Thief series catch-all

Yeah, I think it's time for a new Thief. We're done with Garrett. He was a great character, but his arc is complete. Let's play someone different this time.

They could tighten up the 'stealth' mechanics a bunch, making them more realistic, with the simple explanation that THIS Thief has to rely on skill, not an instinctive magical shroud.

Malor wrote:

...not an instinctive magical shroud.

Hey, that's a visibility gem! And it's super helpful!

I'm excited for Thief 4, but I'm really not expecting a "real" Thief game. I have a lot of expectation about what that title means, and the chances of the guys who made Human Revolution living up to a lot of those is very, very slim. I don't see the sprawling levels, measured pacing, or lazer-pointed focus on stealth making the transition to the modern era in a big-budget game.

That said, I *am* looking forward to seeing a full-on (I hope) stealth game from them set in the Thief universe, because I think Human Revolution was pretty awesome.

Malor wrote:

Yeah, I think it's time for a new Thief. We're done with Garrett. He was a great character, but his arc is complete. Let's play someone different this time.

Agreed. I love Garrett, but he's had his time.

Bottle wrote:

That said, I *am* looking forward to seeing a full-on (I hope) stealth game from them set in the Thief universe, because I think Human Revolution was pretty awesome.

This is my stance, and a pretty good attitude to have I think. I'll expect this much, and anything more will be a bonus. I'm actually hoping for a return to the weirdness that was in the Dark Project, the lobster men and zombies might've annoyed some people, but they were one of the things that made the game's atmosphere so unique in my opinion.

Gravey wrote:

It's mechanical! Mechanical!

Semantics! You say potato, I say tomato!

My objection to the bow is that it's a technology that doesn't quite fit with the original setting; from the brief glimpse it looks either too modern or too fantasy-contraption-frilly.

Bottle wrote:

That said, I *am* looking forward to seeing a full-on (I hope) stealth game from them set in the Thief universe, because I think Human Revolution was pretty awesome.

Well, except for the ending. :/
A DX:HR style game in the Thief world would certainly be interesting. It wouldn't be Thief, but it might be its own unique thing. I'd be very sad, because there is nothing quite like Thief, and no one since Looking Glass has managed to have that emphasis on stealth while keeping enough sim to make the world believable and give the player agency.

Choices in Thief are very different from choices in Deus Ex. Particularly, HR had most of the choices embedded in dialog trees, rather than in the navigation of the space. This is in keeping with the original (though the most powerful moments in both are when your choices are expressed as actions, not words).

Thief is different. To take one example from Thief 2, the second level, Shipping...and Receiving, is very open level that can be explored in many possible orders as the player slowly gains mastery over the hostile space (a central theme of Thief). The worst levels in Thief 2 are the ones with linear puzzle sections intended to move the plot along. The best levels give the player many different ways to encounter the same space. A bare description of Life of the Party sounds linear if you recount the chokepoints, but the bulk of the experience is in the expansive interwoven between places.

Likewise, unlike Deus Ex, Thief is about stealth, and only about stealth. Thief: The Dark Project changes things up with different kinds of stealth, but all the levels revolve around sneaking. The architecture becomes full of meaningful possibilities, every corner a potential hiding place or danger zone. And every door represented a choice. Thief is one of the few games where the virtual space has invaded my dreams. I can vividly remember certain rooms right now.

A plot-heavy linear experience set in the City could be amazing, but it wouldn't fill the void left by that trapezoidal box.

Bottle wrote:
Malor wrote:

Yeah, I think it's time for a new Thief. We're done with Garrett. He was a great character, but his arc is complete. Let's play someone different this time.

Agreed. I love Garrett, but he's had his time.

Like I said, out of the three defining elements of Thief (character, setting, gameplay) for me the character is least important to the project; you need a character, preferably with a distinctly-written voice, but that character does not need to be Garrett.

I liked the female thief in T2X... that would be a fine path to take.

But I think you illustrated for me one way that Thief 3 actually wasn't as good as the earlier offerings. I hadn't truly internalized that such a central part of the gameplay was that idea of encountering a very hostile space, and gradually making it safe. T3 didn't have as much of that, because the levels were so small. Mostly, you were transiting spaces, instead of neutralizing them. The story was much more interesting, so I didn't really notice, but there is just nothing in that game anything like Shipping And Receiving.

