To quote the most troubling bits:
Backed by a large AAA budget, the Thief team expanded rapidly. While the project attracted a few designers, programmers and artists from across the globe, many came from other Montreal studios. A number of senior team members previously worked together at Ubisoft Montreal, and were quick to recruit local colleagues. According to one source, collegial favoritism began to divide the office.
The lead and senior design roles were fluid, with some team members departing after less than two years. According to one source, each new lead and senior designer would come with a new vision for the game. Old ideas — including stages and mechanics — would be rebuilt or scrapped. In March of this year, the same month as the game's publicity push on the cover of Game Informer magazine, Lead Game Designer Dominic Fleury left the studio.
The studio has seen a number of high-level departures
Due to a need to hit promotional deadlines, the latter part of 2012 and early 2013 was focused on creating press demos, the first of which was shown for the Game Informer cover and also at last month's Game Developers Conference. According to a source, the demo took nearly 10 months of development time, roughly six of which required the participation of nearly every content creator on the team. The level, which takes place in part inside a brothel, apparently featured "Cinemax-level" sex sequences at one point that some animators were uncomfortable creating.
"Cinemax Level Sex Sequences"
Holy shit what?! A publisher owned developer needs external funding from another private company? Isn't this similar to the same bullshit that plagued Kingdoms of Amalur and 38 studios?
And finally:
This...even ignoring the changes it's making as a sequel it still sounds like a disaster.
I was ready to say something sarcastic and painful like "La la la, your complaints pale into insignificance next to the artistic integrity of my large pile of money", but it looks like there isn't even one of those. Jesus.
From the sound of it, seems like someone at the top had terrible management skills. Playing favourites, making decisions their team mates couldn't follow. And some sort of power vacuum emerged from that. I wish we had more details. I'd love to pick over their various visions.
I'm interested in how Montreal's PR is going to react to this. Should they.
edited 4th May '13 5:16:36 AM by Nicknacks
This post has been powered by avenging fury and a balanced diet.Here's
the link.
It...looks pretty bad honestly. The shadowy crap on the screen doesn't really convey the player's likelihood of being seen as clearly as the light gem (makes me wonder if we'll even have degrees of being lit and instead just go with a more "streamlined" binary lit/dark approach).
Stealth action is stupid and unrelated to Thief. There's Dishonored for that but Thief is very specifically about a pretty weak guy getting by with his wits and resources and still managing to challenge supernatural demonic creatures.
But of course the biggest insult is that "We respect the DNA of the franchise" comment as Garrett takes out a guard with a headshot on screen and gains 40XP for it. Oh and bullet time VATS style melee combat? Seriously? Isn't queuing up arrow shots in bullet time bad enough?
The dev is talking pure marketing speak and the only thing the game looks to have going for it is stuff like the Water Arrow, basically features that were already in the previous games.
I'm glad Thief 3 had closure for Garret and ended his story arc.
Hmm... I think that I see what they're aiming at with the inclusion of action elements: making failing fun by having recovery from failure engaging in itself (something for which I seem to recall that Extra Credits praised the Thief games).
However, I'm not convinced that action is the wisest route for that, and Thief already had elements that could be incorporated, such as flash bombs and gas arrows.
He does note that one can play in a non-lethal "ghost-like" manner, so perhaps it comes down to some degree to player preference: as long as the action elements don't become more powerful than the stealth, then I'm tempted to like the idea of giving the player freedom of play-style. I do note that Garrett seemed to die fairly quickly when facing guards.
I'll admit that I'm not a fan of including RPG mechanics into the game; it seems to me to change the atmosphere, make it one that reminds the player that they're playing a game rather than remaining immersive within the missions. While not negative in and of itself, to me it doesn't feel much like "Thief".
As to degrees of visibility, I note that the "dark ring" at the edges of the screen does seem to change opacity, being lighter as Garrett moves, for example, from which I suspect that degrees of visibility likely are still in the mechanics.
My Games and Asset PacksKim from the Yogscast interviewed the producer of Thief
recently, it seems.
One item that I noted was that one can apparently disable the "focus" feature for a more "purist" playthrough.
edited 12th Jun '13 4:35:23 PM by ArsThaumaturgis
My Games and Asset Packs“A lot of people, a menagerie of people, told us okay, ‘it doesn’t work. Ten years later, that type of gameplay doesn’t work’, said Roy. “I don’t know if you remember with the previous game? Let’s say I’ve been detected; it was really, really tough to survive. You know? It was unforgiving. Game over”.
THAT IS THE POINT OF THE STEALTH GENRE YOU TAFFERS.
http://sneakybastards.net/theobserver/thief-hands-on/
Game is going to have a bunch of cinematic "run forward to continue" scenes where control is mostly taken from the player....sigh.
