HOME | DD
DanVzare — Less is More in Thief 4
Published: 2014-03-19 16:07:07 +0000 UTC; Views: 1390; Favourites: 17; Downloads: 1
Redirect to original
Description
Check out the official website for the latest 20 Quid Amusements comic strip!First Previous Archives Next
Overall, I remember really hating the new design for Garrett. Either they changed him a little without me realizing it, or I've gotten used to it. Whichever the case, I think it's mostly just that stupid handkerchief thing that bugs me now, because without that, he looks exactly like the Garrett I know and love. Although that voice annoys me to no end. As a matter of fact, all of the voices sort of annoy me, as well as the way they speak. In the original Thief games, the guards used to say "Taffer" a lot, and all of the guards also had the same voices (about three or five different male voices in total if I recall correctly). While I can understand adding more diversity to the voices, I still haven't heard any of those good old voices that I miss so much, nor have I seen that drunk guard that was present in all of the other games. Also, the original voice of Garrett was just so suave, but the new one is just so... plain, and boring. Also, maybe it's just me, but in the original Thief games, everyone sounded British, while now, everyone sounds American, which sort of spoils the mood as well.
Thankfully the game isn't as bad as it could have been. Apparently they were going to put in Quick Time Events, and a Leveling System. While those aren't terrible features, they are horrible for a Thief game.
Now you may be wondering why not being able to jump on the spot is a bad thing, especially since you can still climb on everything (actually, you can probably climb on more things now than before). The reason is simple. First, there are a select few places you can't jump across because of the new system, but that's minor. The main reason, is because me and everyone else I know, jump on the spot to get a guard's attention. Now you have to use bottles to achieve the same thing. Well, either that or run past them, which comes with it's own set of problems. But I mostly just mentioned this in my comic, because it's such a simple feature that was in the older games, but not in this newest one.
Something that has been really bugging me about the game though, is how the screen flashes every time you walk into the light. Yeah, I know I'm in the light, I can see the indicator to the side, you can stop reminding me now! Seriously, if you're just wandering about a little bit, going in and out of light, that flash is enough to give you an epileptic shock or something. Couldn't they have put it on a delay or something? Maybe check to see how long you've been in the dark, and if you've been in the dark for 5 seconds or more and have just gone into the light, then flash! Because most of the time when it flashes, you're just wandering about without needing to be sneaky (such as when you've knocked everyone out).
Well, enough complaining. The game isn't too bad. Personally, I would be enjoying it more if they had kept the original voice of Garrett, but the developers were too tight to pay for both a voice actor and another guy to do the mo-cap stuff, and as such settled on an all-in-one person. I don't care about their so called excuses, I know the real reason was because they weren't willing to hire two people when one would do.
You know something else? The zombies in Thief 1 (none of the sequels) are still the scariest zombies I've ever seen on a video game, even to this day they scare the living daylights out of me. I'm not kidding. I play and watch lots of Zombie Games and Films, and love them all. Zombies don't even phase me now. But the zombies on Thief 1... man those things are still scary!
I wonder if I'll ever get past level 2 of that first game?
Related content
Comments: 164
I heard two harlots talking about a man who apparently had some problems with his vascular system. Maybe it was a bit too much for him :/...? I don't know, but I was really pissed off. I'm a taffer with work ethic, damn it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm, perhaps that's what killed him.
I suppose the only way to stop him from dying then, is to find him and knock him out before he kills himself. Which believe it or not, is the only way to save Cutty in Cragscleft Prison.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But they all wear masks (not that I care about their faces) and there is no information about him apart from the short conversation...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Why don't you just knock one out early on in the game and complete the level, and see if it was him, and then if it isn't, try again. I'm sure it's likely to be a scripted event that will kill him. So you'll just need to be in the right place at the right time. Then again, doing all of this will be a complete waste of time, unless you're wanting to be a complete perfectionist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, not in T4 
But finding an asylum not scary is a shame! I had been:
- talking to my dog when he was around,
- eating those yummy J. D. Gross chocolates (the dark ones, of course),
- answering a phone once or twice,
- taking screenshots,
- PEELING POTATOS!
...and still, I neither got scared nor seen. It sucks.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Tell me about it. Moira Asylum... not scary at all. And I don't think those were zombies. More like ghouls, or shadow creatures, or something like that. Definitely not zombies. And personally, I thought they were more annoying than anything else, what with their ability to run past you into those inaccessible locations. Of course, when they stopped doing that, they were just... what you said in a way.
Such a shame really, considering it's a Thief game.
Although, I have been told that there was a lot of nice readables in that asylum. I didn't read them though, mostly because I play a game to play, not to read. Well, that and because there's very few games which doesn't give so much text that it looks daunting. When will they learn, that you want to leave them wanting more (at least Kingdom Hearts got that part right, only real game where I've read all of the texts).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There were 42 texts. Only a bit more than 42 lines of writing, to be precise. They were "do this, get that" type. Nothing seriously interesting, moreover they were so... flat. Nothing creepy, nothing touching. Just plain boredom. Texts in the Cradle were alive and ominous, the ones from Moira are typical one-liners. Real shame, considering how much unnecessary effort they put into making descriptions for collectibles. Nothing that caught my eye and frankly, I was fed up with what they did. No real story behind any of the patients, just numbers. Bleh.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The old Thief games had such interesting texts. Stuff which you actually read, because it intrigued you! Of course I didn't read everything on the original Thief games (I was too busy being a Thief), but I never felt that reading them was a chore. Unlike this game. I think the way the text is displayed also played a part in that.