T3 tends to be linear, moving through small spaces in a predefined order. There's not much roaming and trying different angles and approaches... usually, you have only a couple of options, instead of, frequently, a dozen or more in the prior games.

Malor wrote:

I liked the female thief in T2X... that would be a fine path to take.

I was about to mention that FM pack but you got there first.

Malor wrote:

But I think you illustrated for me one way that Thief 3 actually wasn't as good as the earlier offerings. I hadn't truly internalized that such a central part of the gameplay was that idea of encountering a very hostile space, and gradually making it safe. T3 didn't have as much of that, because the levels were so small. Mostly, you were transiting spaces, instead of neutralizing them. The story was much more interesting, so I didn't really notice, but there is just nothing in that game anything like Shipping And Receiving.

Linking it once again http://www.blog.radiator.debacle.us/...

It strikes me that really, the systems that make up the core of thief really aren't that complex (I'd argue that good game systems aren't complex), but very few games have copied them, or can't be bothered to copy them.

I've read Part 4 before, but I'd never gone back to read Parts 1 through 3. Good read. Part 3 covers what I was talking about... some guy actually did a PhD dissertation(!) on how players gradually 'solve' dangerous levels in stealth games, rendering them safe.

I just hadn't really consciously thought about it before. I've had a mental image of picking at a big knot.... a tug here, a pull there, the idea being to untie the knot as elegantly as possible. But seeing it described differently up above twigged me to the fact that the knots in T1 and T2 were a lot more complex than they were in T3.

I just liked the story so much better that I didn't notice until now.

Honestly though, if I don't have to do another level like Sabotage at soulforge again, I'll be happy.

I think in some respects Thief1/2 presents some good counter examples to the trend of 'better graphics means we can't make big levels' and why that is bad. I think because their graphics palette was limited, they created levels that were too big from a gameplay perspective. One one hand it was awesome to have sprawling levels and sometimes grand complex puzzles to solve, but a good developer needs to know what fat to trim as well.

Scratched wrote:

It strikes me that really, the systems that make up the core of thief really aren't that complex (I'd argue that good game systems aren't complex), but very few games have copied them, or can't be bothered to copy them.

The systems may not appear complex from the player's POV, but I remember reading about some of the technology for audio propagation and AI response in the original Dark Engine, and thinking it actually was pretty complex under the hood, at least for the late 90's.

The guards supposedly don't "cheat" to zero in on your position, they use only the senses available to them based on the sounds you are making and the shouts of alarm they are able to hear from other guards in proximity. Different levels of sound are generated by different floor surfaces, the sounds travel through doors, windows, and hallways in different ways, and guards are programmed to respond to the clash of swords more urgently than a less threatening sound like an object dropping to the floor.

Not to mention the lighting/shadow system which adds another layer of complexity...

Scratched wrote:

Honestly though, if I don't have to do another level like Sabotage at soulforge again, I'll be happy.

I think in some respects Thief1/2 presents some good counter examples to the trend of 'better graphics means we can't make big levels' and why that is bad. I think because their graphics palette was limited, they created levels that were too big from a gameplay perspective. One one hand it was awesome to have sprawling levels and sometimes grand complex puzzles to solve, but a good developer needs to know what fat to trim as well.

Interesting. I'd have to agree; Soulforge is particularly bad since the setting means that most of the mundane mansion furniture that gives scale the other levels is missing. There's a concept I've been grappling with; call it 'interaction density', the ratio of meaningful interactions within the space. Large, sparse levels have low density, and since interaction in Thief is not improved by large, empty rooms, the level suffers.

Soulforge also has a pacing problem, since it's the climax. In The Dark Project, the final level was quite short and to the point; in The Metal Age things are drawn out. It doesn't help that the robots are sterile enemies; unlike with the human opposition they can't do much to relieve the length of the level.

One game I'd like to see made is a Deus Ex style game with graphics from roughly that era (or equivalent in production effort). Something that focuses on the interaction depth. Thief, on the other hand, is focused on stealth, and is all about paring away the nonessentials. I'm not sure open world roaming is the right direction to go for Thief, and those articles confirm my feeling on it. In contrast to more recent games, though, the immersive sim elements are very much a part of the essentials.

chaosmos wrote:

The systems may not appear complex from the player's POV, but I remember reading about some of the technology for audio propagation and AI response in the original Dark Engine, and thinking it actually was pretty complex under the hood, at least for the late 90's.

