Decline The new Thiaf game is MASSIVE decline - Eidos Forum Refugee Camp

[J_C]

Sure Thiaf works, it has stealth, but is it OK to ignore that it is a step back from the games 15 years ago?

If you're enjoying the game and having fun, then it's not fair to mark it low just because it's simpler than Thief 1. I think it's fine for a review to point out that a game is simpler, more linear etc, but if the game is well made and enjoyable then it deserves a good score.

I can agree with this one. Although I have to say, the Codex is typically a place that shits on games if they are dumbed down from their predecessors.

 

[Data4]

Sure Thiaf works, it has stealth, but is it OK to ignore that it is a step back from the games 15 years ago?

If you're enjoying the game and having fun, then it's not fair to mark it low just because it's simpler than Thief 1. I think it's fine for a review to point out that a game is simpler, more linear etc, but if the game is well made and enjoyable then it deserves a good score.

I can agree with this one. Although I have to say, the Codex is typically a place that shits on games if they are dumbed down from their predecessors.

And rightly so. It's perfectly reasonable to expect follow-on games to improve on the previous ones. Unlike, say, movies, games rely heavily on technical advancements. Whether it's figuring out a new piece of code to implement, taking advantage of graphics & computing power, or what have you, new games should be iterative.

More often than not, this isn't the case. There's always a bias towards one aspect (usually the visual), at the expense of other aspects (usually storyline, gameplay features). Visuals are the first thing people see. They're the hook. So naturally, if a game is made to be visually appealing, the masses will buy it. Only when graphics fidelity have reached their absolute pinnacle will we see the focus turn more to the actual content and substance of the game.

 

[Melan]

Sure Thiaf works, it has stealth, but is it OK to ignore that it is a step back from the games 15 years ago?

If you're enjoying the game and having fun, then it's not fair to mark it low just because it's simpler than Thief 1. I think it's fine for a review to point out that a game is simpler, more linear etc, but if the game is well made and enjoyable then it deserves a good score.

I would be symapthetic to this position if Thief 4 wasn't a bad game on its own merits. But it is: terrible writing, tepid aesthetics, limited mobility, inconsistencies in climbables, the lack of backtracking, irritating "cinematic" audio, a procession of dumb plot elements and poorly conceived characters, misapplied "maturity", a cartload of bugs, and just a general design that falls apart once you prod it with a stick.

This is the same case as Deus Ex: Invisible War: a game that's worked legit hard to earn its place on the shit list.

 

[Heresiarch]

Thanks to this failure of a reboot, I've gained the interest for my fourth try on Dishonored and this time I've finally endured through the prologue and its weird stealth mechanism. And then the first serious mission made me keep on playing and even bought a legit version. The game feels more like a weird combo of Bioshock/Arkham Asylum/Deus Ex rather than a spiritual successor of Thief, but it was very well designed with lots of nice details. A game with true Arkane blood.

Gamespot even made a comparison article of Thief (reboot) vs Dishonored and declares the latter as a complete winner.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/thief-vs-dishonored-the-stealth-action-showdown/1100-6417922/

 

[Tom Selleck]

Re: TotalButtscum's completely awful, pedantic and spergy defence video:

The problem is that he - and lots of people - conflate the idea of a respect for a differing opinion with the idea that ALL opinions are valid,
and completely missing the point that some are shit and his are shit

 

[Shralla]

The game feels more like a weird combo of Bioshock/Arkham Asylum/Deus Ex rather than a spiritual successor of Thief

That's exactly what it is. Like first-person Batman with murder, but in with Deus Exy levels and Bioshock "gameplay" (weapon in one hand, power in the other). As a result I liked it quite a bit, despite not being that into Bioshock. Everything about the game just "felt" right.

