Thi4f becomes plain old Thief, reboot coming in 2014

[motsm]

I see, its not exactly what you want so the hell with everyone else. You know you can simply not buy it right? There should be some middle ground there somewhere, because you probably cant even get Thief fans to agree 100% on what was great about it and what didnt work.

You seem to have some caricature image of my opinions built up in your head, and your replying to them, regardless if I perpetuated them in the first place. So anyway, pointless discussion.

 

[Childs]

See, here's the problem with that:

When you use the name of the series in the title of the game, shockingly, people and fans of said series have certain expectations for it. Period. End of debate.

This isn't hard. Using the name Deus Ex or Thief or whatever isn't just because they can't come up with a new title. With carrying on a series, with consciously and deliberately choosing to tie in your NEW game with an established franchise, certain expectations are not unreasonable from the fans of that series. Otherwise, make a new IP. Simple.

And my point if you dont like something it doesnt mean everyone wont like it. Lets continue to use Deus Ex HR. So if 75% of people who played the first Deus Ex like HR, does that mean if shouldn't have been made? Tomb Raider 2013...lots of people in that thread say they really like, yet its not so much a traditional TR game but something else. Should that have not been made? Fallout 3 is another example. Thats about as far as you can get from the original, and people loved it. One could even say it changed what Fallout was while still being Fallout. I'm sure there are some dudes somewhere on the internet saying Fallout 3 was an abomination and it shouldnt have been made...do you really want to be one of those dudes?

What makes something what it is can actually be more subjective and objective. Doom 3 isnt Doom, yet others say its the Doom they remember. I didnt care for it myself, but do I think it shouldnt have been made? No, cause the original Doom aint walking through that door. Lets take Die Hard 5. Now I haven't seen it, but have read people complain about it. People like Die Hard. 2 wasnt as good as 1, 3 wasnt as good as 2. Who frickin cares, its more Die Hard. People like seeing John McClain running around blowing up things and talking sh1t. Not having Die Hard sequels doesnt make Die Hard 1 any less enjoyable. Of couse it would suck if I saw DH5 and it was so bad it actually did somehow ruin DH1, but I dont know how that would be possible. Same thing with Lethal Weapon or Mad Max. Even the Batman and Robin (Clooney), which I detest, didnt kill that franchise. Life moves on.

And can we all agree to drop the pedantic and condescending "if you don't like it you don't have to buy it" line? Yeah. We got that. What a ridiculous sentiment to trumpet on a forum devoted to proffering opinions, positive or negative, on video games. Taken to its logical end, no one should ever complain about a game they think sucks or point out its flaws because, hey, if you don't like it, don't buy it! Please.

I dont think people do! They act like they have to buy it, and they have to beat themselves in the head with it until they cant remember the original game anymore. You dont actually have to buy it. It bares repeating over and over. You can rock out to the original like its 1999, or whenever the hell it was it came out.

You seem to have some caricature image of my opinions built up in your head, and your replying to them, regardless if I perpetuated them in the first place. So anyway, pointless discussion.

I reject the notion that you know whats best for the rest of us. You aren't saying it directly, but thats the subtext I see in your posts. Maybe something crawled up my butt, dunno, but its really rubbing me the wrong way. I'm sure Sulaco is looking at my posts and thinking the same thing. lol

 

[ThinClient]

See, here's the problem with that:

When you use the name of the series in the title of the game, shockingly, people and fans of said series have certain expectations for it. Period. End of debate.

This isn't hard. Using the name Deus Ex or Thief or whatever isn't just because they can't come up with a new title. With carrying on a series, with consciously and deliberately choosing to tie in your NEW game with an established franchise, certain expectations are not unreasonable from the fans of that series. Otherwise, make a new IP. Simple.

And can we all agree to drop the pedantic and condescending "if you don't like it you don't have to buy it" line? Yeah. We got that. What a ridiculous sentiment to trumpet on a forum devoted to proffering opinions, positive or negative, on video games. Taken to its logical end, no one should ever complain about a game they think sucks or point out its flaws because, hey, if you don't like it, don't buy it! Please.

This is true.