"Case in point (no pun intended): rope arrows. Previously, Garrett’s rope arrow stuck to any wooden surface, after which a climbable rope would unfurl from its point of impact. Here, rope arrows only attach to specifically marked anchor points that have been placed by level designers – anchor points that seemed to exist when the only way forward was through the use of a rope arrow."
I'm out. Another franchise I love into the pile.
"“It’s a question of production choice,” Roy explains. “If I give you the possibility to shoot the rope arrow everywhere, I will have to cut something. I will have to reduce our intention for the narrative. If it’s everywhere, the cost of it is to block your view, because it’s still a console. It’s still tech. By having a smart level design, by making sure that feels natural that here you can go – not scripted, but you check and if you feel that you should be able to do that and it’s there, the job is done. If it’s not frustrating, the job is don"
Screw your narrative.
edited 25th Jun '13 9:28:45 PM by Thorn14
@Thorn: Check this video
I do agree on that it sucks when people make non linear games more linear because they suck in narrative.
edited 25th Jun '13 10:59:21 PM by SpookyMask
Deadly Shadows had an ending to Garrett's journey with his life coming full circle.
And Deadly Shadows might not be perfect but compared to the sequels we get in this day and age it's a much truer and more passionate sequel that ultimately just suffers from technology limitations (seriously, the maps are actually pretty big when the segments are removed, that museum is Thief 2 tier level design without the segmented loading walls).
There's no need to be gutted about it, just ignore it and maybe laugh when Square Enix announces yet again that a title didn't live up to their 6 million sales expectations and will therefore never get another sequel.
I'd hardly say the boss fights ruined the stealth in HR. Yeah, they sucked and went against everything else in the game... but they only constituted a fraction of game time, and the Wii U version is going to revamp them anyway, apparently.
So could someone summarize everything that's going on here? I mean, thanks to steam I was able to get back into some of my favorite PC games without having to worry about ruined discs, and I'm a bit interested in all the new sequels and reboots coming out. Human Revolution was pretty good, if not exactly the same as the original Deus Ex. The Thief series is pretty good, so I'm curious about what's going on but also too lazy/busy with life to dig through a thread and articles. Can I get a summary here?
It's some sort of reboot, for purposes of "accessibility" (though I can't help but think they're doing it because the games industry only has confidence in telling the one kind of story). Canon will largely remain the same, but the world is going to be downplaying a lot of the setting's more unique aspects, limiting focus to the human element — particularly the City's Baron, who we're told it to be the main villain. Keepers have been retconned, as a cabal of stealthy types. Basically a cabbalistic thieves guild. Initially water arrows were called "dry ice arrows", and moss arrows did (do?) have another name, though the former was changed as a bone to outraged fans. The change is, of course, cosmetic.
Speaking of cosmetic, all the guards have identical faces, and I can't decide whether this is just stupid or some sort of homage. They look very similar to Thief 2's guard faces, which isn't ideal.
Gameplay involves first person sneaking, though the UI has been changed. Stealth will be based on shadows and line of sight (and noise?), and the light gem (while present) is being superseded by a kind of smog-effect at the corners of your vision. It's a little intrusive, and frustratingly means that you'll have more difficulty seeing out your peripherals. Stealth is emphasised by an upgrade system (basically introducing a gamification system to Thief) which rewards stealthy players with more upgrade points. Knock-outs are achieved in 3rd person cut-scenes (think Human Revolution), as is a flashy combat system.
While sneaking, Garret's hands are seen on the screen at all times — perhaps it indicate stealth? These have minimal interaction with the environment, particularly grabbing hold of objects in order to lean. Some people find this distracting. Trying to replicate what this would look like to move like that in real life is hilarious, and not dissimilar to a bow-legged zombie.
Said combat system is based on a meter which is refreshed using recouperables in the game (it's not going to recharge on its own) and is basically an all-purpose mana meter which works like VATS. The game goes into slowmotion and Garret is allowed to attack guards or steal with impunity. Though no-one really wants to admit it, it appears to be a way to bypass the skill involved in actually being stealthy while also allowing the player to pull of satisfying action moves, or he ability to pull the earrings straight off a mark. I'm not sold on it myself, partially because the stealing involves disembodied player hands being kind of goofy.
As a result of the third person sequences — there will be mocapped cutscenes as well, the animation from previous titles is gone — they've recast Garret. The argument being that they needed the same actor to do the voice and the theatrics. The new actor isn't bad, though we've not had much exposure to him beyond a couple of purple trailers. He's noticeably younger than Garret ever was, though still has the mechanical eye that Garret receives in the second game. So the narrative is going to be cherry-picking some of the more interesting bits from the earlier games, I'd guess.