Hanging around the Thief forum is getting a bit more satisfying every day because it seems like more and more people, even those who were defending Eidos Montreal during development and those who initially gave positive impressions of the game, are getting fed up with the huge amount of terrible decisions that went into it. There's a lot of complaining about the lack of jumping for not being able to jump over pressure plates and things like that, and it seems like more people are dissatisfied every day. Among the other things I was tickled by, there was one thread complaining about how difficult it was to pick out the areas you were allowed to jump or vault over something and those that you couldn't. The conclusion seemed to be that despite what the devs said, the game was indeed designed with the Focus mechanic in mind, and as such the entire game suffers from many things being indistinct or unnoticeable if you turn it off. I had a similar experience with highlighting in Deus Ex, and told people that the same thing was going to happen in Theif, so there you go.

 

[commie]

. Only when graphics fidelity have reached their absolute pinnacle will we see the focus turn more to the actual content and substance of the game.

Won't happen. There won't be money left over for anything else. Look, games don't look much better than they did in 2007(Crysis, UE3 release, Source engine update round that time) or even 2004(Far Cry engine, iD 4, HL2). The biggest real update are higher res textures that don't blur as much when you get closer to them and in many cases much better lighting(Though iD 4 lighting still holds up). Yet even with graphics hardly advancing in a decade the content, substance and all round gameplay of titles is sorely lacking. If basing graphics on well established, documented, easy to work with and reliable 7-10 year old graphics engines hasn't allowed developers to redirect assets to more important things then when could it?

 

[DeepOcean]

Guys, I *loved* the first game. LOVED it. I bet I played the pre-release demo 40 times.

So you mean just like in thief 1 when you blackjacked someone by tapping one button?

Yeah, here I see how you really played Thief 1, you fucking liar.

 

[racofer]

. Only when graphics fidelity have reached their absolute pinnacle will we see the focus turn more to the actual content and substance of the game.

Won't happen. There won't be money left over for anything else. Look, games don't look much better than they did in 2007(Crysis, UE3 release, Source engine update round that time) or even 2004(Far Cry engine, iD 4, HL2). The biggest real update are higher res textures that don't blur as much when you get closer to them and in many cases much better lighting(Though iD 4 lighting still holds up). Yet even with graphics hardly advancing in a decade the content, substance and all round gameplay of titles is sorely lacking. If basing graphics on well established, documented, easy to work with and reliable 7-10 year old graphics engines hasn't allowed developers to redirect assets to more important things then when could it?

And most of the best games in terms of content and gameplay, lately, are indies with low emphasis on graphics.

Just look at Gunpoint, for fucks sake. That thing was made by one guy, has 2D graphics, yet it packs more atmosphere and intelligent game design than most AAA shit released in years.

 

[DeepOcean]

He makes some very good and relevant points about that in his video. tl;dr version is subjective opinion != objective fact, someone liking a game you don't doesn't mean they're an idiot, a reboot or sequel being different from the previous game doesn't mean the game fundamentally sucks.

Of course, Thief has plenty of problems even without comparing it to the originals (terrible AI, terrible story, context-sensitive everything, excess linearity and lack of decent exploration, poor level design, poor pacing, technical incompetence and bugs, misleading marketing and gameplay demos prior to release, etc.) which probably just renders it a poor game outright.

Did you watch the Broken Age WTF where he fail to mention the main flaws of the game and just babble how it is exactly like an old school point and click and say that Walking Dead is like a RPG?

Everybody has the right to a opinion but that doesn't mean that every opinion is valid, has value and immune to critique. I wouldn't trust the opinion of an ignorant hobo about medicine and if he made a video about it I would think it is the most pointless exercise. There is a reason to why RTS fans opinions are more valid when judging RTS games and racing game fans on judging racing games. TB more than one time said he isn't a gamer who has patience and he doesn't like puzzles or being stuck on a game, that makes him really unqualified to do any serious critique of stealth and adventure games. When some moron at Gamespot that only played CoD gives something like let's say 4 to a game like Blackguards, his opinions ARE shit, subjective yes but still subjective shit.