Hmm, 42 you say... well there you go. The text there is the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything. Sorry, I just can't help but make that reference whenever I hear the number 42... or read it of course.
Such a shame that they didn't try to add more info about the patients. So much potential!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That is right: a lot was not compulsory, but every draft created a feeling of being surrounded by a breathing world.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Agreed. The openness of the game also made the world seem more alive. I can't help but feel that Thief 4 was a lot more linear and compacted.
Also, recently I've thought of one thing I think Thief 4 might have done right. They actually allowed you to turn off all of the hand-holding crap that comes with modern games.
Such a shame that, that was the only thing they did right. But it's something which occurred to me yesterday.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, there are some good concepts, but they're lost in the majority of what we dislike, don't you think?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Agreed, anything decent in that game is overshadowed completely by the sheer amount of things that are done poorly.
Although it's nice to try and look at some of the good aspects. It's a meaningless endeavour. All I'm basically doing is looking at horrible picture and saying "Well at least the hands look good."
Such a shame in my opinion.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But Garrett always had... hmm... appealing hands...
Well, AI is great, but it's due to technological advancement. Back in the time of T1-T3, nobody could have achieved that level. The same with graphics. Even the less-linear movement (I mean swooping, slipping, getting exhausted after a longer run and my favourite "kick the guard's butt" combo 
T1-T3 had outstanding plot that made up for less realistic graphics or movement. T4 is shiny, but flat when it comes to what truly matters for me: plot and immersion caused by good storytelling.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah what was up with those hands. The way Garrett had his hands up on Thief 4 while he was crouching was ridiculous. On Thief 3, he had them by his side in a realistic manner, but on Thief 4, it's so stupid. Have you ever tried crouching down and putting your hands up like that, it looks so stupid.
The truth is, they could've quite easily screwed up the AI. A lot of games generally do (even modern one's in my opinion). So I suppose they do deserve credit for making a decent AI. Although I think graphically, the shadows (or is that lighting) isn't as good as it was on Thief 3.
Thief 3 had the best plot I think. One of it's most redeeming values. Thief 2 had a great plot and great gameplay. The plot on Thief 1 wasn't that that bad either (could've been better now that I think about it). I'm not sure where I stand with the plot on Thief 4, it seemed forgettable.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
He's mimicking zombies. I know adult men may have too long arms to keep them down when crouching, but G. should be agile enough to handle that. If you hold your hands upwards all the time, it gets very tiring. And may even lead to developing spine problems (that's why he keeps doing those finger tricks so often, he simply has some back problems and his body aches!). Tarzan knew how to walk like a gorilla, why would the Keepers not know such tricks?! 
As for AI, mine works like a charm in T4, but quite a lot of my comrades at Thief-Forum.pl complain about bugs and ridiculous behaviour of guards. I may be lucky. Mine is impressive, but too many people report real problems to praise the game entirely for that.
Plot in T1-3 was awe-inspiring. I adore each. In fact I could even say Thief is a video novel, its quality is like good literature. It can be considered ART.
T1 had to start somehow and considering how many motifs from high culture they put in, it is gorgeous. T2 had that cool tense relationship between Garrett and Viktoria (to collaborate or not to, that's the question) and Trouty, of course - I re-met him thanks to dear CSupernova - see her gallery, you will not regret it 
Silly thing, but I remember tears in my eyes with the final cutscene. I immediately went off to start writing. Now delete that comment please before I burn with shame
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Even those who can't fully put their arms by their sides when they're crouching, can still put their arms lower down than Garrett can. He really is mimicking zombies.
Also, I think the Garrett in Thief 4 is actually the reincarnation of Garrett or something. You do after all find Garrett's mechanical eye in the asylum, and there's only one mechanical eye in existence. And if it isn't in Thief 4 Garrett's head, and he doesn't see the eye as anything more than a trinket, then clearly he isn't the original Garrett. Yet his life is very much similar to the original Garrett. He even knows a guy called Basso, who was married (the original Garrett helped him get married at the start of Thief 2), and the two Basso's even do the same job. Meaning either EVERYONE has been reincarnated (which is possible considering all of the messed up things that happen), or something much stranger happened. (Or maybe Basso is just a lot older than he looks.)
It's all so confusing.
I haven't noticed anything odd about the AI. Those people are probably just being too harsh on it.
All AI in games has it's quirks. It's whether or not you notice it, that matters.
And if you're looking really hard, you'll notice it. You'll always notice it.
Yep, Thief 1 to 3, absolute art. The level design was surpurb, and if you looked closely, the maps told little stories of their own. For example, in Bafford's Manor, if you look in the servant's dining room (near the kitchen) you'll notice there are six chair, but one looks different to the rest. If you go to the storage room on the opposite side (of the kitchen) you will find four chairs, all of which match that odd chair. The story being told by the level design, is that there wasn't enough chairs, so someone got a chair from the storage room. You never notice it unless you're pay really close attention, but the level itself gives a story all on it's own! An unwritten story about the lives of the people who live and work in that Manor.
Imagine what else could be found if you looked closely!
And that's why I think the Thief games are Art. But there's so much more, not just the story, and the level design, and the gameplay, but the way it all melds together. That's why it's art. Separated, all of those elements are good, but together they create something incredible.
