Thief 4

Ok, fine it was a generalization but here's what I really meant.

I'm a avid fan of RPS for years, and I'm well aware of the hardcore gamers and fans in there and other communities, (I'm one of them for fuck sakes!) they're just like we are, they enjoy playing and DO buy good games like thief, SS2, deus ex, starcraft and other master pieces.

What I'm trying to say is, as much as these guys do represent a slice of the cake, they're still a minority compared to the "average" gamer and consumer, and it's impossible for publishers and AAA studios alike to ignore that fact and not to try and target their product to them as well. This is where this compromise comes in, trying to appeal to two completely different audiences.

I'm extremely proud that the company I work for didn't sell out on that and that we still target at the die-hard fans, committed to make high quality products, and games that we ourselves would buy, and still manage to do well! So, yes, it's possible to do it if you respect and know your audience, I'm just saying the majority of the publishers don't do this, Square Enix is not doing this they are trying to aim at both hardcore and casual gamers alike, just like they did with DX:HR. Whether that's a good decision or not, it's highly debatable, I agree but they're doing it because of $$$$ it all boils down to that in the end for many publishers unfortunately.

You either go broad or go focused, trying to find a middle ground is insanely challenging. I believe DX:HR sorta did it, it was a fantastic game and both your average joe and avid fans alike did enjoy it. But that's very rare, guess we'll see about Thief 4.

Well what i wonder is if the "casual player" actualy existed before todays generation or wheter it's a monster that the game industry has created themselfes.

On reflection as i said i think this whole casual craze really took off with COD 2. The first one was already pretty succesful on PC. Then COD 2 came out with the 360. The game was suddenly on console and sold a lot. With it also the Hollywoodification and dumbing down of the franchise began. I think publishers just looked at this success and from then on everybody had this idea in their heads that out there live millions of "casual players" who love "streamlined" and over the top games and nothing else.

But this to me seems sorta like a broken window fallacy. Games were popular before that and ppl played fucking hard games on consoles. It's plausible that games would sell just as well today if developers had stuck with more challenging and sophisticated games. And to me it seems also plausible that the dumbed down games created the players who can't cope with challenging and sophisticated games anymore in the first place.

I recall the recent Splinter Cell said it would support both stealth and a shooter approach because blah blah modern audiences. How did that turn out?

I don't think fans of thief are really going to be a market force, frankly. This is probably about trying to open up the IP some, and as we all know that can get messy. I think the game looks quite polished from the trailers, the only problem is that it's a bit obvious and generic in its approach. Polish is nice though, it goes a long way.

Quote from Taylor

I recall the recent Splinter Cell said it would support both stealth and a shooter approach because blah blah modern audiences. How did that turn out?

Yea i don't think it really works well to try and make a game for different playstyles. The core gameplay will always suffer from the compromises.

I had this same experience when i played Dishonored. As a player when you have strong offensive capabilities at your disposal just like that you are always tempted to use them. It's like using a cheat or performance enhancing drugs to get results quicker. You have success quickly but ultimately leaves you feel empty with no sense of having achieved anything.

In Dishonored i played through half the game with the weapons that were at my disposal before i realised that i don't actualy like to play it like that. Then i started fresh with the goal to play completely stealthy. But it didn't work for me because: i'm a casual gamer. I rarely replay games these days because i have better things to do with my time. Playing through the same sections again felt like a waste of time just for the sake of the goal that i set myself. And it also felt silly because ther's no sense of achievment when i do it just for myself anyway. So i would have had a better experience with the game if it was a proper stealth game from the start. to finish.

I haven't played much of DX:HR to be honest because i have the same problem with this game that i had with Dishonored. It's just too easy and tempting to just gun down all the enemies. And that to me takes the fun out of what makes a good stealth game. You should be really afraid of getting caught by the NPC's. The old Deus Ex solved this much better. It still gave you the option to play it as fps but if you chose that path you started with really crappy weapons and skills. Remember how much the scope of the sniper rifle was shaking in the beginning of the game. So the game presented itself as a proper stealth game that invited players to actualy give the stealth gameplay a chance and learn to like it as a way that's equaly as effective and actualy more fun.

In these new games playing stealthy feels like chopping ones leg off to be able to compete in the special olympics.

http://community.eidosmontreal.com/blogs/Take-5-QA-4

Quote

Daniel: I am happy to announce we no longer have an XP system in Thief.

Nic: Yeah, it is not there anymore.

Why was it removed?

Nic: At first, we wanted to outline the progression of the player with XP, but it was reducing our motivation to steal. The main goal of a thief should be to gain loot. Garrett is already the Master Thief, so we saw no need to have XP as a core mechanic.

Yaaay. Maybe now we can actually call it a Thief game!