 

[toro]

Well ... I finished Thief. I cannot explain why I played it but I guess morbid curiosity got the best of me.

I've played on custom master difficulty: except manual saves - I did not use focus mode, special arrows or swoop. I've basically ghosted the entire game using only blackjack, water and rope arrows.

Game mechanics: Contextual jumping and rope arrows usage are two examples of cretinous game mechanics but I have to admit that they did not bother me after a while. * Although I died many times because the jump sequence was not triggered correctly.
The game mechanics are not completely broken and I could say that this is the only department in which the game is not a complete failure. In my opinion the basic stealth mechanics are better than what Dishonored is offering.
But the game fails to capitalized on this potential therefore this is the last good thing you'll hear about the game. * I don't want to speak about the tomb-raider parts which are completely retarded.

Game world: The city architecture doesn't make sense, it's over complicated and a pain to navigate despite the fact that it was designed for Garrett. In addition, the levels are completely uninspired if not linear in nature.
All locations are filled with static doors and dead-ends. In fact, most side-quests consist in "robbing" a completely empty house which is usually only accessible by a window. And there are like 20-30 similar side-quests.

Narrative: The story, the dialogues, the characters are simply bad. I mean obnoxiously bad. Each line spoke by Garrett or Erin is edgy and retarded at the same time. Garret even tries self-irony at some point. It fails.
Basso is probably the only character that is not a stupid fuck. But then ... who in the right mind can create a character called "Thief-Taker General"?

Other remarks: The Asylum level is a bad joke. Jump scares. So boring that I ended up running through the level.
The Great Safe fight is hilariously stupid - you have to sneak and "lockpick" a safe while ~6 guards are actively searching you on a almost empty map. But then there is the Thief-Taker General fight which is simply ... brainfart.
The ventilation vents are miss-placed in this game. As is the electricity stuff.
The eye of Garrett is ret-coned. They were serious about the reboot.
The developers had no idea what the fuck they were doing. Bunch of incompetent hacks.

Conclusion: The game is a waste of time even if someone decides to ghost it (like I did). There are no redeeming qualities, everything is shit.

 

[Tigranes]

I'm just incredibly surprised how many of you actually bothered to try this thing.

 

[SharkClub]

The Asylum level is a bad joke. Jump scares. So boring that I ended up running through the level.

The asylum level was such ass. It's like they wanted to copy the Shalebridge Cradle real fucking hard but were too inept to give it as good an atmosphere (I'm not surprised they had trouble there, what with all the dubstep interrupting every moment that may have been perceived as intense) so they just fucking threw jumpscares in all over the place. When the fucking inmates did finally show up out of nowhere they weren't even 1% as scary as the jittery creepy fuckers from the Shalebridge Cradle. Jesus christ, RIP Thief.

Every time I think about how bad Thi4f is it makes me feel a little better about how Thief 3 turned out. And I fucking hated Deadly Shadows with all my soul before this mess.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

I had a similar feeling of what happened to thief when they announced Prince of Persia sands of time. It was a reboot and I hated that idea. I didn't follow any development news at the time. It took me years to put aside my prejudices and play it, and now I love the sands of time trilogy of games, that has an ending in the 3rd game that mirror's the intro of the first, just like the thief trilogy.

Anyway, that is a case when a reboot changes a lot of things but the franchise name, but the reboot is still good, even if it has so many differences. It was a change in generations done right. Thiaf could be a great game, even being a reboot, but arkane made it first.

I like stealth games, I liked dishonored, but in the beginning of thiaf, I was hoping that it could be the same case as POP. But as time passes, more and more I feel I will never touch it. Maybe some years ahead I'll eventually see what it's about. Meanwhile, i'm havig a lot of fun playing some FMs, and I advise everyone here to enjoy those and forget this shiat.

 

[Psquit]

I wonder that everyone that played this game did in fact bought it... Isnt that like Extra-heresy on the codex?.