However, there is not enough information out to make a realistic conclusion about the quality or content of the game. There are people in this very thread flying off the fucking handle, making shit up about what they expect to see, then basing their opinion on these made-up bullet points.

This is NOT taking it to its logical end. It is not logical to come to any sort of conclusion about a game with such little information out yet.

 

[mindcycle]

I guess what I'm getting at is I dont think the experience would change all the much if the price was lower. When you buy a bad game, even a dollar feels like its too much.

The experience wouldn't change but my anger level sure would if it turns out to be shit and I paid $60 for it.

 

[Sulaco]

This is true.

However, there is not enough information out to make a realistic conclusion about the quality or content of the game. There are people in this very thread flying off the fucking handle, making shit up about what they expect to see, then basing their opinion on these made-up bullet points.

This is NOT taking it to its logical end. It is not logical to come to any sort of conclusion about a game with such little information out yet.

I agree with this completely.

The backlash you see, much of it over the top, I would wager is from cynical, jaded consumers who have watched countless series after series be twisted and butchered from publishers trying to appeal to a wider audience, or what they think is a wider audience.

I agree, it is far, far too early to be casting aspersions yet, but it's likely people subconsciously preparing to be disappointed.

 

[ThinClient]

The experience wouldn't change but my anger level sure would if it turns out to be shit and I paid $60 for it.

So don't be a dumbass. Don't be one of those mindless sheep that encourage the wallet-rape of software companies by submitting to their demand for an outrageous price for a 6-hour game.

Even if it were the best game on the face of the planet, no few-hour game is worth $60.

It's best to wait several months or even a year or more until the price drops to $40 or less and for major bugs to be fixed, if ever.

 

[mindcycle]

It's best to wait several months or even a year or more until the price drops to $40 or less and for major bugs to be fixed, if ever.

I agree man. I almost always wait for a few months on any game nowadays, sometimes even a year or two till they hit $10 or so. See my above posts for how I decide the price point to buy at. Game remakes are usually $10-$20 for me, and that's worked out pretty well as I haven't been blown away by any of the recent ones as of yet.

The only games i've paid full price for recently (within the last year or two) were Witcher 2 and and Risen 2. I support both of those devs 100%. I still waited till reviews were out and didn't rush out to pre-order since I don't believe in that, but I felt both were easily worth full price.

 

[JoetheLion]

If it will be as good as Deus Ex Human Revolution for DE series, it would be something that I'd definitely enjoy. I am not naive enough to think, that it will be somehow at the same level as the trilogy. The time has simply changed and when developing such a big game in today's market, it's (sadly) inevitable to do it the easier way, to please casual gamers or young people who maybe like more shallow and blatant games even though they may not realized it.

tldr: I am interesting even though I realize it just won't be the same as the old Thief games.

 

[Ventanni]

I don't want them messing up the original, but the new Thief has to evolve in order for it to succeed. I consider both Thief 1/2 the best games I've ever played, but I'm not naive to think that simply making a graphical remake of the original is going to be successful. If Thi4f is going carry the same quality as Deus Ex: HR though, then we'll probably have a great game on our hands.

Mistakes in Thief 3 I'd like to see avoided in the reboot though:
-Level design was too narrow in comparison to Thief 1/2 due to the memory limitations in consoles. Levels in Thief 1/2 were quite large and allowed for a great deal of exploration without feeling completely open ended, however Thief 3 just felt consolized as a whole.
-Garrett's movement and feel felt very awkward in Thief 3 since we were actually steering the model instead of just directly controlling it.
-Thief 3 allowed you to the option to either kill or blackjack the guards, but there wasn't any advantage or disadvantage to either option other than killing the guard made a bunch of noise and a mess lol.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

But wait! There's more!

I predict Garrett becomes an ultra-badass Terminator thief who can take out 5 guards at once, all with the help of an AHHHSUM QTE sequence, brah.

Seriously though, I have ZERO faith they'll get this right. The Thief games, more than so many others, were far too nuanced and cerebral for this generation...or rather what publishers think this generation wants.

Ugh, I want to have faith this will be a good reboot but honestly what you're saying is at the back of my mind. I would love nothing more to see a thoroughly impressive reboot but at this stage holding on to hope that it will honor Thief 1/2 is just a fantasy, gaming in the PC space has fallen too far since the days of Thief, expecting that to U-turn in todays market is extremely naive.

