Civvie thread (classic FPS reviews/commentary on youtube)

[A horse of course]

By not removing half the point of the game, which is navigating around guard patrols and such.

Yeah, that's a problem with game design not player's playstyle.

If you don't want player to methodically dismantle your patrols, then derp freely around level, don't give them means to do just that.
If player can reliably KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, player will KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, if only because it's optimal in the long run when it comes to exploring the level (no pesky patrols getting in the way).

If you want patrols to stay there as continuous obstacle in a stealth oriented game (or RPG/immersive sim while using a stealth approach), then:

• Don't give player blackjack, tranq darts, chokeout, whatever
• Make those means unreliable risking victim's death or alarm, preferably with deferred failure
• Make those means resource dependent (victim wakes and raises alarm unless tied up and gagged, finite supply of rope)
• Make player forfeit ghosting/additional stealth goals by taking out patrols
  
• Make detection inevitable once any of the patrols go missing (ideally make detection thing that happens if player leaves the environment in changed state, not just patrols - ghost is when they never know you were there).
• Make alarm states ratchet

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

 

[DraQ]

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

I can't argue with that. Usually playing in degenerate way reduces enjoyment something fierce, but usually it's also THE optimal way to play and avoiding it requires conscious effort and something like a state of self-induced schizophrenia where you simultaneously try to play the game optimally in some ways but constantly prevent yourself from playing optimally in some others.

Water finds a crack:
https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=369

 

[Multidirectional]

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

Navigating these missions alone would be challenge enough for new players, encouraging them to do it while also constantly avoiding guards would just make most of them burn out and quit halfway through or even sooner. Same goes for insisting that everyone should play Thiefs on "Expert" on first run.

 

[A horse of course]

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

Navigating these missions alone would be challenge enough for new players, encouraging them to do it while also constantly avoiding guards would just make most of them burn out and quit halfway through or even sooner. Same goes for insisting that everyone should play Thiefs on "Expert" on first run.

I think you're overstating the difficulty level of Thief. For a basic no-kill/incapacitate playthrough in which the player is still allowed to use water arrows, be spotted, save whenever they feel like it etc. it's not a remarkably challenging game. In fact I'd say it's relatively gentle when played that way, with the exception of RttC and Escape.

 

[Multidirectional]

I think you're overstating the difficulty level of Thief. For a basic no-kill/incapacitate playthrough in which the player is still allowed to use water arrows, be spotted, save whenever they feel like it etc. it's not a remarkably challenging game. In fact I'd say it's relatively gentle when played that way, with the exception of RttC and Escape.

It's not about difficulty but tedium. Player that is new to this game is gonna get lost a lot in these missions and will have to go back and forth a lot in search for shit they've missed. Expecting them to enjoy doing it while constantly avoiding guards? LOL nope. Especially when we are talking about players that are used to modern level/game design.

 

[A horse of course]

I think you're overstating the difficulty level of Thief. For a basic no-kill/incapacitate playthrough in which the player is still allowed to use water arrows, be spotted, save whenever they feel like it etc. it's not a remarkably challenging game. In fact I'd say it's relatively gentle when played that way, with the exception of RttC and Escape.

It's not about difficulty but tedium. Player that is new to this game is gonna get lost a lot in these missions and will have to go back and forth a lot in search for shit they've missed. Expecting them to enjoy doing it while constantly avoiding guards? LOL nope. Especially when we are talking about players that are used to modern level/game design.

Avoiding guards IS the fun though. And civvie's audience skew more heavily towards the boomer shooter era, so they're hardly strangers to different approaches to level design. Sure, there are people who don't like purist stealth gameplay at all, in which case Thief isn't worth recommending to them in the first place. People going in to Thief and just whacking all the guards and forgetting about them are going to wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

[DraQ]

Avoiding guards IS the fun though. And civvie's audience skew more heavily towards the boomer shooter era, so they're hardly strangers to different approaches to level design. Sure, there are people who don't like purist stealth gameplay at all, in which case Thief isn't worth recommending to them in the first place. People going in to Thief and just whacking all the guards and forgetting about them are going to wonder what all the fuss was about.