 

[Angthoron]

The talk about TB and gamejourno integrity and such made me think back to DNF launch and how it got universally panned for what sums up to pretty much the same sins but in a slightly different package.

Butchered mechanics? Check.
Horrible story? Check.
Unnecessary sex/cursing/stupid? Check.
Tiny levels? Check.

And yet with DNF the gamejournos were even saying things like "If you like this, you should be ashamed", and TB had this line, "If you like this, this is why the industry is going to shit", or something close to that, basically pinning the blame for decline on the millions of shit-eaters.

And now he tosses out a little rant in defence of his own eating of shit? And it's fine to like the same things that made DNF so apparently disgusting, even though some people actually claimed having fun? Well, whaddyaknow, how quaint.

 

[Haba]

I'm not sure reviews and journalism are the same thing.

Then you are/were in the wrong line of business. No offence, most video game journalists are.

A professional review is written by someone who at least tries to adhere to the basic journalistic principles. If you steer too far from them, it becomes just another "customer experience".

Though product reviews are always in the danger of being poisoned worthless.

But back to the original point, if someone says that reviews should be written without genre knowledge and without objective comparisons to the previous releases in the same niche... then fuck that guy. It doesn't matter how nice the new car model smells like or how good it felt like for you to sit in it, if it is mechanically inferior to the car released last year.

Why should it be any different with games?

 

[Martius]

The talk about TB and gamejourno integrity and such made me think back to DNF launch and how it got universally panned for what sums up to pretty much the same sins but in a slightly different package.

Butchered mechanics? Check.
Horrible story? Check.
Unnecessary sex/cursing/stupid? Check.
Tiny levels? Check.

And yet with DNF the gamejournos were even saying things like "If you like this, you should be ashamed", and TB had this line, "If you like this, this is why the industry is going to shit", or something close to that, basically pinning the blame for decline on the millions of shit-eaters.

And now he tosses out a little rant in defence of his own eating of shit? And it's fine to like the same things that made DNF so apparently disgusting, even though some people actually claimed having fun? Well, whaddyaknow, how quaint.

Well Forever is terrible mess because of long development time. Its also easy target since you can just say its offensive, sexist and so on. It just baffles me while some people hated Forever for that while praising DmC which had some similarity. Same with Thief, hypocrisy at its finest.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

The talk about TB and gamejourno integrity and such made me think back to DNF launch and how it got universally panned for what sums up to pretty much the same sins but in a slightly different package.

Butchered mechanics? Check.
Horrible story? Check.
Unnecessary sex/cursing/stupid? Check.
Tiny levels? Check.

And yet with DNF the gamejournos were even saying things like "If you like this, you should be ashamed", and TB had this line, "If you like this, this is why the industry is going to shit", or something close to that, basically pinning the blame for decline on the millions of shit-eaters.

And now he tosses out a little rant in defence of his own eating of shit? And it's fine to like the same things that made DNF so apparently disgusting, even though some people actually claimed having fun? Well, whaddyaknow, how quaint.

Well Forever is terrible mess because of long development time. Its also easy target since you can just say its offensive, sexist and so on. It just baffles me while some people hated Forever for that while praising DmC which had some similarity. Same with Thief, hypocrisy at its finest.

Except DmC was still playable and enjoyable.
Unlike DNF and Thiaf.

 

[Martius]

Except DmC was still playable and enjoyable.
Unlike DNF and Thiaf.

Yeah, but how I said earlier most reviews just dismissed it flaws and went with Capcom marketing calling it second coming in series. In my last post I referred to some cutscenes, like Duke having threesome in Forever. If thats bad in Forever why its not in DmC?

 

[MapMan]

I had a similar feeling of what happened to thief when they announced Prince of Persia sands of time. It was a reboot and I hated that idea. I didn't follow any development news at the time. It took me years to put aside my prejudices and play it, and now I love the sands of time trilogy of games, that has an ending in the 3rd game that mirror's the intro of the first, just like the thief trilogy.

