece of shit.


Maybe it is if you've been a fan of the previous games

But i'm sure you'll give it a high rating going by your previous posts supporting baby sitting in games.

shots fiiiiired

Oh shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

Originally posted by Kazenji
I just dislike how they decide to do a new game in a certain game franchise, Then decide to put in "baby sitting" gameplay systems to make it easier for new people to get into it

I understand the point. There's been a lot of time between games in this series. And not everyone is a pro at video games, but still enjoys playing them. The developers demographic is quite expansive these days, with different generations playing the same things. But like, most games will hold your hand through the tutorial mission, and usually the first occurrence or two of a new gameplay element. But not for the whole game. There's a balance to be struck that's ideal for all, imo.

Originally posted by Kazenji
I just dislike how they decide to do a new game in a certain game franchise, Then decide to put in "baby sitting" gameplay systems to make it easier for new people to get into it



Maybe it is if you've been a fan of the previous games

But i'm sure you'll give it a high rating going by your previous posts supporting baby sitting in games.

I'm pretty sure I said I support babying and support games that are hardcore. Why can't we have both?

Limited Resources

Well the obvious answer is that it costs time, money, and effort that could be spent on improving other aspects of the game.

Whether that time, money, and effort are well-spent to give casual and hardcore gamers their own experiences is a matter of debate.

Time and effort?

Huh, I guess but there is plenty of games that cater both audiences, especially big productions like Thief. I would agree that games made by smaller companies through Kickstarter wouldn't have the money and time to do so but Ubisoft?

But if money was an issue that they couldn't develop for both audiences then there is no way this game gets made to satisfy the very small fanbase of the original games.

"We made the decision to record our actor's voices and their movement at the same time using a full performance capture technique. The actor playing Garrett needed to be able to perform his own stunts. Garrett's a really athletic guy. We could have pasted Stephen's voice on top of the actions and stunts of someone else, but this wouldn't appear natural."

Only just now saw this.

"Guys we need mo-cap in a first person game."

lol

Originally posted by NemeBro
"We made the decision to record our actor's voices and their movement at the same time using a full performance capture technique. The actor playing Garrett needed to be able to perform his own stunts. Garrett's a really athletic guy. We could have pasted Stephen's voice on top of the actions and stunts of someone else, but this wouldn't appear natural."

Only just now saw this.

"Guys we need mo-cap in a first person game."

lol

Seems a bit excessive, but I can see a certain logic behind it. There's still the possibility that performing the lines "in character" to this extent made them seem more authentic. It's sometimes hard for even trained voice actors to place themselves in certain specific situations.

Also, it doesn't say motion-capture specifically, though I'd need to read the source to know for sure. It seems more about making the sound authentic by capturing it during the actions. There's also a few instances where the camera zooms out, like the extended wall-climbing sequences.

Digi, you're ruining the circle jerk. Escort yourself out. And then escort yourself back in, with a real escort. For me.

Banished, an indie game created by one guy, that was released earlier, is outselling Thief on Steam.

AAA games a shit

Originally posted by FinalAnswer


AAA games a shit

Maybe some of them.

Originally posted by BackFire
Digi, you're ruining the circle jerk. Escort yourself out. And then escort yourself back in, with a real escort. For me.

Heh, sorry. It's my inherent skepticism. Whenever it seems like people are piling on one way or another (and on the internet, that usually skews toward the negative), I tend to see the ways in which things are being overstated. I haven't called it a great game, and likely won't, but it's not hard to see some of the negativity as sort of a twisted catharsis, where bashers are more interested in seeing their tirades confirmed than they are with considering alternatives.

But, my apologies: http://media.sbwire.com/photos/show/?id=18365&size=medium ...she's been paid and is on the way to your house now. I know you like them younger, but I don't have your connections...

biscuits

She was very good. Then she tried to get me to pay her so I had to put her down. Thanks.