Having said that Deus Ex: HR was a fairly impressive game in a lot of respects and they did do some last minute tweaks to remove the dumbass highlighting etc...it's possible that if we see some attention to the PC version of Thief it might surprise us, and by that I mean: It might not be as completely terrible as we expect. Passable...maybe.

 

[Geosurface]

Everyone in this thread needs to watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=namZ9xWhPZY

 

[Childs]

Everyone in this thread needs to watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=namZ9xWhPZY

lol...this is like the gamer version of Brett Hart.

 

[MeldarthX]

WOW people going on they have no faith that Eidos Mon can do this; this sounds exactly like what peoople said about Deus Ex HR. Word for word; they can't do it; they are going to completely screw it up.

Lets look at some facts - One Eidos is owned by Square Enix. Out of all the major publishers Square is the one that understands the PC market and is giving us the best hits on PC market.

Two - do their games have issues? yes but do the good outweigh the bad? Well in most cases people including myself have easily said yes.

Lets look at a few games that have come from Square last couple years. First and formost - Deus Ex reboot from Eidos.

Was this game good? Oh yea; and it was a hair shy from being a great game. What let it down was the boss fights *which Eidos didn't make* and the ending. Eidos said you know you're right about those issues and we apologies and we will do better next time.

When a studio can do that; they gain a lot of respect; aka Bethesda did what Fallout 3 - yea we screwed up the ending lets fix it. Not like ME3 bs - its art and we're not going to listen to our customers *but that's another discussion*

Next - Sleeping Dogs - where did that come from. Amazing game - so much fun; it was like playing Hard Boiled or other Hong Kong cop movies. Another one from Square Enix.

Next Hitman - now I will say this one does have some issues. Like the fact you can completely break stealth - and I understand what they were trying to do with the stealth and disguises; but didn't completely pull off. Also at times the story did faulter a little until the ending and you find out exactly what you were doing

I still play the game for the contracts and its a lot of fun. Some people didn't like some of the changes - including myself - but it was still a good game.

Eidos - made a very good stealth game in Deus Ex HR - can they do the same for Thief? I believe so - they learned a lot from Deus Ex....

Square has been giving PC users a lot of love; so I don't expect any less for Thief....so before we damn the game; pass judgement before we know anything or seen anything lets just wait and see.....cause I'm pretty damn sure its going to a good game; whether its a great game is up to Eidos and lessons they learned from Deus Ex.....

 

[mindcycle]

Thief's hero redesigned to be 'more mainstream'

"We wanted to keep the main DNA of who Garrett was; we didn't want to change that much because it was working already," game director Nicolas Cantin said. But, "we wanted to bring in more of the modern audience of the console market."

Cantin's past work includes the original Assassin's Creed, and he's drawing on that experience for the new Thief. Garrett can do much more in the new Thieft, and he "wanted the costume and design to reflect" the game's added action.

In addition, Cantin told Game Informer that "we toned down all the things that felt gothic, like black nails and things like that." Why? Because "we wanted to make him a little bit more mainstream."

Not like most of us didn't already see this coming a mile away but this pretty much solidifies it for me. I mean comeon.. Assassins Creed and "bringing it to the console market" are both mentioned here, which I can only guess they believe are selling points..? lol

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.shacknews.com/article/78205/thiefs-hero-redesigned-to-be-more-mainstream

 

[Childs]

Not like most of us didn't already see this coming a mile away but this pretty much solidifies it for me. I mean comeon.. Assassins Creed and "bringing it to the console market" are both mentioned here, which I can only guess they believe are selling points..? lol

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.shacknews.com/article/78205/thiefs-hero-redesigned-to-be-more-mainstream

It appears he is talking about cosmetic stuff, like the costume and black finger nails.

 

[mindcycle]

It appears he is talking about cosmetic stuff, like the costume and black finger nails.

Yes that's what he appears to be mainly talking about but i'm sure that's not the extent of the console crowd sculpting here.

 

[motsm]

Why can't these jackasses just be honest about what they do? I wouldn't give a fraction of the flying f**k that I do give, if they didn't lie about what they are obviously doing at every opportunity. All these gaming spokespeople just turn into politicians any time they are asked questions.