That's because Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is actually a very good game. Thi4f is not.

 

[Jick Magger]

Except DmC was still playable and enjoyable.
Unlike DNF and Thiaf.

Yeah, but how I said earlier most reviews just dismissed it flaws and went with Capcom marketing calling it second coming in series. In my last post I referred to some cutscenes, like Duke having threesome in Forever. If thats bad in Forever why its not in DmC?

I suppose it's mainly because Douk's sex appeal is supposed to be one of the main aspects of his character, and that scene combined with all the other instances of him getting some just rubbed people the wrong way. While the sex scene in DmC is basically a throwaway thing that can basically be totally excised from the plot with little consequence.

I'm not trying to defend DmC here; Duke Nukem at it's core just revels in low brow humour and I love him for it, while DmC is just juvenile in a "Written by a 16 year old who's been watching The Crow and listening to Nirvana too much" kind of way that's totally unintentional and painful to experience.

 

[Spectacle]

I had a similar feeling of what happened to thief when they announced Prince of Persia sands of time. It was a reboot and I hated that idea. I didn't follow any development news at the time. It took me years to put aside my prejudices and play it, and now I love the sands of time trilogy of games, that has an ending in the 3rd game that mirror's the intro of the first, just like the thief trilogy.

What do you think about the 2008 re-reboot? I also enjoyed the Sands of Time trilogy, but I found the 2008 Prince of Persia so boring that I couldn't even finish the first level.

 

[sea]

Then you are/were in the wrong line of business. No offence, most video game journalists are.

I am not a "games journalist" and I'm really not sure why people seem to think I am or ever was.

A professional review is written by someone who at least tries to adhere to the basic journalistic principles. If you steer too far from them, it becomes just another "customer experience".

Yes. But, honesty, integrity and lack of undue bias are not necessarily what I would call exclusively journalistic principles. Furthermore, reviews are, effectively, subjective critique framed as purchase advise and/or entertainment for an audience. Given that, the idea of "objective reviews" is not just effectively unattainable, it's also basically pointless and probably not what most people want. The entire point of someone's job as a critic is that their opinion is considered more trustworthy than others', which is the height of subjectivity.

And now he tosses out a little rant in defence of his own eating of shit? And it's fine to like the same things that made DNF so apparently disgusting, even though some people actually claimed having fun? Well, whaddyaknow, how quaint.

That Thief is "shit" on par with Duke Nukem Forever is your opinion, not his. I still do not understand this insistence that if someone likes a game that others don't, that person must be a) stupid b) taking bribes c) has an opinion that holds no value. He has never stated that his opinions on specific games are somehow universally applicable or that anyone who has a different opinion for liking something he doesn't is wrong, except on more or less technical matters of implementation (i.e. is this mechanic broken, is the game buggy, etc.).

 

[Darth Slaughter]

I had a similar feeling of what happened to thief when they announced Prince of Persia sands of time. It was a reboot and I hated that idea. I didn't follow any development news at the time. It took me years to put aside my prejudices and play it, and now I love the sands of time trilogy of games, that has an ending in the 3rd game that mirror's the intro of the first, just like the thief trilogy.

What do you think about the 2008 re-reboot? I also enjoyed the Sands of Time trilogy, but I found the 2008 Prince of Persia so boring that I couldn't even finish the first level.

well, they did one reboot and made a great trilogy out of it. Then, they made another reboot with that other POP in which you couldn't die (in a series that death was one of its trademarks). That game is boring, but I actually finish the game... Guess what? everything You fight for you throw away in the end and you make everything happen again. They even got back to sands of time trilogy, with forgotten sands, which is good except for combat, in which there were like 30 enemies, but they fought in slow motion. But the level design (traps, platforming, puzzles and use of powers) were actually solid. The story is forced inside the trilogy with a brother that was never mentioned before. This game is like they wanted to forget about the 2008 game, and it would be like eidos trying to make a new thief that ignores thiaf, but is set inside the original canon.