You're right, Thief 1 did have to start somehow. Although, I think there might have been too many monster based levels on that game. Then again, that is one of the many things that made it stand out. Sneaking around monsters... that's pretty awesome when I think about it.
I loved that relationship between Garrett and Viktoria (especially after what happened in the last game). I was so sad to see her go at the end.
And yeah, Thief 3 added some much needed development to the keepers, and the whole story in general. Could've been ported to the PC better, but the story was spot on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I also don't enjoy the apebeasts, spiders or the mantis. For me, outwitting humans is much more challenging. I understand the beasts' purpose though: the Maw of Chaos would be incomplete and simply not believable otherwise. Trickster's a god of nature and creative chaos after all and his "pets" show his madness well
Regarding Viktoria... There is a lovely fanfiction on FanFiction.net, I guess, written by Albino Ghoul and called "Holy Tree Is Growing There". Quite a nice twist with the Pagan tree in T3. I admit I always planted it the first time the Pagans wouldn't try to decapitate me for trespassing
I too feel Garrett-Proxy is a kind of an incarnation, just as if any magical place like the City couldn't survive without some characters of its lore. I have a short piece, "SPOILER-PROOF" (it is in English, I can share), which dwells on the motif of fluctuations of the narrative woven by the Keepers. Just as the wizards of Unseen University of Discworld accidentally created Roundworld (Earth), the Keeepers with their gevaisas ("tombs of words buried alive" according to my beloved Terry Pratchett, who by the way likes Thief a lot and plays FMs!!! 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep. The beasts were needed for the plot, and honestly, I don't think there could have been a better plot for the first game in the series?
So when I truly think about it, it's just something you need to get by.
Hmm, I'll probably have to look up that fanfiction. I don't know if I will (I generally try to avoid fanfiction), but if you recommend it.
Also, quite an interesting idea there. I'm not entirely sure if I understand it all though. Are you trying to say that Thief 4 takes place in an alternate universe, or that the Keepers probably screwed up reality some time between Thief 3 and Thief 4.
Personally though, I'm leaning towards the latter. Actually, I think reality might have been screwed up even before Thief 1. Who knows how many Garretts there have been!
Maybe time is in some sort of perpetual loop. Maybe the Trickster God did it before his demise. Maybe it was something even more powerful than him!
Who knows.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, you're correct. I believe the Keepers did survive the Final Glyph. It's a part of a larger picture - for me they take the power from narrativium, an element found on Discworld. They control the games' story after all, right? The Final Glyph couldn't destroy narrativium (that would be terrible), but reshaped the Glyphs, thus the Order had to learn how to draw power from narrativium again.
I guess it must have taken some time. Anyway, after some time, the books started to show their contents again. I imagine the relief! And they decided to, instead of controlling the factions so frantically (which turned very bad during Orland's reign), they studied the narrative more carefully. They could have accidentally created a mishaped, poorer version of their own reality. I drew the concept from theory of simulacra, to be honest. Anyway, if you are curious, here's a story: sta.sh/0iddhqn39ex - but if you haven't finished the game yet, don't read it now, it has some spoilers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You know, that actually makes a lot of sense. After all, who's to say that those glyphs were foretelling anything! They might have been written to create the path that the world would take.
All of those prophecies depicting Garrett and so on and so on. Might have not been prophecies, but someone actually just weaving time in place, and storing it within those books. In which case, once the keepers relearnt how those books were written (which they would have had to do when the Glyphs disappeared), they could and probably would write time out however they pleased.
And but even though they could write out time. They could not rewrite that which had already come to pass, hence why there seems to be hints about a previous Garrett, and why you can find his mechanical eye in the asylum. The Keepers could only write out how time would play out, not how it already has. As a result, they clearly must have wanted to reset everything and recreate the world, hence why thing seem to have repeated themselves.
They're wanting to do things again, but this time, do them correctly!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Exactly! I'm so overjoyed to share my theory and find it being said to be probable by fellow taffers 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What I like most about your theory, is that it explains the weird things in Thief 4 (all of the proxy characters). And to be honest, yours is the only theory I've heard that explains it decently. Someone else said that Thief 4 is just set far off into the future, but seriously? Seems a bit coincidental that everyone has been reincarnated.
But your theory explains all of that, and that's why I like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You made my day saying this
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sure, copy our entire conversation if you like.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
so true, it's a shame to see that in 2014
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Still, it could've been worse. It could've been like Duke Nukem Forever!
Sigh, that game could've actually been good, had they stuck with dated gameplay, rather than a mish-mash of old and new.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
well I had fun to get back to the city, see Garrett again, lurk in the dark to steal things, but the gameplay is incredibly poor, 10 years late compared to Thief 1! The QTE are invasive and useless, the maps are small and unidirectional, the scenario is... pure nonsense. the graphics are nice but this is not why we love Thief. and the lack of hammerites was quite disturbing^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Apparently there was a lot more Quick Time Events, and that they were taken out at the last minute. And I must agree, the gameplay does seem rather poor. Which I can't quite pin my finger on why, considering it plays rather similar to the other Thief games (rather than the obvious changes, of course). Although, what about the fire arrows! They're just useless sparklers now!
As for the maps. That's what you get, when your game is made for a console. Thief 3 suffered the same problem. Well, unless you merge those maps together.
You too noticed the lack of Hammerites. I found that rather strange, considering they play a rather major role in the Thief universe.