There's certainly a decent amount of complexity in there, but it's fairly easy to account for it all, and I'd like to think given today's tech it would be reasonable for most competent developers to at least equal what Thief did.

chaosmos wrote:

The guards supposedly don't "cheat" to zero in on your position, they use only the senses available to them based on the sounds you are making and the shouts of alarm they are able to hear from other guards in proximity. Different levels of sound are generated by different floor surfaces, the sounds travel through doors, windows, and hallways in different ways, and guards are programmed to respond to the clash of swords more urgently than a less threatening sound like an object dropping to the floor.

Not to mention the lighting/shadow system which adds another layer of complexity...

I used to think they didn't cheat, but after reading that when they're hunting for you they very slowly gravitate towards you, and then playing some with that knowledge I think that particular cheat is true. It's very very subtle, and probably for the better in gameplay. Things like that are why I hate gameplay spoilers more than plot spoilers because it shatters a more important illusion.

Grenn wrote:

I'd have thought that the new thief would be the girl he took into training after the end of Thief 3.

Given what Square Enix has done with Lara Croft and Hitman, I don't want them anywhere near another female protagonist right now.

Scratched wrote:
chaosmos wrote:

The systems may not appear complex from the player's POV, but I remember reading about some of the technology for audio propagation and AI response in the original Dark Engine, and thinking it actually was pretty complex under the hood, at least for the late 90's.

There's certainly a decent amount of complexity in there, but it's fairly easy to account for it all, and I'd like to think given today's tech it would be reasonable for most competent developers to at least equal what Thief did.

What Looking Glass did was to create the systems that no one had before. Now that they've been created, they can probably be used and improved upon without needing that level of innovation. Which is not a slight against contemporary devs, just an opportunity to take this core and either polish it or build innovation in from elsewhere. Thief is part of a genre, now, with understood strengths.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Grenn wrote:

I'd have thought that the new thief would be the girl he took into training after the end of Thief 3.

Given what Square Enix has done with Lara Croft and Hitman, I don't want them anywhere near another female protagonist right now.

You unfortunately have a point. On the other hand, having a male protagonist is no guarantee of what would happen with any secondary female characters...

Sexy nun assassins aren't protagonists!

Bottle wrote:
Gremlin wrote:
That said, I *am* looking forward to seeing a full-on (I hope) stealth game from them set in the Thief universe, because I think Human Revolution was pretty awesome.

Well, except for the ending. :/

I actually had tons of problems with Human Revolution, but taken as a whole package I loved it.

Gremlin wrote:

A plot-heavy linear experience set in the City could be amazing, but it wouldn't fill the void left by that trapezoidal box.

Hell no it wouldn't, but we do have umpteen fan missions and the Dark Mod for that. And there's also Dishonored for my immersive sim fix. But even if Eidos' take on the Thief series is relatively analogous to what they did with Deus Ex (i.e., they boil down the individual gameplay elements into separate pieces rather than creating a broad simulation), I'll still play the crap out of it.

edit: sorry, my BB quotes 'sploded

There's a BB quote tag that isn't opened.

I guess my bigger problem is that we don't have much in the way of immersive sims these days. The 3rd Radiator blog post goes so far as to argue that we should let go of the idea, that everyone has moved on. And I guess I'm just not willing to move on; I think that there's something valuable in the immersive sims that can't be replaced with Call of Duty scripted theme park rides.

Thief rewires the relationship that humans have with light and shadow, which is such a primal aspect of humanity that it creates a sense of empowerment that is very real. I'd argue that the empowerment in Thief is authentic, it's not a simulation of the emotion, its using the virtual to enable to human to overcome the real human fear of the dark.

I love the setting of Thief; I'll probably gladly play a non-sim game set there (if it's at DX:HR levels of polish). But it will be unlikely to invade my dreams, and it won't make me reevaluate architecture, class structures, or the human reaction to the night. Rollercoasters are seldom life-changing experiences.

Gremlin wrote:

Choices in Thief are very different from choices in Deus Ex. Particularly, HR had most of the choices embedded in dialog trees, rather than in the navigation of the space. This is in keeping with the original (though the most powerful moments in both are when your choices are expressed as actions, not words).

Thief is different. To take one example from Thief 2, the second level, Shipping...and Receiving, is very open level that can be explored in many possible orders as the player slowly gains mastery over the hostile space (a central theme of Thief). The worst levels in Thief 2 are the ones with linear puzzle sections intended to move the plot along. The best levels give the player many different ways to encounter the same space. A bare description of Life of the Party sounds linear if you recount the chokepoints, but the bulk of the experience is in the expansive interwoven between places.

