Thief vs. AAA Gaming (how do these old dogs stack up against the AAA gaming industry of today) - General

[QUOTE=Toats MaGoats;49519972]I never played thief before. I'll definitely buy it this week when I get the time to play.[/QUOTE] I first played it a few years ago, and even today it was one of the most immersive series I've played.

I totally agree with the sleepwalking, I didn't really know if it was me or the game, but I swear, sometimes playing games feel like a chore.

It's just so much more satisfying to discover shit yourself instead of quest markers exactly pinpointing shit you need to find or go to..

I can't finish listening to this. At the start he claims he'll point out the flaws of modern games and the strengths of Thief without being an elitist but being an elitist is exactly what he's doing for the entire video. He complains about games having variety and choice and praises Thief for limiting the player while ignoring the intent of those other games. It's easy to say Thief is better than modern games when you ignore all of Thief's faults and lump the flaws of modern games into some monolithic whole. He compared Thief to Saint's Row, calling the variety of weapons 'simplistic and juvenile' ignoring the fact that both are entirely different games with different goals, and being a huge elitist bellend while doing it. He keeps jumping his examples of 'flaws' with other games when comparing to Thief, which just leads me to believe he can't find any coherent thing to complain about and instead has chosen to lump all modern games together, ignoring their intent, their genres, their other mechanics, in an attempt to build Thief up to something bigger than it is. Some of his examples of Thief being a better or more realistic/sensible game are bullshit also. "Here's a kitchen, we know there won't be any gold in a kitchen. Here's a note and some gold in the kitchen." Or how hiding things under the stairs is somehow wrong because people don't leave things under the stairs (which the totally do BTW), but somehow a lever that opens a secret door half way up a wall that can only be accessed with a rope arrow is better? Also his complaint that you get lost in Thief (2014) when you turn the map and objective markers off is bullshit because he fucking praised the original games for being maze like and not giving you clear maps. So is having to explore the map for stuff to steal and the paths around a good thing or a bad thing? You can't have it both ways. I agree that the level design is flawed in many areas, but the same can be said of the originals. A lot of what he says I agree with, objective markers are crap, games do tend to shoehorn in as many features as possible with no regard to whether they fit, and unnecessary cutscenes are annoying. However the way he presents his points, and that he's willing to give Thief a free pass on its flaws while using "modern games" as a grab bag of complaints really makes me dislike the video. If he had use Thief (2014) and Dishonored as a comparison to The Dark Project and The Metal Age the video would have been a lot more coherent and he could have used actual comparisons between the games and design philosophies of the different time periods. I think he probably didn't do that because if he had to honestly measure the old games to the modern games he'd have to admit that the old games aren't universally better than the nebulous "modern games". Also, Thief II: The Metal Age isn't "the best stealth game even to this day", Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is. If he wants a stealth game where you play a disempowered character he should play Styx: Master of Shadows. Or play Dishonored or Thief (2014) and actually look around and read the notes, because actually playing them with the same restrictions as the old Thief games is pretty fun, not perfect but not the hot garbage you'd think they are from how he talks about them.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;49521610][B]I can't finish listening to this. At the start he claims he'll point out the flaws of modern games and the strengths of Thief without being an elitist but being an elitist is exactly what he's doing for the entire video. He complains about games having variety and choice and praises Thief for limiting the player while ignoring the intent of those other games. It's easy to say Thief is better than modern games when you ignore all of Thief's faults and lump the flaws of modern games into some monolithic whole.