I don't know if you've completed the game yet, so I'm encasing the next sentence in spoiler tags.
*SPOILER ALERT*
I think there was a broken down Hammerite catherdral at the end of the game.
I think it was Hammerite. It looked like it was.
*SPOILER ALERT*
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
indeed, I think this cathedral was a veiled reference to the haunted hammerite cathedral of T1 (the most terrifying thing I ever played, even more than the shalebridge cradle)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I always thought the Shalebridge Cradle was scarier, but I must agree that The Cathedral was damn scary. What The Cathedral did better than the Shalebridge Cradle though, was that while the Shalebridge Cradle used a lot of scripting and dialog for it's scary moments, The Cathedral just used level design and monster placement (except for the part where the door locked, of course). I still found the Shalebridge Cradle more creepier though. Maybe the dense fog played a part in that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The problem with the cradle is that's a single-use weapon. The first time is scary as hell (the moment when I saw a puppet passing behind the main counter (script), I crouched and hid for 5 minutes), but when you understand how the "monsters" work, it gets quite boring. But with the cathedral, all the monsters are really deadly (especially the skeletons), the noisy tiles are everywhere and your arrows are very limited. Man, so many memories. I remember having to calculate all of my travels in the main building in order to avoid the damn skeletons patrolling in the stairs.
The convicts in Thi4f are hard to avoid but not scary. In fact the whole level isn't scary.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have to agree that the Thief four asylum isn't scary. I mean, it can startle you a little bit here and there, but that's about it.
It was a poor attempt at horror. And those Shadow Creatures, weren't that scary either. They were mostly just annoying when they were running off into inaccessible locations.
And yeah, the Cradle is a single-use weapon. As I said, the Cradle was mostly script based, while the Cathedral was just expertly designed. When you're talking about multiple playthrough, the Catherdral wins, without a doubt. But on only one playthrough, the Cradle is the scarier level.
I think we feel the same way about both of the levels, it's just that while the Cradle and the Cathedral, while both being horror themed levels, are both quite different to each other due to the way they're made and executed. If we're going to argue on quality, the Cathedral wins, but if we're going to argue on first impressions, then I'm going to have to say the Cradle.
You know, the first time I saw the Cradle, my dad was playing the game. He hadn't encountered any of those Asylum Zombies, but me and the rest of the family (we were all eagerly watching because it was interesting) noticed the lights going funny in the other rooms. My dad thought the whole place was empty, but the rest of us thought there was something else wandering the halls. You've got to remember, he had gotten lucky, and had not run into any monsters for quite a long time. The first time we actually saw one of those Asylum Zombies, it was quite a shock.
I think I told that story terribly, but I hope that gives some insight on why I find the Cradle such a winner on the first impressions side of things.
It'd be nice if there was a level, where the layout constantly changed. So when you head back on yourself, you end up in a completely different room. Mix in some form of the Weeping Angels from Doctor Who (which can only harm you if you stay in a certain room for too long), and furniture which rearranges itself every time you leave a room. And you'd have a pretty disorientating but creepy level. Of course you'd be able to get back to a room you would have been in before, but the difficulty of that would depend on how long ago you left that room, and how far you traveled away from that room.
And if you really wanted to add a creepy feeling. Just put in a shadow which constantly watches from far off corners, and that runs away when you get too close, only to reappear far behind you. Completely harmless, but would give you the creeps during the start of the level.
Of course, like the Cradle, this level idea of mine would be a one-shot wonder. It wouldn't be anywhere as scary the second time around, without some very well placed enemies that lurk about on patrol (not to mention the enemies themselves would also have to be scary on their own).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree with you. The concept of abandoned asylum/orphanage filled with unnatural things is cliché but always effective and nightmarish. I'm not easily scared by games (Slender serie or Outlast are just silly jump scares) but the first minutes in the cradle were very very good, I admit it. Until you realize how harmless the monsters are (at one point, I just had fun hunting them with fire arrow). And that's why I prefer the cathedral. Some games like Amnesia (and his "water monster") or the cathedral level are scary everytime, because there is a real threat. The monsters can really kill you fast and it's a challenge to avoid them with the permanent darkness or the noisy tiles. After multiple playthroughs, you still are anxious because even if you know the level by heart and how the monsters work, there is a real difficulty when the cradle proves to be quite easy. But I won't argue with, I understand you point (and the story with your father is funny).
The idea of changing architecture is excellent, like in the game Antichamber or in the movie Grave Encounters (and Don't Blink is a great episode). This and the occulus rift could be a real heart killer^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
We're arguing? I thought we were agreeing, just with slightly different standards of horror.
When you put everything down like that, you're right, the cathedral has pinpointed a type of horror that very few games use (although I can't name any other from the top of my head, I'm sure another game has somewhere). Not the horror of impossibly hard gameplay (I hate those so much!), or the horror of making you jump through scripted events, but rather a unique blend of both.
The game lacks scripting, which is why it is continuously scary. But it does have some scripting which helps enhance the mood, such as the front doors locking themselves, the slightly unsettling voice of The Eye, and not to mention the fact that the doors close on their own (which gets a little annoying after a while, but always remains slightly creepy). The monsters on their own are quite scary, mostly due to the sounds they make, this includes not only their own mutterings but also the (eerie) footstep which comes along with Thief anyway. And then there's the gameplay! The haunts are faster and stronger than any living creature, and the zombies are unkillable without the proper weapons, and what's worse is that there are a hordes of both!