The problem is that the boundaries between intended and degenerate gameplay in Thief are even fuzzier than usual.
If BJing guards is sometimes valid, then what exactly is degenerate?

 

[flyingjohn]

There is no such thing as "playing the game wrong".
Both styles are acceptable and the devs have not made the thief series "ghost" centric. Being able to ghost is a byproduct of great level design,not some inherit design decision.You can look at thief fm missions to see that.

Are we gonna start bitching about "balance" of classes in rpg's now?
Are we gonna start bitching about exploiting ai and path finding in strategy games?
Are we gonna start bitching about abusing specif moves and enemy action's in every other genre?

Every game is like a puzzle box that needs to be broken to achieve victory through optimal means,it has always been that way.It is up to the devs to make the "puzzle" as degenerate less as possible,not the player.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Ghosting is not the "correct" way. It's the fan's version of iron man the devs clearly wanted the player to be able to get rid of the guards, or they wouldn't have given you the tools to do so. The reason ghosting is necessary if you happen to be familiar with the game is that once you figure out how the AI works you can essentially blackjack your way through the guards like it was nothing meaning the challenge is essentially gone. For a new player who still doesn't know that being made by the AI is actually rather easy to avoid getting rid of them WILL actually involve a play style similar to ghosting. That's how i played the game the first time, because i had no idea what would alarm the guards to my presence and i sort of played it as safe as i would have if the guards were actually human. Alas, eventually i realized just how limited the AI actually is.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

I'm those thief fans that play a lot of FMs, consider thief series the best games ever made, etc, etc. I do play some levels with the intention of ghosting, but often as an imposed on myself exercise. I know all the quirks of dark engine, to identify randomized patrols, AI states (even fake no alert states that somehow happen once in a while). But my ideal playthrough is and will always be blackjacking everyone, but without alerting AI, and pickpocket first then blackjack. My main joy in thief games is exploring everywhere in a level, and going back and forth to find that missing ring on the corner. There some FMs that impose you to not even alert the guards. And some that impose this only before reaching an objective. I have no objections to these kind of missions.

On the case of Civvie, he at least mentions in his video it's a possible way to play by avoiding knocking out everyone. I guess it would be also bad for a video presentation.

 

[A horse of course]

Alright. I've always considered any playstyle other than (at the very least) no kills/no knockouts detrimental to the average player's enjoyment of the game and appreciation for its core stealth mechanics.

I'll just have to concede that I possess superhuman levels of skill and mental acuity, and shouldn't expect normal men to match my abilities.

 

[DraQ]

There is no such thing as "playing the game wrong".

[citation needed]

Both styles are acceptable and the devs have not made the thief series "ghost" centric. Being able to ghost is a byproduct of great level design,not some inherit design decision.You can look at thief fm missions to see that.

Then why make a stealth game instead of an immersive sim? (And even in immersive sim not ghosting should quickly escalate to some form of combat).

Are we gonna start bitching about "balance" of classes in rpg's now?

Mostly in the context of balance being mostly inapplicable to a proper RPG but the part of it involves cheesy tactics, minmaxing and trap builds, and that's applicable.

Are we gonna start bitching about exploiting ai and path finding in strategy games?
Are we gonna start bitching about abusing specif moves and enemy action's in every other genre?

Of course.

Every game is like a puzzle box that needs to be broken to achieve victory through optimal means,it has always been that way.It is up to the devs to make the "puzzle" as degenerate less as possible,not the player.

If it can be broken in a stupid and shitty way it can be bitched about.

 

[DraQ]

Ghosting is not the "correct" way. It's the fan's version of iron man the devs clearly wanted the player to be able to get rid of the guards, or they wouldn't have given you the tools to do so.

Or ghosting is the correct way and devs were simply not able to track their design choices to their logical conclusion. Either way is possible.
Neither precludes option to KO all the guards with impunity being wrong design choice that resulted in a worse game overall.

Alright. I've always considered any playstyle other than (at the very least) no kills/no knockouts detrimental to the average player's enjoyment of the game and appreciation for its core stealth mechanics.