Originally posted by Digi
Seems a bit excessive, but I can see a certain logic behind it. There's still the possibility that performing the lines "in character" to this extent made them seem more authentic. It's sometimes hard for even trained voice actors to place themselves in certain specific situations.

Also, it doesn't say motion-capture specifically, though I'd need to read the source to know for sure. It seems more about making the sound authentic by capturing it during the actions. There's also a few instances where the camera zooms out, like the extended wall-climbing sequences. That never stopped Russell before, and if you need Garrett to sound tired during a scene, just have the VA perform some strenuous activity directly before (Like in The Incredibles, where they had Dash's VA constantly do laps around the studio so he'd always sound out of breath).

Thief (The new one) is probably not even as bad as some of the worst games I've ever played.

What it is is a shameless attempt at dumbing down the series in a futile effort to attract a more mainstream crowd.

I for one hope the game continues to bomb hard, and that everyone involved gets fired and dies of cancer.

Originally posted by BackFire
She was very good. Then she tried to get me to pay her so I had to put her down. Thanks.



Originally posted by NemeBro
That never stopped Russell before, and if you need Garrett to sound tired during a scene, just have the VA perform some strenuous activity directly before (Like in The Incredibles, where they had Dash's VA constantly do laps around the studio so he'd always sound out of breath).

Thief (The new one) is probably not even as bad as some of the worst games I've ever played.

What it is is a shameless attempt at dumbing down the series in a futile effort to attract a more mainstream crowd.

I for one hope the game continues to bomb hard, and that everyone involved gets fired and dies of cancer.

What's the background here? Why is the hatred so intense? I take it you played and loved the earlier games in the series, at least.

I do hope the criticisms provide some valuable feedback. The flaws are glaring, and detract from the overall experience. But there aren't a lot of them (hand-holding, no jump, level design is too linear...that may be it in terms of obvious flaws). Those are enough to hurt it significantly, but I think that also makes the series eminently salvageable.

Game is actually "good" but its target market have been poorly defined. People got the wrong idea about this game due to checkpoint based progress and stuff that matters more in action games. It is unwise to give GOW and COD treatment to this kind of game. In addition, it is really lame to present a cut-scene without a dialog (I mean seriously?).

Furthermore, Ubisoft should have aimed for a complex and lengthy story but opportunity have been wasted with this reboot. A sequel should be given a shot which should address the mistakes of this reboot.

Originally posted by Digi

What's the background here? Why is the hatred so intense? I take it you played and loved the earlier games in the series, at least.

What would I be without hatred? Much like you, I expect.



I am shallow and will never get past Garrett's appearance.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD


Furthermore, Ubisoft should have aimed for a complex and lengthy story but opportunity have been wasted with this reboot. A sequel should be given a shot which should address the mistakes of this reboot.

Try again

Ubisoft isn't involved with this.

Originally posted by NemeBro
What would I be without hatred? Much like you, I expect.

I'm not even quite sure what this means. Sounds like a melodramatic movie line.

Originally posted by NemeBro
I am shallow and will never get past Garrett's appearance.

Meh, ok.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Try again

Ubisoft isn't involved with this.
Thanks for pointing out, Eidos then.

Originally posted by NemeBro
What would I be without hatred? Much like you, I expect.

I am shallow and will never get past Garrett's appearance.

As a more serious response, I just can't bring myself to feel hatred, or really even anger, toward something that is a release for me (video games, that is). 's probably why I've trended toward single player games in recent years. The abject aggression and bile spewing from the fandoms of several mainstream games is antithetical to my purpose for playing.

I don't necessarily disagree with some of your assessments, of course. I just have a different perspective on them. As such, it's been a bit disappointing that you've refused to engage some of my points, instead opting for veiled slights like this last post.

Also, have you played the game yet? I haven't seen much in the way of in-game critique. Or are you skipping it altogether?

Nemebro doesn't actually play games, he just reads about them and judges them accordingly. It's a matter of efficiency, really.

