Chi Haotian

The choice will still be up to them, with the choice of the difficulty level. And they would still be able to make progress on Expert, just in a more intense, involving way. Playing on Hard, however, is pretty much the same as playing on Expert, and it would allow saves too, so those who need to save wouldn't miss much by choosing to play on Hard. A save restriction on Expert would make that difficulty level really live up to its name, I think.

Does D3 engine take into account the dispersion of light when it does lighting/shadow-casting? Because notmally, the further an object is from the light source (or the light source and the object -- from the surface), the more the cast shadow will be blurred. I don't remember if D3 had this effect, but TDS sure didn't -- the shadows in TDS were always sharp no matter what the distance was, and it didn't look good despite even the fancy dynamic lighting. Will this be addressed in TDM?

Speaking of Difficulty Levels again. It was suggested elsewhere that difficulty levels should determine AI abilities (sight, hearing, aptitude, etc). I would think it's a bad idea. When switching to a lower difficulty level, one should not get slower, dumbed-down guards who see and hear less. This would be faulty. Difficulty levels should not make such qualitative differences (this was yet another defect of T3), but rather quantitative ones, as was pretty much done in T1 and T2 (i.e. player hitpoints, availability of weapons and inventory, number of guards, different objectives and points of access, etc). As an innovation to this system, it would be great to implement a 'save restriction' for Expert difficulty, so that it would be possible to save only at the loadout screen in the beginning of a mission.

I always wondered about this -- do copy rights remain after the developer company has gone out of business (Looking Glass, then Ion Storm)? And even if they do, do they extend to particular details of the game like plot, faction names, etc? And finally, does it really matter for a mod that will be released, pretty much like any FM, for non-commercial, free of charge, open-source use?

Yes. Thanks, guys.

Will archers use vantage points as they used to in T1? (There were vantage points in T2 also, but bowmen never cared to use them...) Also, remember the archer assassin from the Assassins mission -- the way he used to run off and then shoot from a distance every time, making it bloody hard to fight him? I guess it was due to vantage points used in that level, and also because of some scripting. Will similar behaviour and the use of vantage points be implemented for archers in TDM?

In DromEd I always tried to make large, impressive buildings, but very often I ended up with stuff that was simplistic or architecturally improper. It wasn't enough to have an idea of what I wanted built, nor did it help much to see real architecture without being able to know precisely how it was constructed. Does anyone know of a good source from which one can learn basic principles of architecture, of structuring buildings, where one can see plans or blueprints?

I've tried Doom 3 Demo to see what the engine feels like. Will any of Doom 3 gameplay features be retained for TDM? In particular, when D3 character gets near the end of his hit-points, for a few moments the screen pools blood-red and the surrounding sounds deafen and resound. This could be a great combat effect for Thief. And it would be a good compromise between, as has been suggested elsewhere, significantly crippling player movements when he is nearly dead and leaving him totally unaffected.

Will regular users have the capability to change such things as the AI (without having any particular skills in game-development coding, but willing to learn what is necessary)? What tools will be released, besides the editor? (There will be modifications made to the Doom 3 editor itself, right?) It would be great if some coding tutorials were released along with other tools.

I think you're correct about this. Still, I think it's safe to assume that hiring new people to make up most of their team played a major role. It's hard to believe that the same people who introduced Keepers in the story of the first game would have brought us Keeper Enforcers in the third. Anyway, I was just concerned that a promising project does not end up disliked as TDS game is, by trying to cater to varying audiences.

But if publicity does attract people willing to help out, wouldn't accepting them make the TDM more like an FM project, or more like TDS? By accepting people thus attracted, TDM team risks getting people who haven't been there from the beginning and haven't grasped the depth of ideas that inspired the project from the start. Wasn't it a similar thing that ruined Thief: Deadly Shadows for so many who do not like it? As for attracting players for when the Mod is finished -- most of them are on TTLG forums, so making an announcement there on the day of release would be enough. As for gaining audience that would let the developers know that their work is appreciated and its results anticipated -- most of it is on these forums.

There is a thread in News & Announcements called The Dark Mod In Gamestar. Does The Mod need publicity at all? How would the project ever benefit from attracting random audiences?

First thing one noticed when playing Thief for the first time is the impracticability of overt attack. Player began to associate this with the stealth genre. After playing for a while, one learned how to exploit imperfections of AI combat skills, and stealth became optional. T3 tried to enforce stealthy gameplay by replacing player's sword with a dagger, and by raising AI combat skills slightly. This was more like a hindrance rather than a raise in difficulty, and it was still possible to learn to kill multiple guards in open melee combat. In TDM, with sword in player's hand again, I think it would be a great idea to increase AI combat skills significantly. If the game is to be true to the stealth genre, player should not consider its opposite as an equal option. (For example, a player may be able to stand against a single guard in combat successfully, but not against two, three or more.) This can be acheived only by raising the guards' martial abilities to a brand new level. Far from making the game impossible, this would resuscitate and amplify that feeling everyone had when they just began playing Thief, the feeling of unyielding demand by the genre. Will the AI combat abilities be increased so?

It is good to hear that TDM characters will have varying height, and that these particular Builders characters will carry legacy from the original game. T3 idea of standardizing the models and simply making them skinnable was a poor one. Greater variety of well-made models is very effective in creating good gameplay.

I hope the new sounds will be clear, loud and realistic like the original ones. I played T2X and realized that a single poorly recorded sound (especially if it's recurring) can reduce immersion and enjoyment of the gameplay.

Hammerite (and Mechanist) guards were distinguished by their intimidating body-size in T1 (and T2), which helped create the feeling of strength that is accorded to their order. What felt wrong in T3 was that Hammerite guards were identical to regular guard models, distinguished only by voice, armor and weapon. TDM seems to model the Builders' faction on Hammerites. I think Builders' models should follow the way of T1.

Will you not be using the original sounds from T1 and T2?