And let's not forget the ghosts, which adds not only another sound to the mutterings of the undead, but also means you aren't safe from ranged attacks either.
The great thing about this level that no other horror level has ever done before. Is that when you start running away on The Cathedral, you're running for your life, not just from something!
In most horror games or horror levels, you're either running away when it's futile and you're gonna die anyway (Slenderman), or you're merely running away from a scripted event (countless games), which doesn't even require you to run to a logical hiding place or anything.
And what makes The Cathedral even better, is that if you're careful enough, you can see all of these undead creatures wandering about, walking past you, and going about their business. Which actually makes it scarier because you realize that you're in the dead center of the eye of the storm.
The Cathedral never tries to make you jump. It instead scares you by showing you just how utterly overwhelmed you are.
But then it gets even better. It gives you the tools and abilities to fend off these undead hordes! Thief isn't a horror game, even though The Cathedral is a horror level. And while most horror games and levels are just there to try and scare you by giving you nothing to fight with, Thief does the complete opposite and gives you something. It actually gives you a lot to fight with, but it's still not enough to fight all of them off, due to the sheer numbers! The Cathedral is the most horrifying level in any game due to the fact that the level isn't built for a horror themed game, and that the gameplay in Thief compliments horror themed levels so damn well!
And that is my entire reason from the top of my head, as to why The Catherdral is such a great level.
So yeah, we're not arguing, just agreeing with slightly different standards as to what we find or found scarier (you using the present tense, and me using the past tense).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Consistency from one Thief game to the next was never perfect... After all, Garrett did somehow forget how to swim between games 2 and 3.
Now he's forgotten how to use rope arrows. And jump. And speak properly. Maybe someone's given him a taste of his own blackjack and caused some minor brain damage.
Still. Thi4f (stupid stupid stupid name...) on its own isn't a bad game at all. It's just a terrible /Thief/ game. I think most old-time fans are pretty disappointed/angry with it, but people unfamiliar with the earlier ones probably like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I suppose you're right, consistency from game to game has always been a bit iffy. Still, I rather like your theory that he's suffered brain damage. With everything Garrett gets up to, I find that very easy to believe.
As for the title, I actually didn't think it was that bad. If you look closely at the title of Thief 3, you'll see that they changed the "E" slightly to make it look similar to the roman numeral for 3, turned sideways. So it's something they have done before. And recently I think they might've scrapped the Thi4f idea and just called it Thief and forgot to change the "E".
None the less, they could've give it a subtitle of some kind. Such as... I've just spent ages trying to think of a subtitle. I couldn't think of a decent one (Thief 4: Gloom Doom, sounds terrible).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i totally agree. i honestly did try liking this game but it just pissed me off so much!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thankfully I got used to the game after a while. Well, most of it.
Like someone else recently said to me. While it will annoy the old fans to no end. The new people will probably love it.
At least they give you the option to turn a lot of (modern) things off.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Eh sorry for the double post here....
You know something else? The zombies in Thief 1 (none of the sequels) are still the scariest zombies I've ever seen on a video game, even to this day they scare the living daylights out of me. I'm not kidding. I play and watch lots of Zombie Games and Films, and love them all. Zombies don't even phase me now. But the zombies on Thief 1... man those things are still scary!
I wonder if I'll ever get past level 2 of that first game?
Just walk right by them. I am not kidding...just walk right by them. They are more just objects in the way.
If you think those are scary then I am afraid you are not in for an easier ride later on in the game.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah I know you can just run past them. You can even just smack them on the head with your sword twice and they go down (until you walk over them). They're the easiest enemy in the game. The sounds and the models still creep me the hell out though.
I've watched both my father and sister play throughout every single Thief game though, so I know how the entire series plays out. I even played on some levels in between, which they saved for me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I usually just name them all and blow them up
The Haunts are the worst...just...ugh. They scare me the most and they are the only creature that can run faster then Garrett.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah yes, the Haunts. The things they mutter to themselves "Join us... join us... join us NOW!" and that's when they don't even know you're there!
Thankfully one sword hit to the back of the head kill them. Not to mention the bug in Thief 1 that allows you to run really fast if you hop. Due to those two reasons, I don't find them quite as scary as the zombies. I mean yes, they're scary, but I find the zombies scarier. But only on Thief 1. The Haunts are definitely scarier in the other games (mostly due to the model change on Thief 2, and the voice change of the zombies on Thief 3)... except maybe Thief 3, where I think the crown for scariest monster goes to those Asylum Zombies.
So, um, I think I only find Haunts to be the scariest on the second game. Do you I'm too specific?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Either they changed him a little without me realizing it, or I've gotten used to it. Whichever the case, I think it's mostly just that stupid handkerchief thing that bugs me now, because without that, he looks exactly like the Garrett I know and love.
Well the scarf keeps him warm and let's face it, he's crawling through places that kick up a lot of dust and dirt as well as a lot of ash. You don't want that in your lungs or nose. His whole outfit is about being functional...not looking awesome.
Although that voice annoys me to no end. As a matter of fact, all of the voices sort of annoy me, as well as the way they speak. In the original Thief games, the guards used to say "Taffer" a lot, and all of the guards also had the same voices (about three or five different male voices in total if I recall correctly).