[/B] He compared Thief to Saint's Row, calling the variety of weapons 'simplistic and juvenile' ignoring the fact that both are entirely different games with different goals, and being a huge elitist bellend while doing it. He keeps jumping his examples of 'flaws' with other games when comparing to Thief, which just leads me to believe he can't find any coherent thing to complain about and instead has chosen to lump all modern games together, ignoring their intent, their genres, their other mechanics, in an attempt to build Thief up to something bigger than it is. Some of his examples of Thief being a better or more realistic/sensible game are bullshit also. "Here's a kitchen, we know there won't be any gold in a kitchen. Here's a note and some gold in the kitchen." Or how hiding things under the stairs is somehow wrong because people don't leave things under the stairs (which the totally do BTW), but somehow a lever that opens a secret door half way up a wall that can only be accessed with a rope arrow is better? Also his complaint that you get lost in Thief (2014) when you turn the map and objective markers off is bullshit because he fucking praised the original games for being maze like and not giving you clear maps. So is having to explore the map for stuff to steal and the paths around a good thing or a bad thing? You can't have it both ways. I agree that the level design is flawed in many areas, but the same can be said of the originals. A lot of what he says I agree with, objective markers are crap, games do tend to shoehorn in as many features as possible with no regard to whether they fit, and unnecessary cutscenes are annoying. However the way he presents his points, and that he's willing to give Thief a free pass on its flaws while using "modern games" as a grab bag of complaints really makes me dislike the video. If he had use Thief (2014) and Dishonored as a comparison to The Dark Project and The Metal Age the video would have been a lot more coherent and he could have used actual comparisons between the games and design philosophies of the different time periods. I think he probably didn't do that because if he had to honestly measure the old games to the modern games he'd have to admit that the old games aren't universally better than the nebulous "modern games". Also, Thief II: The Metal Age isn't "the best stealth game even to this day", Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is. If he wants a stealth game where you play a disempowered character he should play Styx: Master of Shadows. Or play Dishonored or Thief (2014) and actually look around and read the notes, because actually playing them with the same restrictions as the old Thief games is pretty fun, not perfect but not the hot garbage you'd think they are from how he talks about them.[/QUOTE] As I understand his point isn't that choice and variety is [I]bad[/I], it's that game developers don't seem to consider [I]why[/I] they have those things. Take The Witcher 3 for example. Did the weapon variety make that game better? Not really, I think it was pretty annoying constantly finding new swords that were slightly better than the last one, and the same applies to Skyrim. I also kinda stopped doing side quests because they started to suffer in quality later in the game - maybe because there were loads of them? If I couldn't expect a rewarding quest, I'd rather not try a quest at all; it might end up being a waste of time. I loved TW3 for the record. And he did compare the game with Thi4f (and Dishonoured to some degree)? I must say that though it does seem like he really, really likes the old Thief games, you kinda have to look beyond that. He's saying that those games did a lot of things right (not necessarily that they were perfect and should be a 100% emulated) at the time that he thinks games do wrong today... and I think some of his points are pretty agreeable.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;49521610]Also his complaint that you get lost in Thief (2014) when you turn the map and objective markers off is bullshit because he fucking praised the original games for being maze like and not giving you clear maps. So is having to explore the map for stuff to steal and the paths around a good thing or a bad thing? You can't have it both ways. I agree that the level design is flawed in many areas, but the same can be said of the originals.[/QUOTE] I haven't played any Thief game but I imagine it's the same problem as with Dishonored. You can turn off quest makers but then the game doesn't give you enough information for you to find the objective on your own. I got stuck in the Knife of Dunwall because I had to open some valves but I was never told what they looked like or where they were supposed to be, and the level had lots of non-interactive valves and piping all over the place. Or the game would be like "go talk to that guy" but wouldn't tell me where I should look for him, etc. A game that's actually made to be played without objective markers needs to have more specific quest descriptions and dialogue so you don't have to examine every inch of the map to find where to go.