So as I plunged into the depths of the underground library, I became increasingly convinced I was about to be assaulted by an undead or similar beasty. Hated those ----ers in the earlier games. I almost shat myself in Thief 1 the first time I encountered an undead as I went to loot him (and, about 5 seconds later in a fearful retreat, my first giant spider encounter, a "F*CK THIS" moment of horror that I don't think any game has equaled since for me). The creepy "reveal" of the humanoid thing wasn't surprising, then, but was appreciated.

Then I never encountered him again. It was...disconcerting. I couldn't decide if I was mad at them for messing with me, or respected them for creating such tension for the remainder of the level. I was seriously on edge for the entire escape sequence. It was the most I've felt of anything so far, which is a good thing, and I look forward to the creatures later on.

Unrelated: Basso aside, there's a depressing lack of references to the earlier games. There's also a plot gap between what we're told at the end of Deadly Shadows and the beginning of 4. Garrett became a Keeper, presumably. So what happened? Where are the Keepers these days? The library was clearly a Keeper stronghold. So...why is it abandoned? Why does Garrett say nothing about it, and at one point act like he doesn't even know what the place is? I did catch a reference to the Trickster (the main enemy of Thief 1) in an NPC's casual dialogue, which was cool. Needs way more of that. Even if they have to catch up newer players, it will add depth to the story. Where are the burricks? What happened to the Builder cult after the downfall of Karras in 2? Etc. There are some potential leads (the recovered book, for instance). But there still needs to be a payoff.

Originally posted by Digi
I'm not even quite sure what this means. Sounds like a melodramatic movie line.

Video game, actually.



It is pretty awful, to be fair.

Originally posted by Digi
As a more serious response, I just can't bring myself to feel hatred, or really even anger, toward something that is a release for me (video games, that is). 's probably why I've trended toward single player games in recent years. The abject aggression and bile spewing from the fandoms of several mainstream games is antithetical to my purpose for playing.

I don't necessarily disagree with some of your assessments, of course. I just have a different perspective on them. As such, it's been a bit disappointing that you've refused to engage some of my points, instead opting for veiled slights like this last post.

Also, have you played the game yet? I haven't seen much in the way of in-game critique. Or are you skipping it altogether? Wow, you really think I'm upset, don't you? The closest I've really come to being butt blasted is when I discovered there were people here who liked new!Garrett's design.

"Refused to engage" some of your points? Like what? That I'm super ass angry at this video game? I'm not. Am I going to rush to buy it to try it out and validate my expectations? No, the same way I didn't rush out to see, say, Revenge of the Fallen when it was released to validate how I thought it would turn out. I don't shell out money on release for something I doubt I'll really like.

Will I ever play the game to validate said viewpoint? Maybe, but I probably won't pay for it. Borrow it? Sure man. It's probably not the worst game I've ever played, not even close. It's probably even a solid "okay". But a game has to either do better than that or appeal to some interest of mine for me to spend time and effort beating it.

Also ignore Backfire, he's just upset that I didn't instantly fall in love with The Last of Us (And even now that I've gotten a lot further in it, it's still only in "pretty good" territory).

No, don't ignore me. That's my one weakness.

Jesus Christ man calm down. I know you're a mod but there is no need to abuse your power and try to bully me like that.

Originally posted by NemeBro
It is pretty awful, to be fair.

Agreed. For what it's worth, in-game Garrett is less emo looking. The promotional pics of him, his face at least, are somewhat exaggerated.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Wow, you really think I'm upset, don't you?

Actually, no, I don't. "Anger" is pretty relative on forums. But you have had some acerbic posts (devs getting cancer and whatnot), so it's at least been fairly angry by forum standards. In any case, this supposes I try to get into peoples' heads based off of very little information. I really, really don't care enough to attempt that.