The originals weren't gold on the voices either...in fact most of them were down right irritating. Stephen Russell was the only real actor they had and while I enjoyed his Garrett, I really only liked him in Thief 2. Well ok it's a close tie between Thief 1 and 2 but Thief 2 he had that angry, wary voice that people are most fond of. Thief 3 he just sorta read through things too fast or just fell flat altogether. I really hope they bring Romano back for sequels and if you have played this game, if they used Russell then this story would make no sense or very little sense.
The guards say Taffer in Thief 2014..I have heard it 6 times already. That's actually another critique I have with the originals...I think Taffer is overused in many parts. To the point where I just hear a censor bleep, it's actually rather juvenile at times.
While I can understand adding more diversity to the voices, I still haven't heard any of those good old voices that I miss so much, nor have I seen that drunk guard that was present in all of the other games. Also, the original voice of Garrett was just so suave, but the new one is just so... plain, and boring. Also, maybe it's just me, but in the original Thief games, everyone sounded British, while now, everyone sounds American, which sort of spoils the mood as well.
Lenny. The drunk guard is named Lenny. He has is own special mission in Thief 2014.
Uh..I am going to disagree on the British sounding voices. No one sounded British in the originals at all. The City is a pot of accents, it's not just one generic accent. Most sounded American or Mid Western. I don't know maybe there was the odd person in Thief 3 that sounded British but poorly done British.
.The main reason, is because me and everyone else I know, jump on the spot to get a guard's attention. Now you have to use bottles to achieve the same thing. Well, either that or run past them, which comes with it's own set of problems. But I mostly just mentioned this in my comic, because it's such a simple feature that was in the older games, but not in this newest one.
I will never ever miss doing that. It was actually rather dumb to jump up and down to get a guards attention. I'd rather throw something (which you could do in the originals but the AI was still in the developing stages so it almost never worked), to distract him and have him go one way while I go the other. Not jump, wait for him to come where I am and then move around to find another path.
This game uses Metrics (sorta like Assassin's Creed) vs having objects just randomly placed everywhere. Meaning, Garrett can climb up onto objects that equal that to his height. The city is designed well enough that this isn't an issue and you learn the rules quickly. Also, I am glad they made it so Garrett no longer has thoes stupid long arms, he now can only grab objects within reach and only in eyes view. It's not like the original first 2 where you can pull switches at a stupid length and at a implausible angle.
Something that has been really bugging me about the game though, is how the screen flashes every time you walk into the light. Yeah, I know I'm in the light, I can see the indicator to the side, you can stop reminding me now! Seriously, if you're just wandering about a little bit, going in and out of light, that flash is enough to give you an epileptic shock or something.
I don't think it's there long enough to give you an epileptic shock as it is just a single flash and it's quick. To the point where I don't notice it or I just got used to it.
Personally, I would be enjoying it more if they had kept the original voice of Garrett, but the developers were too tight to pay for both a voice actor and another guy to do the mo-cap stuff, and as such settled on an all-in-one person. I don't care about their so called excuses, I know the real reason was because they weren't willing to hire two people when one would do.
If they had kept the original voice of Garrett I don't think the story would have been that good. That would mean that Garrett is hundreds of years old as this Garrett is a different one (they are not related from what I can tell but it had something to do with the Primal...AKA what the Keepers tried to harness).
I prefer actors playing off each other vs them yelling in a booth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fair enough, I'll accept that his outfit was designed to be functional. It doesn't mean I have to like it.
I agree, the use of Taffer in the older games was like a censor bleep. That's why I liked it. Because it was completely unnecessary (considering the maturity of the game with the horror elements). It became a sort of tagline for the game. While they do say it in this game, they don't say it nearly enough.
I'll get to the Garret voice bit at the end.
I'm terrible at determining accents. the way the voices sound is my personal opinion (and I'm willing to accept that it's in the minority).
Also, thanks for giving me the name of the Drunk Guard. Hmm, I don't remember the mission with him in it. Ah well.
I still miss jumping. it's a basic move that should have been in the game. There are numerous gaps which you could easily jump over, but that Garrett won't even attempt to hop over. Not to mention that at the start, I kept running about for fun and accidentally climbing over everything and committing suicide. But I got used that, so that's not that big of a deal. Jumping is still a good feature though that should have been implemented. And Thief shouldn't have had to copy Assassin's Creed. Assassin's Creed was the one that copied Thief (heck, when that game first came out, I thought it was related to Thief... until I played it). So in other words, Thief set standards that a famous game used for inspiration. And this new game has no innovation in it whatsoever, and so just copied a mechanic from a famous game. Stop defending every last feature they implemented. Next thing you're going to tell me is that the leveling system would've been a good idea, and that they shouldn't have taken it out.
They're not long enough to give you an epileptic shock?!? You do realize you only get an epileptic shock from short flashes. Long flashes won't effect you. Hence, what you just said futher proved my claim that the flash is too short and annoying. None the less, I doubt you'd get an epileptic shock either, it was more of a figure of speech about how annoying it is (then again, if you have a history). And just so you know, if you have to get used to something, that's usually a sign of bad game design (usually... sometimes it's the sign of good game design).
Actually, that is the original Garrett. I know it's easy to believe it isn't, but it is. Want me to tell you how I know. Erin is the girl Garrett sees at the end of Thief 3. Meaning it's only about 15 years after the last game (probably less). While I know it's easy to believe that it's set in the future or an alternate universe, it actually isn't. The fact that there's no Hammerites and that Garrett has his doubts about the existence of ghosts is because of either bad game design or because they wanted to make a sequel that doubles as a sort of reboot. Basically, any inconsistencies are retcons, much like how James Bond changes every now and again, but still has the memories of the other Bonds.