Narrative Focus

Story Driven

No gameplay

Shouldn't RPS be eating this up? Wait it's by a big publisher. Guess it's more like Thief 4 out of 10 then.

Man, all of the fuzz with this game can't be good PR.

I'm not too upset personally, since I never played the old Thief games. And I have a massive boner for Dishonored instead.

Quote from Puddy

Man, all of the fuzz with this game can't be good PR.

I'm not too upset personally, since I never played the old Thief games. And I have a massive boner for Dishonored instead.

Imagine working on the game and reading all these bad negative comments ...

Maybe the biggest problem here was calling the game Thief, because it really doesn't look bad at all but all the baggage that comes with such a well-loved IP is causing a lot of stir. That's the problem with trying to reboot or revive old franchises — sometimes more trouble than it's worth. I would be interested to know how many people saying so much negative stuff about it have had any hands-on experience with it though, because unless I'm missing something not very much of the game has even been shown?

I dunno, I'm kind of tired of hearing the complaints at this point and just want to see what the end result is like. Who knows, maybe it'll be an amazing game despite upsetting the old fans (in the same way DX:HR upset some Deus Ex fans but was legitimately incredible). At this point it seems like people are getting crazily excited by just words and tiny gameplay clips. It's the typical 'angry old fan bandwagon' type situation where people are just excessively hating for the sake of it IMO.

Quote from Steppenwolf

I haven't played much of DX:HR to be honest because i have the same problem with this game that i had with Dishonored. It's just too easy and tempting to just gun down all the enemies. And that to me takes the fun out of what makes a good stealth game. You should be really afraid of getting caught by the NPC's. The old Deus Ex solved this much better. It still gave you the option to play it as fps but if you chose that path you started with really crappy weapons and skills. Remember how much the scope of the sniper rifle was shaking in the beginning of the game. So the game presented itself as a proper stealth game that invited players to actualy give the stealth gameplay a chance and learn to like it as a way that's equaly as effective and actualy more fun.

In these new games playing stealthy feels like chopping ones leg off to be able to compete in the special olympics.

If you feel like you want to gun down all enemies, then why don't you? I mean if you're not enjoying the stealth aspects of the game then there's no shame in that.

I don't think it's a question of "getting lucky" to cater for different playstyles, rather I think it's just a question of how the levels are designed. Most people would probably make paths that differ, while having different connection points between them so that players could always switch between the paths whenever they feel like it, and it's not a bad approach. A full sandbox experience on the other hand will give players the ultimate freedom to follow their own whim. Granted, a full sandbox approach is more difficult to engineer into existence, but if done well it can definitely elevate the game to a new level. More than anything however, the level design has to support the game design and the mechanics - if there's a mismatch there, then the game will suffer. There's nothing worse than using rocket launchers in tight spaces where the explosions kill you off too.

I urge you to check this paper out made specifically on this kind of design, because it is super insightful on how to make the whole thing come together: http://www.dcdr.dk/dk/materiale/d…dro-canossa.pdf

Quote from Nysuatro

Imagine working on the game and reading all these bad negative comments ...

It will happen with every single game you'll work on, don't sweat it.

Quote from Nysuatro

Imagine working on the game and reading all these bad negative comments ...

Man i worked on rome2 ... go read the comments, it can't be any worse if that helps. People are expecting a LOOOT of things from legendary licenses. Even if the game is better than the previous one, they will be disapointed. Actually i think they just make up expectations

Quote from Sentura

If you feel like you want to gun down all enemies, then why don't you? I mean if you're not enjoying the stealth aspects of the game then there's no shame in that.

I think you misunderstood. My critique is that the option to just gun down all enemies takes the fun out of the stealth gameplay.

Not because gunning down is more fun. To the contrary. It's just that playing stealthy is much more fun when getting caught actualy has consequences. In the old Thief games my adrenaline was pumping and i was on the edge. I remember freaking out when i heard a noise only then to realize it was some guy sleeping in his bed. Such feelings can't be created in a game where getting caught simply means "ok no biggie i will just gun down these NPC's then and move on".

Does that not change with difficulty Steppenwolf? I've never played DX:HR on hard because I have lots of discipline when playing stealth games and never resort to shooting everyone up. With Metal Gear Solid it's quite possible to go into 'gun everyone down' mode on normal difficulties, but if you go up to the hard or extreme difficulties you'd better get your ass hidden if enemies spot you (also they can see and hear much more realistically to the point of it being hilariously hard).

Stealth games are the one genre where difficulty levels truly transform the game. I've played a number of them now where using the higher difficulties doesn't add more hit points to enemies, but instead makes their AI much better and gives you less room to be lazy. I think anyone truly dedicated to their stealth should be hitting this shit on the hardest difficulty.