Thief

No wait, it's actually pretty funny.

Love you too. :D

Well, Garrett does have that mechanized eye thing... wait, doesn't that technically make him augmented?

Garrett: I never asked for this.

Ugh, I really hope most of this turns out false. . .

That's an official release from Eidos. I think it's probably true.

To be honest, I never liked sneaking past zombies in Thief. I always liked sneaking through elaborate mansions with guards more than skulking through ruins and Hammerite bases with monsters running around.

Some of the other pre-release info is worrying, but I was worried about Human Revolution as well, and that game is great.

All I know is: I liked Human Revolution, and if these devs can pull off something of similar quality in the Thief reboot, then I'm sure it'll be fine in the end.

I think of it all the thing that most surprises me is that their sticking with Garret as the protagonist. My knowledge of the series is limited mind, but I do seem to recall the end of the third game mirroring how Garret got his start as a keeper - some kid pickpocketing him while he was trying not to be seen. I always kinda figured Thief 4 would star the kid all growed up.

Still, so far I don't think we've seen anything hugely offensive to the series. They mentioned the possibility for more action, sure, but not the necessity. I don't doubt that all it's done is make the game more forgiving for the less patient, and stealth is still going to be a viable option. After all, why else bother with the mechanics to help players find sneaky routes?

Of course then there's the debate of whether or not making it easier/more accessible is a good thing, but that's a whole other story...

I think for the time being I shall count myself as 'cautiously optimistic'. It still has potential to be quite good, I think, and I will wholly admit to finding the aesthetic pretty sexy, for as little as that counts for.

Thief 4 discussion.

This isn't Thief 4.

Edit: It's also the longer thread.

edited 5th Mar '13 10:31:50 PM by Nicknacks

I was looking forward to this

Completely ignoring the fascinating lore of the original series and removing all the supernatural elements that made those games so unique is pretty disrespectful and then also creating a game with the intention of not "forcing you to play a Thief" makes you wonder why the title is being used at all.

If I wanted steampunk title with multiple approaches to gameplay I'd play Dishonored or another original IP.

But Thief is about a very particular gameplay-mode with a unique setting that wasn't just "Victorian steampunk".

Yep. The games were great anyway, but it's the setting that really made it stand out. They could still have included multiple approaches, just as long as they kept all the options thief-like.

The funny thing is that when I first played it, I didn't like the zombies and spiders, thinking that it was supposed to be a real world setting, but they quickly grew on me because of how well they fit the mood. The magick/pagan stuff was always a big part of the lore, so I don't see what made them think it was a good idea to get rid of it. It's not like today's gamers are completely averse to fantasy.

This was the only game I was looking forward to, and while it could still be decent, it'll never be Thief.

edited 5th Mar '13 11:58:32 PM by supergod

It's strange, the Baron's actually a part of the lore. Just a relatively obscure part in comparison to what they're dumping.

If I was an optimist I'd say they are hiding the supernatural stuff for a reveal later on.

Where exactly does the idea of "No more Pagans/Hammerites/lore come from again? I didn't see any in the original article posted, but there may have been some somewhere else.

Because magic being removed doesn't automatically equate to magically inclined things(And hammerites) being taken away - especially since, as Pannic mentioned earlier, that was a plot point in the third game. In fact I think it would be rather interesting to see the Pagans dealing with the loss of magic.

Well, stealth games are officially dead, just like arena shooters and rhythm-based games. I think I'll make a grave for the genre after I stop weeping ;_;

SO MUCH BUTTHURT FROM EVERYONE.

edited 6th Mar '13 7:13:48 AM by theLibrarian

Well, when someone drags up your favorite game from its peaceful slumber, revives it for no reason, and makes it into Thi4f: Assassin's Dishonored Uncharted Revolution, it's easy to understand why people might be mad.

Except that you're drawing a lot of conclusions and making some pretty broad strokes based on not a lot of information. Information that can and likely will be subject to change, even if it DOES mean what you take it to mean.

Maybe sit back and wait a while before calling Ruined Forever.

Or calling an entire genre(Which, by the way, had a notable release less than a year back) dead, for that matter.

edited 6th Mar '13 7:42:43 AM by kegisak

This is the OLDER thread.

And a PS? New info about the game.

The fantasy elements aside, I don't see how a developer dismissing Garrett's previous incarnations as weak or girly or whatever can be taken any way but negatively.

edited 6th Mar '13 9:03:38 AM by supergod

I think it was a play-tester who had implied that about earlier iterations of Thief 4. Not that that makes any ultimate difference, and certainly not that we should be catering to that line of thinking. I'll grant you in either of those cases it's a bad thing, if not necessarily a bad sign.

However, it could just mean that Garret's animations in this game were genuinely feminine looking, which would be odd. I certainly don't see how his movements from the first three could be construed as 'girly'.

edited 6th Mar '13 8:53:26 AM by kegisak

Ahh, I see. I hadn't actually read the link at the time. Just going by what people were saying here (which I still misread). Edit: I suck at touchscreen phones.

edited 6th Mar '13 9:12:05 AM by supergod

Yeah. Like I said, a lot of this stuff is still very vague preliminary information, and it can be taken a lot of ways. I think it'd be wise to at least wait for some gameplay footage to really set on anything.

This is perhaps not unwise.

While I'm still rather sorry to see the undead and magic disappear, it's likely worth waiting for better information and responses to the game itself before making any real decisions.