So yes, the old voice would've made more sense. And while you may prefer actors playing off each other rather than yelling in a booth. Let's not forget that some of the best films are animations where they're "yelling in a booth". And that the translations will also be "yelling in a booth".
By the way, thanks for the long, well thought out comment. I don't get many of those (except from one particular guy). So it's nice to hear your thoughts. I get the impression that you were offended by the comment I left at the end of my comic, and you will no doubt be offended by this comment (sorry about that). Still, we both have our differing opinions. You clearly love the game. And while I do find the game fun, I can't help but feel it could've been a lot better. You must understand, I did like the game, I just thought it could've been so much better. The game in my opinion was worse than Thief 3, which isn't saying much, because I actually thought Thief 3 was pretty good. Still, this game seems to be the worst in the series so far. Still, it's better than Duke Nukem Forever.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I wasn't offended by the comic at all...at least I don't recall being offended. It's your opinion and I can't change that.
Thief is one of those games where you either love it or hate it...across all the games.
Yes I really enjoyed the game but I understand that it has flaws. The Map system isn't good (The originals weren't that great either in that department as the Level Design ranged from too confusing to not being fun. There were great levels but I found them all in Thief 3.), the sound mixing is god awful (As someone who has worked as a development tester, I am actually pretty angry at the quality of it), the lack of client jobs (that was the most enjoyable event in the game...and there wasn't enough of them. Hopefully they'll add more in a sequel or have DLC packages), the detection system (Not the worst I have played but some of it I had a hard time understanding how it worked as the AI didn't seem to follow these procedures, Checkpoint Reloads sometimes didn't work (again with the AI, Most times when you reloaded a the Ai would start their patrol path...not good guys).
However, I respect what the devs tried to do in that they tried to reboot a series that has been "dead" for 10 years. I stopped played FM's 5 years ago as they were mostly all the same and really only a handful were actually good. I didn't really like The Dark Mod either as I found it had too many steps to carry out a Gameplay command and it just had too many features. If some were cut, then I would have rated it higher...although I think it's mostly the Dark Mod team that I can't stand. They aren't very nice.
I love the originals as well, but can also admit they are flawed too. Thief 3 has the best story IMO as I really enjoyed the Keeper Storyline and how they were corrupted from within. It also explains the Primal a bit more. Remember the Keepers never created the Primal (I can believe they created the glyphs in a way to control it), they just found a way to harness it centuries before The Dark Project (we know the City is old as dirt and that it has been built on over the years). The Queen of Beggars (Fan Theory is that she could be Gamall.) also mentions the Keepers (not directly but her words suggest that A) she either knew them B) is one herself. There isn't any hard evidence but there is a LOT more to her then the game leads on. The comics sorta go into more detail but not by much. She also knows a TON about glyphs and she can sell you Glyph like powers to enhance your senses.
Because of the in game evidence, I am having a hard time believing that this is the same Garrett. If he is then HOLY BURRICK CRAP IS HE OLD! And how did he live that long? Dark Project, Metal Age and Deadly Shadows all took place during the Late Bresling Dynasty (roughly BRy 400's). Their family is mentioned in Deadly Shadows
"Choose your immortality wisely, whether it be the treasure you amass, or the family who succeed you. - Advice to a Patriarch, Baron Bresling" Thief 2014 takes place in NRy842 or the Northcrest Dynasty and Elias Northcrest is the 10th Baron of this particular family to rule.
Here is what I found in game:
The Moria Asylum (obvious nod to Thief 3) was commissioned by the Widow Moria, Edwina to try and help heal those that have "bad habits or could be a danger to others". There is a statue of her out front with the date: BRy459 (which was years or decades after Deadly Shadows). Again, not fully explained.
We know there was a Thief who was caught and brought there for treatment and we find out through documents that it was someone known as The Sneak Thief. He is a legend among the other thieves and was said to have lived a long time ago. thiefgame.wikia.com/wiki/Sneak… . These events might also have happened during the early rule of the Northcrest Family.
Garrett's final fate is unknown. He either died there or got out.
There is no evidence that the two Garrett's are related though. Maybe that's a good thing.
thiefgame.wikia.com/wiki/Mecha… - Garrett's Mechanical eye found in the Moria Asylum. The device here matches the blueprints for it in Thief 2.
This is more of a Theory then an actual fact, but some fans believe that Garrett in the original 3 was not the first Garrett and that there could have been more "heroes" like him before as the Primal seems to have a huge effect on him. No in game evidence.
At the store you can pick up a boost that is a small figure statue that pays a small nod to Old Garrett : thiefgame.wikia.com/wiki/Spect…
The game explains why there are no pagans or Hammerites. The Northcrest Family outlawed the practice of believing in the Old Gods and many of the churches and holy sites were destroyed or lay in ruin (the second to final mission has Garrett go to Old Quarter and infiltrate the Hammerite Cathedral there). You can find secret cults that worship the Trickster or Builder (both of these Gods are mentioned in several documents that you find around the city). There is a side quest called The Wax Witch where you have to light 36 wax candles that have been hidden around Stonemarket. They contain souls that were trapped there by someone who was into Pagan worship.