Levels are meant to be open, with "multiple paths", though in practise this seems to mean pushing Garret down multiple channels of approach. The levels are broken up into small, easily loadable rooms, and all the objects seem quite large, and the effect is to be a little cramped, IMO. The player can only jump or climb along pre-set lines of approach, which is clearly limiting, and traversing the environment through the use of tools has been revamped. Players seem to be able to create new types of arrows by combining parts with "blunt arrow" types in the field, expanding their stock. Also, in addition to rope arrows, the player has access to a climbing grapple-type thing, and I'm not sure how these work. There seem to be less opportunities to use these — rope arrows can only be attached to specific points, as can the grapple. Like I said, everything has been done to push the player down specific paths in the environment, presumably to minimise resources, though it could be to provide a standardised experience, or because the developers were more comfortable with this system. It's unclear.
Lockpicking is still in the game. If you use magic points on it, then it's a different system to just lock picking and you apparently see the tumblers inside the lock. Otherwise it's just the lockpicking from Fallout 3, Thief 3, New Vegas, Skyrim, ect.
There will be involved set-pieces, though these aren't that common (apparently). One heavily spoiled example involves running through a burning building (a bridge?) while picking locks/stealing/navigating the space. We know of at least two more. Seem to be an attempt to 'actionise' the narrative. There will be quick-time events, and they won't be common. Prepare to be surprised, and then die.
Throw in a touch of exotic transphobia — in the form of an Asian trans* brothel owning duplicitous slimy type — and you've got yourself Thief, Generation 2.
Edit: Id anyone's got anything to add, please do. I didn't go into what we're now hearing about the (incredibly) fraught history of this game, and there's a few other things I cut out.
Don't argue with me about that last point. It's not worth anyone's time.
edited 26th Jun '13 6:23:00 AM by Nicknacks
This post has been powered by avenging fury and a balanced diet.
...When you say "unique aspects" and "human element" am I to take that to mean that there won't be zombies? Because the rest of that sounds pretty awful from my perspective, even though you tried to make it sound somewhat unbiased and objective. Which I thank you for. I don't think I could stand a rant at the moment. You stated the facts, and let me draw my own conclusions.
Why did they take the best stealth series and take it in the same direction as everything else? Why would anyone do this? I guess it's easier to program for, but it shouldn't be given that the old games weren't as expensive.
The promse of new hardware is that developers will be able to make better and more complex games. But all I see is games that are, for the most part, worse, less complicated, and too simple.
And the push for "Realism" has taken away all the cool things, like magic zombies.
edited 26th Jun '13 6:38:00 AM by unnoun
Yes, no zombies. Apparently burricks (sp?) exist, but don't appear in the flesh — though they haven't since the first game.
I don't know if they're minimising the supernatural content out of an interest in naturalism — it's probably not an attempt at Realism — , or because the game was influenced by devs which strongly opposed the supernatural elements in the series. There was a strong vein of Thief fandom who believe the series was better like that, and according to some 'Polygon' article somewhere that I can't be bothered finding just this second, there was a lot of peer divisions and infighting during the development of this game.
Edit: This is why they had to get rid ofthe undead.
◊
Too much colour
◊.
edited 26th Jun '13 7:04:33 AM by Nicknacks
This post has been powered by avenging fury and a balanced diet.Double posting because I think everyone should read this interview.
"YOU CAN'T HAVE ICE CREAM EVERY DAY SO I SET A HOUSE ON FIRE!" is what I got from that.
Well, not really. But it's a slightly silly thing for them to suggest. Surely the burning house is the treat, the excitement that they're selling us on. It's more narratively engaging, it's sensational, it's certainly going to be more expensive to produce. I don't get it.
edited 26th Jun '13 10:49:37 AM by Nicknacks
This post has been powered by avenging fury and a balanced diet.Because it's a reinvention, we are not going back to the old factions. We want new factions. The last story didn't give us a lot of options. We wanted to take a step back and make sure we have everything right for a new, fresh experience within this universe. There may be some references back to keep the following happy, but it will be all new groups.
The two new factions are the Baron and he has The Watch. We also have a dissident group called the Raven. There is a political conflict that Garrett finds himself in the middle of. There will be characters associated with the group that will reveal themselves within the game.
How exactly was The City reinvented?
I don't want to say we completely scrapped everything. We took a lot of inspiration from what made this city memorable. The connection might be a little different, but for us it's still the same. We haven't locked down the names of the new districts. We choose what matches best with what the old games have. Naturally we want to make it feel like it is the same place.
Why not just call him Garrotte?
(please don't do this)
edited 26th Jun '13 10:52:15 AM by Nicknacks
This post has been powered by avenging fury and a balanced diet.

Actually, that's probably another thing I'll miss - I liked the more medieval steampunk flavour, and they seem to be leaning towards a more generic Industrial Revolution steampunk. :/ Oh well.
From the article linked earlier: