Posts by Sentura

I think Taylor hit the nail on the head. By now the term is so hyperbolic and contrived it really shouldn't be used at all. I think an easier distinction would just be AAA games and non-AAA games, or why not even go ahead and use the full spectrum of movie labeling instead of only the top tier? AA games? A games? B games?

Nah, indies would probably bitch and whine over all be labeled B games.

It seems the general consensus here is that indie games are better because they have more freedom, even if they are missing the necessary funding. I don't think I can argue with that, although it does lower the barrier to entry. Which perhaps isn't a bad thing, but it just means people without experience get put in positions where they don't have the skill to pull things off properly. However my biggest gripe with is people taking the label of indie and using it in ways to justify shitty quality of games (be it art or design). Being that I have seen the inside of at least one indie community, I can honestly say it's way too prevalent.

Another thing that is prevalent in the indie community is the focus on idea and execution of idea in a game design context. There's almost no focus on games as a whole, on how e.g. environments and graphics may have influence on games. Nobody dares do 3D indie because they know it will be shit. For people who supposedly are to take people out of their comfort zone, they do little to go out of their own. I don't dig on that at all.

Quote from AlexM

I think you may have touched down on my favorite aspect of MOBA's with that tip. A lot of the lessons taught are directly applicable to the game.

It's definitely also one my favorite points of MOBA. That and the ability to make a big play, being alone and taking out 3-5 heroes.

Goddamn I love how he made the center bridge so sharp and colorful compared to the rest. I gotta work on my technique

And oh yeah, about the discussion: I don't really have an opinion for what's going to happen with the industry... and it's getting increasingly harder for me to care. As long as I can do what I love the industry as a whole can do whatever the hell it pleases.

I wonder how it would look if people with decades of industry experience would come together and make an indie game with a large budget. No holds barred.

Would it be... the PERFECT game?

At this point, who knows? It's not like the fourth version of a game is a common occurrence. Street Fighter 4 turned out to be the best 2D fighter for years to come, but then maybe even that is not really comparable. Keep in mind I'm not hyping Thief 4 at all, I just want to give it a fair chance. Stealth games are pretty rare, so I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth just yet.

My point was that I was absolving a large part of the blame from designers - or rather pointing their faults out as necessary. It is the venerable price of progress.

And yes, maturing the industry will fix this. Hollywood is known for its blockbusters, but there are also more sublime films coming from there. Film theory is widely used and respected. However, it seems like your ideal position would involve the removal of a capitalist economy - which is likely to never happen unless there's a total world collapse. In the golden ratio mentioned, I assume that the capitalist society will continue. It doesn't mean we'll get rid of the Call of Duties, in the same way that we won't get rid of blockbusters. But we'll get more nuance and more depth, perhaps so much so that even Call of Duty 46 will pick up a thing or two. Evolution is slow, but that doesn't mean it's not there.

I think there's many things that could be classified as the designer's fault - the game mechanics might not be well thought out in relation to what the premise of the game is, or the levels might not adequately make use of the mechanics to the point where the "fun" gets sapped out of the game. I think we're forgetting that the industry is young, and as such there are very few ground rules to follow. Designers do hits and misses constantly, which leads some games to succeed while others tank - even if those games may be similar in many respects.

The "golden ratio" will only be achieved when the industry matures so much that it begins to accept proper and established research, coupled with uncovering the tacit knowledge behind proper team collaboration and design. Until then we'll continue the same trend with designers not being secure enough in their knowledge to understand whether or not some effect will work or not. But at least we're slowly moving towards an equilibrium, as more designers enter circulation with different backgrounds and understandings of how to use mechanics, gameplay, levels, art, experience and whatever other factor and abilities they have to their advantage. The day will come... eventually.

I was referring to your opinion about the new Thief 4.

Also, I consider myself a "true" fan of the series, yet I'm looking forward to this new game. Maybe it's not so much the game that needs to change, but the "true" fans that need to understand why things change.

If you want to hate for no other reason than to hate (which is the case at least with the voice of Garrett in the new thief), then by all means go ahead. Just don't mask it as legitimate criticism of the game.

Like Kokos said, it's new times for new players. Games change because people change as well. Even IF the case was that the new game was like the old games, it would never evoke the same nostalgia as the old games - and rightly so.

As for the clocktower: Yes it was narrow and to some extent linear, but this was not the case throughout the entire level at all. To me that level always stood out because the way it showed how narrow space can be used well in a stealth game - something not seen very often.

I definitely thought the game an improvement on some of the levels from thief 1/2, especially the lost city (even though the concept is dear to me). Even if the loading times were long (I don't recall them being), and the levels small, I still think it has some great merits. The clocktower level and the cradle were amazingly cool, and easily up there among the best thief levels of all time (along with life of the party, assault on soulforge, the cathedral levels, casing the joint and the sword/escape).

The rope arrows were removed in favor for the climbing gloves - probably because rope arrows were deemed to powerful or disruptive for the third game. It's not really that much of a change - admittedly it could have been utilized more than it did - but even so I didn't miss rope arrows even once during any of my runs through thief 3.

Also, if you thought the economy was bad, then why make use of the excessive items? One thing is trash something because it wasn't balanced properly, but if it's balanced in your favor it doesn't mean you have to use it. Personally, I didn't really think of the economy of the game as any different than the first two, I had basically the same amount of items available.

My only gripe so far with Thief 4 had been the voice of Garrett, but admittedly in the latest trailer he sounds pretty convincingly like the old Garrett. I don't really give a fuck if they make it possible for people to fight and and win that way, as long as the stealth remains intact.

I don't get it, I loved all 3 thief games... what was wrong with the third?

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

breakfast of champions

I actually thought it was a bit too much with the FOV, which is why I mentioned it. It kind of removes something from the experience when your eyes are basically the same as a chameleon's.

I've been consistently eating between 1000-2500 kcals a day and been getting pretty good gains regardless. I guess some can be attributed to different bodies, but man I can't picture myself ever doing 4000 a day. Just get proteins instead, jesus.

wow the FOV in that trailer is hella weird

I mean honestly the visuals don't really matter to me, what I saw of gameplay looked pretty amazing to me. But still like the small mist cloud when you steal from someone is pretty cool.

No blorange? Check at 0:14 in the trailer. The whitening effect that makes it look insignificantly less blorange is bloom.

In general I would let surrounding be darker and less saturated while lights should be brighter and more saturated/vibrant. You want sharper contrasts in a world like this, because it makes the world seem dark. And if Thief is anything, it's dark.

I actually thought the art was the weakest part of the trailer (along with the walkthrough of the first mission basically). Blorange all over, it's just getting trite. They should have gone for an art direction that would push more of the darker colors, as thief is a pretty lightless world.