[QUOTE=lxmach1;49515695] "It's not enough to put things in because they're fun" is just untrue for a vast majority of games.[/QUOTE] I think his point was that all these elements are being added to games because they're trends. Not because they're actually fun.

I thought this video was brilliant.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;49521838]I haven't played any Thief game but I imagine it's the same problem as with Dishonored. You can turn off quest makers but then the game doesn't give you enough information for you to find the objective on your own. I got stuck in the Knife of Dunwall because I had to open some valves but I was never told what they looked like or where they were supposed to be, and the level had lots of non-interactive valves and piping all over the place. Or the game would be like "go talk to that guy" but wouldn't tell me where I should look for him, etc. A game that's actually made to be played without objective markers needs to have more specific quest descriptions and dialogue so you don't have to examine every inch of the map to find where to go.[/QUOTE] The levels in Thief are more linear than Dishonored, but it also has notes around to lead you to different areas. There are a couple of things that are unintuitive, like interacting with a switch to grab a meat hook and activate the conveyor to move to another area, but that's hardly the norm.

[QUOTE=lxmach1;49515695]While he makes a lot of good points, it sounds like he's saying that being powerful is bad and story must trump gameplay (not wearing armor? die in one hit). He makes it sound as if story should come first, and if something doesn't make sense (hidden loot? unrealistic) then it's bad. It's like he's saying games that are just trying to be games and not a story are simplistic and juvenile. If he narrowed it down to RPGs or first person stealth games, then I'd agree completely but as it stands he's making a ton of blanket statements on the overall gaming industry. Again, I agree with most of his points but they can't be applied to all games like he seems to be doing. "It's not enough to put things in because they're fun" is just untrue for a vast majority of games.[/QUOTE] I don't think that's what he's saying at all. It seems like you're operating with this false dichotomy where there's story on one side and gameplay on the other, and they sabotage each other when put in the same place. The video isn't chastising modern games for sacrificing story for gameplay, it's chastising them for sacrificing immersive and mechanically complex gameplay for immediately gratifying and simplistic gameplay. Which isn't to say that there is anything inherently wrong with immediately gratifying and simplistic, just like there's nothing inherently wrong with the Fast & Furious movies, but it's frustrating that the mainstream gaming industry is dominated with that kind of stuff, leaving little space outside of the indie/AA scene for games that demand more cerebral energy from the player and have a subtler payoff. [editline]13th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=axemunger;49516303]What he says about the mechanics & story telling of the game is really interesting although nothing new. But then he starts to lose me when he goes on about how modern day games are stagnating & how older games were better. The thing is this isn't anything new either, the games industry has done this before in the 80s with platformers, the 90s with fighting games & the 2000s with FPS games. AAA games tend to do this because they're funded by huge companies who want what sells not what's "good", it just happens that "good" tends to be what sells for the most part. It's like he's just now starting to realize that AAA games are ridiculously homogenized & that they don't appeal to him anymore, but the thing is there's still niche games out there & that this homogenization doesn't apply to all games, just the AAA games. This video would be a lot better if it was just a review or analysis of the Theif games instead of tacking on a message about AAA games[/QUOTE] Well obviously, but the AAA market is important territory for the games industry. AAA games have more resources and have a more prominent role in shaping the industry's future as a whole, and just because the AAA industry isn't scratching a particular itch doesn't mean that there's a AA or indie alternative that will do it for you, because even if AA or indie games can afford to be more daring, they can't afford the same scope and refinement that AAAs do. Just because it's nothing new doesn't mean it's not a problem worth addressing.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;49521610]Also, Thief II: The Metal Age isn't "the best stealth game even to this day", Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is. If he wants a stealth game where you play a disempowered character he should play Styx: Master of Shadows. Or play Dishonored or Thief (2014) and actually look around and read the notes, because actually playing them with the same restrictions as the old Thief games is pretty fun, not perfect but not the hot garbage you'd think they are from how he talks about them.[/QUOTE] Going to have to disagree. I'm huge into stealth games, they're my favorite genre, but Thief 2 is the best stealth game I've played yet. I love the MGS series (Haven't played 5 yet though so that may change), I love Styx, and I hated Dishonored. Thief isn't perfect but this ass-looking game from 2000 is still the most immersive stealth game I've played thanks to its gigantic sprawling levels and phenomenal sound design. I played these games for the first relatively recently too, so it's not like I have nostalgia for them either.

Thief 2 is a good game, I agree, it even reduced how often you have to deal with zombies (the one thing I hated about the first game) but there are just too many little things about the Thief series as a whole that prevent me from considering it the best. Things like secret switches being in places on the player can reasonable reach (why even have such a switch) or Garret wearing tap shoes all the time (soft soled shoes exist), or even just the movement feeling clunky. And I did play the Thief games as they came out, they always bothered me.

Haven't we been saying this since the 90's about gameplay over graphics?

[QUOTE=Tools;49524166]Haven't we been saying this since the 90's about gameplay over graphics?[/QUOTE] Sadly the mass market is easily impressed with flashy things. It's the reason shooters and third person action games are ubiquitous while stealth games are a nearly dead genre.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;49524332]Sadly the mass market is easily impressed with flashy things. It's the reason shooters and third person action games are ubiquitous while stealth games are a nearly dead genre.[/QUOTE] Hardly, the Stealth genre is kept alive by series' like MGS and Splinter Cell and to a lesser extent AssCreed, with stealth indie games coming out fairly frequently. You want a nearly dead genre, take a gander at RTS games.