C**ts like him are why I have far more respect for companies like Infinity Ward, because while they produce even more dumbed down mainstream games, they aren't lying to everyone about what they do.

I now despise this Stephane D'Astous.

 

[Geosurface]

When did Garrett have black fingernails?

 

[mindcycle]

When did Garrett have black fingernails?

I don't think Garrett ever did, but maybe he's talking about other characters in the game world? Who really knows what he's talking about though.. All I can figure is Edios it's attempting to justify stepping away from a lot of the things that made the original games so unique. Because, you know.. all modern games must have "mainstream" appeal, it's like a requirement nowadays right? Why stay true to the original when you can just remake Assassin's Creed. That game sold well..

 

[Childs]

When did Garrett have black fingernails?

I don't think Garrett ever did, but maybe he's talking about other characters in the game world? Who really knows what he's talking about though.. All I can figure is Edios it's attempting to justify stepping away from a lot of the things that made the original games so unique. Because, you know.. all modern games must have "mainstream" appeal, it's like a requirement for enjoyment nowadays right?..

RPS got a quote on this:

“I was referring specifically to a previous Garrett design we tried out internally and not Garrett from the previous games. Our early design went a LOT more gothic – with black nails etc – but we thought that this wasn’t true to the legacy of Garrett so we pulled it back a bit. Returning to something more true to the original Garrett is what I meant when I said we made him more ‘mainstream’, this wasn’t a comment about the direction of the game. I can assure you we’re huge fans of the original games and we’ve done our homework to create a game that maintains the essence of the original. I can’t wait to show you more of the game and Garrett soon!”

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/201...=Feed:+RockPaperShotgun+(Rock,+Paper,+Shotgun)

 

[mindcycle]

RPS got a quote on this:
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/201...=Feed:+RockPaperShotgun+(Rock,+Paper,+Shotgun)

Thanks for posting that. I truly hope that's the case.

 

[Sulaco]

What made Garrett so likable as a character and memorable to me, is that he wasn't some ultra-badass, "kill-30-guys-in-a-row" who walked away from the exploding building in slow motion mugging the camera.

He (well, the gameplay) forced you to play smart, and rewarded you when you did so. He was skilled, he was a sneak master (obviously), but he wasn't some caricature comic book hero who has endless waves of bad guys as fodder to wade through.

That just cheapens the atmosphere and experience of the games.

 

[TheSlamma]

What made Garrett so likable as a character and memorable to me, is that he wasn't some ultra-badass, "kill-30-guys-in-a-row" who walked away from the exploding building in slow motion mugging the camera.

He (well, the gameplay) forced you to play smart, and rewarded you when you did so. He was skilled, he was a sneak master (obviously), but he wasn't some caricature comic book hero who has endless waves of bad guys as fodder to wade through.

That just cheapens the atmosphere and experience of the games.

But that would be a challenge and no one wants to think critically anymore.. that's why CoD does so well

I agree completely though, I much prefer a game that isn't Rambo style kill everyone to the finish style. I keep hoping that game development can get less expensive in the future somehow so that developers like Looking Glass, Bullfrog and Cavedog could actually make games and survive. Meanwhile we get a complete lack of creativity with Ubisoft, EA and Eidos.

 

[Childs]

Ideally, the game would provide enough freedom that you could play how you wanted to. Deus Ex HR was good about this, except for the boss battles. I started out running and gunning, but ended up going non lethal for probably the last 90% of the game. If I had known I was going to spend so much time playing I would have restarted early so I could have done a complete non lethal playthrough. I kept thinking I passed that point of no return, but the game kept on going.

Even in something like Assassins Creed, you dont have to rely on the counter system if you dont want to. In the case of Thief, obviously if you take on guys it should make more noise, alerting more guards, and generally making it more difficult. But you should be able to do it. As long as its not the only way it shouldnt be a problem.

 

[motsm]

In the case of Thief, obviously if you take on guys it should make more noise, alerting more guards, and generally making it more difficult. But you should be able to do it. As long as its not the only way it shouldnt be a problem.

Why should it be an option?