It's ok, it's just it's a self-imposed challenge. I have played a lot of games featuring some form of self imposed challenge. Many games can be broken in some way, actually. I just reserve the right to bitch about games where challenge needs to be self imposed because of crappy design somewhere.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Neither precludes option to KO all the guards with impunity being wrong design choice that resulted in a worse game overall.

I doubt they expected "most" people to be able to cheese the AI so easily. Thief is not an easy game for the average player but is also not particularly hard either. In the post Dark Souls age they might have made the AI super hard to fool but this is still a 90s game which, while not intended to be popemole trash still had some mainstream pretensions in the sense they still wanted the average person to be able to play it.

I remember trying some mod a while back that made the AI harder but i wasn't sure if it was compatible with custom maps so i kinda forgot about it. When i did try it i did feel like the first time i played the game, where i didn't dare move because i had no idea if the AI would spot me or not and i think at the time they thought the AI was plenty hard as it was as it had the same effect on most players.

 

[DraQ]

I doubt they expected "most" people to be able to cheese the AI so easily.

It's an AI, of course people will cheese it.

 

[Carrion]

I don't think the zombies (and other non-human creatures) should be ignored here. In the first level of Thief you're sneaking past human guards and learn that you can take them out with a blackjack, maybe even taking part in swordfight or two. In the very next mission the game suddenly throws a zombie at you — an enemy type that can't be knocked out and keeps getting up even if you whack it with your sword. This really makes them a different kind of a challenge, especially if you don't know about holy water yet.

I think Thief is best suited for a couple of playthroughs: one with a lower difficulty level, using every tool at your disposal, and another one on Expert when you already know the levels and can fully appreciate the new objectives and other difficulty-related changes.

 

[JarlFrank]

By not removing half the point of the game, which is navigating around guard patrols and such.

Yeah, that's a problem with game design not player's playstyle.

If you don't want player to methodically dismantle your patrols, then derp freely around level, don't give them means to do just that.
If player can reliably KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, player will KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, if only because it's optimal in the long run when it comes to exploring the level (no pesky patrols getting in the way).

If you want patrols to stay there as continuous obstacle in a stealth oriented game (or RPG/immersive sim while using a stealth approach), then:

• Don't give player blackjack, tranq darts, chokeout, whatever
• Make those means unreliable risking victim's death or alarm, preferably with deferred failure
• Make those means resource dependent (victim wakes and raises alarm unless tied up and gagged, finite supply of rope)
• Make player forfeit ghosting/additional stealth goals by taking out patrols
  
• Make detection inevitable once any of the patrols go missing (ideally make detection thing that happens if player leaves the environment in changed state, not just patrols - ghost is when they never know you were there).
• Make alarm states ratchet

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

I dunno, I have played Thief for a decade now and always go for the methodical blackjacking approach and enjoy it.

 

[A horse of course]

By not removing half the point of the game, which is navigating around guard patrols and such.

Yeah, that's a problem with game design not player's playstyle.

If you don't want player to methodically dismantle your patrols, then derp freely around level, don't give them means to do just that.
If player can reliably KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, player will KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, if only because it's optimal in the long run when it comes to exploring the level (no pesky patrols getting in the way).

If you want patrols to stay there as continuous obstacle in a stealth oriented game (or RPG/immersive sim while using a stealth approach), then:

• Don't give player blackjack, tranq darts, chokeout, whatever
• Make those means unreliable risking victim's death or alarm, preferably with deferred failure
• Make those means resource dependent (victim wakes and raises alarm unless tied up and gagged, finite supply of rope)
• Make player forfeit ghosting/additional stealth goals by taking out patrols
  
• Make detection inevitable once any of the patrols go missing (ideally make detection thing that happens if player leaves the environment in changed state, not just patrols - ghost is when they never know you were there).
• Make alarm states ratchet

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

I dunno, I have played Thief for a decade now and always go for the methodical blackjacking approach and enjoy it.

I don't see the appeal. There are plenty of games, especially in the modern era, built around sneaking up behind people and doing epic cinematic stealth kills.

 

[Carrion]

How many games are there with satisfying old-fashioned blackjacking, though?

 

[JarlFrank]

By not removing half the point of the game, which is navigating around guard patrols and such.

Yeah, that's a problem with game design not player's playstyle.