[QUOTE=DeVotchKa;49524356]Hardly, the Stealth genre is kept alive by series' like MGS and Splinter Cell and to a lesser extent AssCreed, with stealth indie games coming out fairly frequently. You want a nearly dead genre, take a gander at RTS games.[/QUOTE] The fact that you can name the majority of the genre with 3 titles says to me it's nearly dead. Assassin's Creed is hardly a stealth series, most missions don't even allow a stealth approach. And indie stealth games are a very new phenomenon, even then they're closer to puzzles games with Stealth Bastard, The Marvellous Miss Take, and Volume being heavy one the puzzle solving element above anything else.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;49524501]The fact that you can name the majority of the genre with 3 titles says to me it's nearly dead. Assassin's Creed is hardly a stealth series, most missions don't even allow a stealth approach. And indie stealth games are a very new phenomenon, even then they're closer to puzzles games with Stealth Bastard, The Marvellous Miss Take, and Volume being heavy one the puzzle solving element above anything else.[/QUOTE] What about Hitman and Dishonored? Both are somewhat different but theyre still pretty stealth heavy games. Not just that but indie/open source games like Gunpoint and The Dark Mod are still present. People like going the stealthy route in deus ex games both old and recent too. Stealth isnt really dead, its just "in the shadows", ironically enough.

[QUOTE=SoaringScout;49516515]I like when he actually talks about game design, but when he starts bitching about the industry, acting like he knows better than the people within it, and writing off the majority of modern games, it's just frustrating to listen to.[/QUOTE] He has a great editing and writing style, but I agree, a big portion of the video felt like "kids these days" When he actually started showing ACTUAL examples of what he's talking about. It's good, but the somewhat endless talk about how X is good, Y is bad, Z is bad but then doesn't really spend some of his 30minutes showing why that thing is bad in practice just got a little old. That's a bit hypocritical of me in my videos, but I do try hard to show direct examples.

[QUOTE=Kabstrac;49526047]Dark Messiah in many ways reminds me of these older thief games. Man I love dark messiah[/QUOTE] You mean Kicking People: The Game?

[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;49526073]You mean Kicking People: The Game?[/QUOTE] Still a fun game [editline]13th January 2016[/editline] Geez what's up with that minimap in Thief 2014 It's so zoomed in that it's not even useful.

[QUOTE=DeVotchKa;49524356]Hardly, the Stealth genre is kept alive by series' like MGS and Splinter Cell and to a lesser extent AssCreed, with stealth indie games coming out fairly frequently. You want a nearly dead genre, take a gander at RTS games.[/QUOTE] From my experience with Ass Creed (the newer ones at any rate), I'd really just lump it in with other open world games.

[QUOTE=MacD11;49524825]What about Hitman and Dishonored? Both are somewhat different but theyre still pretty stealth heavy games. Not just that but indie/open source games like Gunpoint and The Dark Mod are still present. People like going the stealthy route in deus ex games both old and recent too. Stealth isnt really dead, its just "in the shadows", ironically enough.[/QUOTE] stealth is kept alive nowadays by being mixed with other genres, it's very rare now to see an entirely classic one. but paradoxically more and more games are starting to incorporate elements of it where they didn't necessarily have to, to the point that it's probably livelier as a modifier to existing genres than it was as its own thing

The sleepwalk hit it right in the spot for me. Even great games like uncharted or the last of us. (Not fps I know but I am talking about the industry in general) So as I was saying about naughty's games , I would just walk like a zombie and kill shit untill I would get a cutscene which was my only reward in the games . I could mention a shit ton more of games but I will mention some good shit too. Soma was a great FPS experience. Look I agree with games being mainstream AS FUCK these days, but I understand how business works and being involved in a video game developing project as a person who doesn't care about gain but only a way to express my passion for it. Big companies care about MONEY , streamlined easy as fuck games with CINEMATIC experiences cash in hard. We all know it with games such as Assasin's creed , call of duty and much more. Been a fucking long time since I saw a new title. It's always sequels trying to cash in. Like far cry Tribes , using the title to cash in. Never the less games like Soma make the difference for me. One last thing to say, fuck yeah Thief should be praised , the game has a unique feel and a world with its own laws and thats why for me its a great game. You can hire an architect for that sweet blueprint to work on, you can hire some amazing sound designers , modelers and a clueless business man as the game designer and pressure to fuck these people with a deadline and responsibility. Half-life 1 wasn't made like this , soma wasn't developed like this either. That is when passion is flushed down in the shitter.