Likewise, unlike Deus Ex, Thief is about stealth, and only about stealth. Thief: The Dark Project changes things up with different kinds of stealth, but all the levels revolve around sneaking. The architecture becomes full of meaningful possibilities, every corner a potential hiding place or danger zone. And every door represented a choice. Thief is one of the few games where the virtual space has invaded my dreams. I can vividly remember certain rooms right now.

Absolutely. I liked the gameplay in DX:HR, but since it isn't a dedicated sneaking game they have to make other win options available to players, and that dilutes the sneaking experience. Also, as you said, the mission progression in DX:HR is very linear, while the better Thief maps allowed for a bunch of different ways to traverse the map (but for maybe a few guarded choke points to add tension). In Thief 1 specifically I remember getting completely lost in that crazy mixed-up house where you're trying to retrieve a sword (I believe) from a tower.

I really liked that in Thief 3 they added a town map to interconnect all the mission areas, but the missions themselves were weaker. And as atmospheric as The Cradle was, the inmates with unerring perception and cages on their heads were very out of place for a Thief game. It was ridiculous that the only way to practically traverse that map was with a full quiver of fire arrows.

Thief was probably my favorite game series while in college. I have a lot of good memories with that one. Thief 3 came out at a bit of a busy time in college, so I never actually beat it. But just the thought of a new Thief game gets me excited, regardless of the game focus. I do hope they don't do the hub system as in 3, that bothered me to no end for some reason. It didn't feel natural. The mission system seemed more organic just because I could fill in the gaps in my own imagination. With an explicit city where you move from place to place for missions the limitations of the software became too apparent. My mind can do a lot to fill in the gaps that software and hardware can't jump, but that requires leaving space for the imagination.

Gremlin wrote:

Well, except for the ending. :/

I actually had tons of problems with Human Revolution, but taken as a whole package I loved it.

Gremlin wrote:

A plot-heavy linear experience set in the City could be amazing, but it wouldn't fill the void left by that trapezoidal box.

Hell no it wouldn't, but we do have umpteen fan missions and the Dark Mod for that. And there's also Dishonored for my immersive sim fix. But even if Eidos' take on the Thief series is relatively analogous to what they did with Deus Ex (i.e., they boil down the individual gameplay elements into separate pieces rather than creating a broad simulation), I'll still play the crap out of it.

edit: sorry, my BB quotes 'sploded

Gremlin wrote:

Thief rewires the relationship that humans have with light and shadow, which is such a primal aspect of humanity that it creates a sense of empowerment that is very real. I'd argue that the empowerment in Thief is authentic, it's not a simulation of the emotion, its using the virtual to enable to human to overcome the real human fear of the dark.

I think the reason Thief works so well is that it uses aspects of the world everyone will be familiar with. We can empathise with the guards that something not well lit will be hard to see, and quiet makes you hard to detect, and also the things in the world that will affect that like turning out a light, being in front or behind someone, or floor surfaces.

Compare that to other games. (probably not very good examples, but what the hell) I've never driven a car like a lunatic, I know that pressing a button in a game uses the handbrake, but I don't know how that controls to do a turn. I've never fired a gun, how to hold a gun and aim or how to deal with recoil. All things that presumably are second nature to anyone who's played those kind of games, but moving the mouse down slightly or pressing a button are different in a tactile way.

Scratched wrote:

I think the reason Thief works so well is that it uses aspects of the world everyone will be familiar with. We can empathise with the guards that something not well lit will be hard to see, and quiet makes you hard to detect, and also the things in the world that will affect that like turning out a light, being in front or behind someone, or floor surfaces.

Indeed. I also love that the game went to great lengths to sell the player on the fact that the guards were idiots in order to make your ability to constantly sneak past and outwit them make sense. They really thought through their design decisions and made sure that everything was as intuitive, plausible, and consistent as possible with the technology they had available.

Thief is a freaking triumph of smart game design.

Gremlin wrote:

Thief rewires the relationship that humans have with light and shadow, which is such a primal aspect of humanity that it creates a sense of empowerment that is very real. I'd argue that the empowerment in Thief is authentic, it's not a simulation of the emotion, its using the virtual to enable to human to overcome the real human fear of the dark.