Originally posted by NemeBro
"Refused to engage" some of your points? Like what? That I'm super ass angry at this video game? I'm not. Am I going to rush to buy it to try it out and validate my expectations? No, the same way I didn't rush out to see, say, Revenge of the Fallen when it was released to validate how I thought it would turn out. I don't shell out money on release for something I doubt I'll really like.

That's cool. No reason you should if that's how you feel.

It's just, your posts have been mostly rants against one aspect of the game or another, as I try to engage you on the actual merit of the game (or lack thereof). I've just been perplexed by your vitriol and certainty without having played it. If you're not going to, that's fine, but it's begs the question of your continued attacks.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Will I ever play the game to validate said viewpoint? Maybe, but I probably won't pay for it. Borrow it? Sure man. It's probably not the worst game I've ever played, not even close. It's probably even a solid "okay". But a game has to either do better than that or appeal to some interest of mine for me to spend time and effort beating it.

That's fine. I just wanted to know if you had played it yet.

It's a lot of work trying to interact with you. You know what I said about anger toward something that is a release for me? The same is largely true of KMC. I'm not trying to push your buttons, nor trying to assume anything about you personally. I'm trying to discuss a game, and somehow we're arguing with one another. Your approach to our discussion has been combative, and in this case needlessly so.

Originally posted by Digi
Agreed. For what it's worth, in-game Garrett is less emo looking. The promotional pics of him, his face at least, are somewhat exaggerated.

Could be, but I'm pretty big on functionality in my character designs (As seen in a lengthy rant in the Game of Thrones thread) most of the time, so eh.



I uh, don't actually want the devs to die of cancer.



I've acknowledged Thief isn't a truly epic travesty of a game in of itself, though it could be argued to be an abortion when put next to the other games in the series.

Certainty eh? I am indeed pretty certain that the game is a more casual rendition of the Thief ip. Am I wrong?



Calm down. You fight, and eat good food. You fight, and drink fine wine. You fight, and sleep with beautiful woman. Hell, fight with beautiful women! That is what it means to live.

Now that I've shoehorned another video game quote into my post, allow me to reiterate: I'm not angry, nor am I even mildly upset. I think my posting style gives that impression sometimes, but I am far more laid back about shit like this than many others, some of whom have posted in this thread (Like FA for example, whom I often tell to calm down, especially since in this case he hasn't actually played the series being "butchered".

Do I think Thief 4 is kind of shitty, even only relatively? Yeah, I suspect that is indeed the case.

Am I wrong?

Anyway, I'm off to play episode 2 of Walking Dead.

It is misleading to label this game as "shitty." It is a good game, a welcome development for the fans of this franchise.

The appeal factor of this game is dependent upon how it is played. If you (as a player) will play it just for completing missions, you are likely to be disappointed. If you will play it for Thief experiences, you are likely to enjoy it.

No.

To each his own.

When I am playing this game, my priorities are as follows:

# 1: LOOT (including collectibles)
# 2: MISSION

This is how this game is meant to be played, any Thief game is.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
It is misleading to label this game as "shitty." It is a good game, a welcome development for the fans of this franchise.

The appeal factor of this game is dependent upon how you play it. If you will play it just for completing missions, you will be disappointed. If you will play it for Thief experiences, you will be enjoy it.

There's a decent point hiding here somewhere. While the merits and flaws of a game exist regardless of your play approach, there's a lot to be said about the opportunity to make your own experience, so to speak. The open world and side missions help, and if you, say, decide you're going to be an absolute ghost for the entire game, it creates a new experience and mindset. I always feel like I'm cheating to put an arrow in a guard's head...I want to be a Thief, not an action hero. Fleecing an entire section of city and picking off guards one by one is still fun, if only because it allows me the type of creativity that most of the pre-set levels don't (which are still maddeningly linear for my taste).

That's not true of many games, even good ones. I won't say it glosses over the flaws (it doesn't). But it means I'll enjoy the immersion of the game at times despite the flaws.