If you don't want player to methodically dismantle your patrols, then derp freely around level, don't give them means to do just that.
If player can reliably KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, player will KO and disappear all the guards with impunity, if only because it's optimal in the long run when it comes to exploring the level (no pesky patrols getting in the way).

If you want patrols to stay there as continuous obstacle in a stealth oriented game (or RPG/immersive sim while using a stealth approach), then:

• Don't give player blackjack, tranq darts, chokeout, whatever
• Make those means unreliable risking victim's death or alarm, preferably with deferred failure
• Make those means resource dependent (victim wakes and raises alarm unless tied up and gagged, finite supply of rope)
• Make player forfeit ghosting/additional stealth goals by taking out patrols
  
• Make detection inevitable once any of the patrols go missing (ideally make detection thing that happens if player leaves the environment in changed state, not just patrols - ghost is when they never know you were there).
• Make alarm states ratchet

That's all fine, I simply take issue with civvie representing it that way and falling for the "immersive sim" meme, as some of his fans won't have played the series and will end up playing it in a way that's less enjoyable than doing so in the "correct" way.

I dunno, I have played Thief for a decade now and always go for the methodical blackjacking approach and enjoy it.

I don't see the appeal. There are plenty of games, especially in the modern era, built around sneaking up behind people and doing epic cinematic stealth kills.

1. They're not kills. I never do kills in Thief.
2. The game is about more than just stealth. The greatest appeal to me is navigating and exploring the sprawling 3D levels, with mantling and rope arrows etc.
3. Even when you go blackjacking, some areas are challenging (especially with lots of tile and bright lights). But once you got through the challenge for the first time, you can backtrack hassle-free.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

About what's fun/boring:

I reckon many people also say dishonored games are best suited for a "chaos" approach so you can enjoy all the gadgets and different ways to kill, because stealth is boring, because you mostly don't get to use all the cool stuff. I totally disagree with it. I find the chaotic approach in dishonored, and powers in dishonored very gimmicky and get old in the first 2 minutes. Some say stealth is repetitive... but stealth is almost like a puzzle approach. The satisfaction is unlock patterns, and try the best approach to remain undetected, and if you knock opponents, how do you do that and still maintain your cover. I find it much more satisfying that gunsblazing.

In thief, the same. There are self rules to be followed even in a blackjack run: You can't be discovered, bodies can't be found, you must pickpocket only awaken AI. Besides, there are other AI in thief that are imune to BJ. Like ghosts, wraiths, children of karars, vader-helmeted guards. there are defintive ways to deal with them, so it has variety. Also, I like black-jacking Burricks.

Anothe self imposed rule I have in thief is: I never buy extra equipment/gadgets. I must go with what is given on start-up. In every mission I played, I never met a dead end that would require extra shop items. so I know most FM makers do missions completable without the necessity to buy equipment.

 

[Bad Sector]

Well, Dishonored literally starts by telling you - right in your face at the very first moment - that there isn't a wrong way to play the game and yet you still have people thinking that it is a stealth game.

IMO if the simulation allows it - intended or not - then it is fair game. If the developers didn't want you to do something then they shouldn't have allowed you to do that in the first place. Beyond that, let me decide what is fun or not for me.

 

[DraQ]

The problem is that stealth is boring in Dishonored because it's easy and you don't get to play with cool toys.

That's actually my main problem with Dishonored:

• Story-wise stealth and low chaos are rewarded
• Gameplay-wise they are punished, and not by extra challenge, but by boredom.

 

[JarlFrank]

Eh, I enjoyed my ghost playthroughs of both games. Probably more so than the kill playthroughs.

 

[A horse of course]

Well, Dishonored literally starts by telling you - right in your face at the very first moment - that there isn't a wrong way to play the game and yet you still have people thinking that it is a stealth game.

IMO if the simulation allows it - intended or not - then it is fair game. If the developers didn't want you to do something then they shouldn't have allowed you to do that in the first place. Beyond that, let me decide what is fun or not for me.

And then punishes you by giving you a worse ending for going a combat/chaos route. Prey does a similar thing with Typhon powers and the ending. It seems to be a pattern with Arkane.