Garrett himself also mentions the Trickster in Chapter 4 "Those better be the Trickster's Gold Teeth in there..."
thiefgame.wikia.com/wiki/Ulyss… - Ulysses Northcrest. He's the one who built the prison under the Moria Asylum.
Now that the Northcrest Family is gone, the Old Gods and their religions have a chance to return to power.
I think that's what makes Thief (the franchise) so great...it keeps you guessing and makes you want to find out what's going on. Also people have a lot of passion for it which makes it memorable
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So you weren't offended?
Sorry, it's just that the way your last comment was written, made it sound like you had an axe to grind with me.
So you rather liked Thief 3 as well? I too thought the storyline on Thief 3 was the best in the entire series. The only thing that let that game down was the bugs, but they never bothered me that much.
And I agree, the other games did that have their faults. I just generally turn a blind eye on the faults of things that I like. Sorry, it's a habit. At least I admit it though.
And I definitely agree with what you said about the map designs.
I personally rather like The Dark Mod. I don't understand what you mean by too many commands? The game functions almost identically to Thief 1 and 2 in terms of gameplay. Except for the lockpicking, and the body grabbing, and the candle extinguishing (I can understand not liking any of these features). The levels on the other hand, could use some improvement. I can't help but feel that the creators of fan missions, lack the basic understanding of how to make a great level. For example, a safe outside!
I mean, come on. You're just wandering the streets, why are you being attacked?!?
As for the creators. I've never posted on the forums, but I can get what you mean. I've been in my fair share of forums with terrible moderators and such.
Wow... I would actually believe it is a different Garrett with evidence like that. (As for the Gamall part, I also find that believable. As matter of fact, I think you're right about Gamall being the Queen of Beggers.)
Here's the reasons why I think it isn't two different Garretts, but rather the same person.
They're both called Garrett.
They're both master thieves, capable of hiding in plain site.
They both lost their right eye and had it replaced with a mechanical eye (Original Garrett got his made by Karras, thus making it a unique one of a kind artifact). I am assuming that the New Garrett has a mechanical eye, because it looks like one, but I could be wrong. It could just be the primal energy that did that to his eye.
They both know a guy called Basso. The Original Garrett helped Basso the Boxman get a wife, and the New Garrett is told by Basso that he had been married once and that it didn't work out. Although the two Basso's don't look like each other at all.
The two Garrett's look exactly the same in the face. While their outfits are completely different, their faces are virtually identical.
A man at the start of Thief 4, mentions how his father (or was it grandfather) saw the Shalebridge Fires. Which according to Thief 1, happened fifty years ago. If Thief 4 is so far into the future, that would mean that they would have had to take the Old Quarter back, and then lose it again in a similar fashion to how they lost it the first time around (Shalebridge is in the Old Quarter).
I don't know about you, but that's a hell of a lot of coincidences.
But damn, your arguments are also valid. After all, yours does clearly explain the lack of Hammerites and Pagans. Not to mention the mechanical eye in the asylum, and well... everything else.
Perhaps Garrett did something in between Thief 3 and 4 which sort of caused repetition of events. Who knows what could have happened between those two games. Maybe there's a lot more to Garrett than meets the eye (pun unintended).
Oh and the Garrett from Thief 3 was definitely the original Garrett in my opinion. Because Artemis was the mentor to the Original Garrett, and Original Garret was also a Keeper who went rogue and turned into a master thief. And according to Thief 3, the Thief 3 Garrett also had a mentor named Artemis, and was a keeper who left to become a thief (and I don't think I even need to mention them both having an eye). I find it highly unlikely that those events with those exact same names, would repeat in the exact same way. Unless my theory that Garrett did something to cause time to sort of repeat itself time and time again. Maybe that's got nothing to do with Garrett, and instead explains the steampunk nature of The City. Who knows. But while I'm willing to believe that Thief 4 Garrett is a different Garrett, I honestly believe that Thief 3 Garrett is the Original Garrett. Especially with what The Eye says about wanting to take the other eye.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well at least the game isn't anywhere near as bad as it originally was going to be.
There was going to be a leveling system, and quick time events! While I like leveling systems and all, it has no place in a Thief game.
Quick time events on the other hand, are just plain crap.
They could've made this game so much better. But, I guess it's good enough.
I probably wouldn't be complaining half as much if they had kept the original voice for Garrett (the new guy just sort of ruins the experience).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it is tough to get used to a new voice at least this is the first time they changed it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I suppose. But they've changed all of the voices!
They didn't even use any of the Guard voices from the previous games. I can understand them wanting diversity, but it would've been a nice nod to the people who played the older games. I don't think that drunk guard that appeared in all of the other games, appeared in this one either.
They also changed the mood of the game, such as how you barely hear the word "Taffer" anymore, which used to be so prominent in the older games. They also made the game feel as though it's made for a more mature audience. I'm not saying the old Thief games were child friendly or anything, those zombies alone made those games inappropriate for children. But this new Thief game adds certain elements which I think ruins the experience, such as a part in the Brothel.
Actually, having looked at the voice actors. It turns out that the majority of the guards and other characters, as well as Garrett himself, were all voiced by the same person (Stephen Russell if you're wondering). Wow, quite amazing.
Still, their excuse for not using him for voicing the characters, is a damn poor one. I could give a list of reasons why their excuse is bull crap, but I'll save you from that huge amount of text.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>