I think its unreasonable to expect massive corporations to prioritize making fun games over making money. It has absolutely nothing to do with incompetence on the part of the developers, they aren't allowed to be creative or take any risks. Anyone who steps out of line gets fired and replaced , its just the nature of the beast. Personally I'd like this whole corporate industry to be demolished, I can only imagine what a renaissance in games that would be.

[QUOTE=Cone;49531648]stealth is kept alive nowadays by being mixed with other genres, it's very rare now to see an entirely classic one. but paradoxically more and more games are starting to incorporate elements of it where they didn't necessarily have to, to the point that it's probably livelier as a modifier to existing genres than it was as its own thing[/QUOTE] Stealth as a secondary feature is not nearly the same as having an entire game built around that aspect. It's very basic and rarely satisfying, since essential stealth tools and mechanics are often missing and you are expected to engage in combat at SOME point.

this video sort of put into words why i really don't like a lot of the games my friends seem to (fallout 4, skyrim, dishonored, etc). they all feel so fat, bloated, and full of useless guff - so what if they're the size of California and have 4000 quests, it doesn't matter a damn if it sacrifices intent and makes completing it a chore. i'm much more for games with a strong narrative, sensible decision making rather than gamey decision making, and focused gameplay - mother 3 comes to mind, as does papers please. no offense to anyone who does enjoy the kinds of games i mentioned of course, they have a market, just figured i'd give my 2 cents

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49528689]From my experience with Ass Creed (the newer ones at any rate), I'd really just lump it in with other open world games.[/QUOTE] I've only played Assassin's Creed 2 but every time I attempted something remotely stealthy or clever it broke the game. Once I had to climb a tower to reach a character, but the "proper" way was heavily guarded. I found a secondary way to climb the tower, one that I probably wasn't supposed to be able to find, and haflway up it teleported me to a cutscene in a middle of a fight. Another time, I was supposed to chase a guy through a complex and complicated chase segment but instead decided to kill him with a projectile immediately. I teleported to the end of the maze. So yeah, Assassin's Creed probably doesn't count as a stealth game. It's an action platformer pretending to be a stealth game. Shadow of Mordor pulls stealth off better than Assassin's Creed.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;49521610] Also, Thief II: The Metal Age isn't "the best stealth game even to this day", Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is. If he wants a stealth game where you play a disempowered character he should play Styx: Master of Shadows. Or play Dishonored or Thief (2014) and actually look around and read the notes, because actually playing them with the same restrictions as the old Thief games is pretty fun, not perfect but not the hot garbage you'd think they are from how he talks about them.[/QUOTE] I saddens me that we will never get a stealth game as good as Chaos Theory ever again in the current game climate.

Quest markers are not always dumb you know. In Skyrim I appreciated them because the world was really big, I can see why in Thief they shouldn't be needed but yeah most of his points are fair. I'm now playing (and almost finishing) Jedi Academy and I have found so much satisfaction playing this that many other AAA games, it also has a map that it's just that, a map, not an interactive one so you have to figure out the halls and where the objetive is. PD: In Infamous I didn't feel that much overpowered, in fact the enemies killed me sometimes without sweating. Specially the special ones.

[QUOTE=Seibitsu;49536386]Quest markers are not always dumb you know. In Skyrim I appreciated them because the world was really big, I can see why in Thief they shouldn't be needed but yeah most of his points are fair. I'm now playing (and almost finishing) Jedi Academy and I have found so much satisfaction playing this that many other AAA games, it also has a map that it's just that, a map, not an interactive one so you have to figure out the halls and where the objetive is. PD: In Infamous I didn't feel that much overpowered, in fact the enemies killed me sometimes without sweating. Specially the special ones.[/QUOTE] I wish quest markers could be done more organically. It always bothers me in games, especially open-world ones, when you're being tasked to kill an individual NPC or steal a very particular item or something, so it tells you exactly where in the gamespace that point of interest is. I wish that it could instead be like "Oh, here's a quest marker leading you to the general area, from there it's your job to locate the precise location of the object." Shadow of Mordor did a decent job of this. You have to interrogate people to find the locations of NPC war chiefs, and then they give you a general area of the map where they're at. Once you get there it's your job to track down their precise location on the map. I thought this was a decent way of alleviating the frustration of tracking down an item in a large world, while still feeling like you're not psychically and magically knowing where everything is and having to do some of the legwork on your own. I get why map markers exist, they're anti-frustration features. They can be handled better in certain contexts, however.