Well put, taffer!

Bottle wrote:

Indeed. I also love that the game went to great lengths to sell the player on the fact that the guards were idiots in order to make your ability to constantly sneak past and outwit them make sense. They really thought through their design decisions and made sure that everything was as intuitive, plausible, and consistent as possible with the technology they had available.

Thief is a freaking triumph of smart game design.

I work better when I'm drunk. It makes me fearless! If I see a bad guy, I'll just point my sword at him, and say... 'HEY! BAD GUY! YER NOT S'POSED TA BE HERE! GO HOME, OR I'LL STICK YOU WID MY SWORD UNTIL YOU YELL, "OUCH! I'M DEAD!"' Hehe... ain't no one gonna mess with old Benny.

maverickz wrote:

Thief was probably my favorite game series while in college. I have a lot of good memories with that one. Thief 3 came out at a bit of a busy time in college, so I never actually beat it. But just the thought of a new Thief game gets me excited, regardless of the game focus. I do hope they don't do the hub system as in 3, that bothered me to no end for some reason. It didn't feel natural. The mission system seemed more organic just because I could fill in the gaps in my own imagination. With an explicit city where you move from place to place for missions the limitations of the software became too apparent. My mind can do a lot to fill in the gaps that software and hardware can't jump, but that requires leaving space for the imagination.

What I didn't like about the hub mechanic was that it mostly left out some of the implied parts of the Thief 1 & 2 games like buying information about a location and/or casing the joint prior to entry. I did like the open world aspect though, as I had no end of fun traversing town through people's homes.

Bottle wrote:
Scratched wrote:

I think the reason Thief works so well is that it uses aspects of the world everyone will be familiar with. We can empathise with the guards that something not well lit will be hard to see, and quiet makes you hard to detect, and also the things in the world that will affect that like turning out a light, being in front or behind someone, or floor surfaces.

Indeed. I also love that the game went to great lengths to sell the player on the fact that the guards were idiots in order to make your ability to constantly sneak past and outwit them make sense. They really thought through their design decisions and made sure that everything was as intuitive, plausible, and consistent as possible with the technology they had available.

Thief is a freaking triumph of smart game design.

The guards by themselves were fairly dumb, but that gave them great opportunities to build up the challenge through the levels. It's a similar thing to the gravitation towards you when they're seeking you out, it forces you to make a move out of your comfort zone, say to eliminate and hide a guard before another patrol comes around, which is great from a player experience perspective.

Gave this a shot just to see if it would run properly. The game squeezed down my game resolution to half, but I still played through half of the first level regardless. I've finished thief 2 twice now and even got halfway through the community addon campaign. That was a blast, never got to revisit Thief 1 the same way, particularly the gold version.

I looked up resolution fixes and learned about DDfix. I was all set to install it when I discovered that the Steam version of Thief Gold already has it packed in. Sweet! Two edited text files later and it runs at native res.

I liked the game up until the dead people, after I didn't find it fun anymore. I can't cut off their head. Can't take off a arm or leg. Can't kill them in anyway. What's the fun of sneaking up on dead people you can't kill.

TGfix also improves the graphics with some T2 stuff. And there's Tafferpatcher for T2 itself. I think these predate the steam release, so steam might throw a hissyfit and try to fix things, you might want to disable file updating.

Baron Of Hell wrote:

I liked the game up until the dead people, after I didn't find it fun anymore. I can't cut off their head. Can't take off a arm or leg. Can't kill them in anyway. What's the fun of sneaking up on dead people you can't kill.

1) water arrows blessed in a font or with bottles of holy water
2) flashbombs (also works on the ghosts)
3) Fire arrows
4) Hammer haunts can be killed with [SPOILER's] sword if memory serves.

also they have EXTREMELY short memory spans, so you can run past most of them and they quickly forget about you and go back to their "patrols".

Baron Of Hell wrote:

I liked the game up until the dead people, after I didn't find it fun anymore. I can't cut off their head. Can't take off a arm or leg. Can't kill them in anyway. What's the fun of sneaking up on dead people you can't kill.

You quit at Down in the Bonehoard? That level had such great design. I remember breathing a big sigh of relief after finally getting my larcenous hands on the Horn of Quintus. And then the long trip back out.

Come on, don't quit there, you'll miss alot of good stuff

Spoiler:

At the very least, use the level-skip cheat if you must