Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Thief 4


chakkman

Recommended Posts

It's not an issue of things being "different". It's that they're (in many cases) worse.

And in some aspects it is better. They did not make everything right, that's true, but they also didn't deliver complete bulshit. The stealth mechanics are very solid. If they had focused on that instead of adding those nonsense linear action sequences, the game would have been even better. IMHO the first mission "Lockdown" ist the best part of the game, and it is actually pretty close to the originals. More of that would have been good.

 

And if there were a level editor for the game people would get the chance to proof how good the game could have been. I mean, it's like one would judge TDM by choosing the missions he likes the less. It's a bit unfair.

FM's: Builder Roads, Old Habits, Old Habits Rebuild

Mapping and Scripting: Apples and Peaches

Sculptris Models and Tutorials: Obsttortes Models

My wiki articles: Obstipedia

Texture Blending in DR: DR ASE Blend Exporter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing you also can criticize is the lack of challenge the game provides (which is a general thing with games though these days). It just isn't difficult enough, especially if you played something with hardcore difficulty like TDM with certain missions before (which is a bit too hard in places though IMO, especially with the introduced "AI hears blackjacked or AI's falling" feature). Even on Master difficulty it's not very difficult, you can turn certian things off like the focus thingie, but as it's an integer part of the game, that wouldn't make much sense. Also, turning off the loot or object glint could lead to missing a lot of stuff, as there are many objects in the world which could be pickable, or loot too.

 

Nonetheless, as Obsttorte said, there's a lot to like about the game, and if you want to argue that it has nothing to do with the Thief games, then i only can counter argue, it has loads to do with them. Actually Thief is dripping out of every slit of it. ;) Maybe people expected exactly the same thing. I'm very glad that they didn't just make a plain copy, but developed their own mechanics and style. Everything else for me would have been a disapointment. For the next title i'd wish a total open world environment though, where you can explore the city yourself, and take jobs and buy stuff when you want to, not that strict linear approach they got for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stealth mechanics are very solid

 

What do you mean by "solid"? The first things that come to mind for me are a three stage lightgem and the reduction of footstep sounds to "noise traps" of water and broken glass. Both of which I would consider a neutering of the original stealth system.

 

Anyway, with worse you can't mean the technical side, because of course a 2014 game will be better on the technical side (graphics, sound, UI) than a 10 years plus old game

 

I think the buggy sound issues are enough to prove that statement false.

 

So if you talk about the gameplay then, it's highly subjective. What you consider as worse, i can consider as better

 

That's fine. But if you want a 'live and let live' approach, then you can't at the same time try to discredit the people who disagree with you as "haters" and "biased".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't mean the "hater" thing at all serious, sorry if it came along that way despite the smilie. On the other hand, there's surely some bias around here, i mean, come on, even years before its actual release, this game was already flamed to death judging by some early pictures.

 

Didn't come along the sound issues btw, what are these? Only came along that a guard said the same line doubled, with slight delay, which sounded pretty weird.

Edited by chk772
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, there's surely some bias around here, i mean, come on, even years before its actual release, this game was already flamed to death judging by some early pictures

 

Judging a game by early art is not especially accurate, but the more information a company releases, the easier it becomes to tell whether you like the direction a game is going. Plenty of people had concerns early on, and many of the concerns (such as fears that control was being taken away from the player, the rich lore was being lost, the mechanics trying to appeal to non stealth players) actually turned out to be valid.

 

Didn't come along the sound issues btw, what are these?

 

The multitude of sound bugs is well documented: http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=142344

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, going through that list i can confirm most of these points. Especially the lack of sound balance is a bit immersion breaking, that's right. I sometimes even wondered where voices were coming from, when i heard them, as if the ppl stood next to me, and i thought it would be in the house nearby. (wanna add though that none of the Thief games were perfect in that regard too though) Also in general, people in the game talk too frequently. It seems as if the dev's wanted to make sure the player realizes there are people around.

 

At the point of the control being taken away from the player: Surely. But that's a general thing with games these days, they're mostly designed like that to make life easy for casual players. Which is sort of weird, as there's more and more experienced players around actually. But the thing they want to prevent i guess is that people take time to get used to the controls, and generally the game. Actually, Thief makes it really easy for you. Play it for an hour, and you're aware of pretty much most of the gameplay aspects. Still, i think it makes some interesting enhancements to the Thiefy gameplay, like aerial takedowns for example. What i miss a bit is a cover system like in Deus EX: HR, i think it would have added to the game well. What i'm often a bit unsure about is whether i move to a shadow or not, it's not 100% visible to see where is shadow and where not, they could have done that better.

Edited by chk772
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by "solid"? The first things that come to mind for me are a three stage lightgem and the reduction of footstep sounds to "noise traps" of water and broken glass. Both of which I would consider a neutering of the original stealth system.

I've meant it is working well. Yes, they simplified the acustic part of the game, by dividing between less and more loud surfaces (what you call "noise traps"). But making something simplier doesn't mean it is worse by definition. Regarding the lightgem I can't tell much, as I've disabled it when playing Thief 4. (Like all other hud stuff except the icon in the lower right showing you which equipment you have equipped).

 

In thief and TDM the sound mechanics doesn't differ much. Yeah, we divide into more categories, but the result is the same. On loud surfaces like tiles or metal the player walks slower. That's it.

 

It is a very subjective matter me thinks. But the basic interaction with the ai in regards to stealth gameplay was functioning, even though slightly different then in the original games (were it wasn't perfect either). IMHO the main failure was that they didn't build the game around that, but decided to add additional stuff noone needs (one word: Erin).

FM's: Builder Roads, Old Habits, Old Habits Rebuild

Mapping and Scripting: Apples and Peaches

Sculptris Models and Tutorials: Obsttortes Models

My wiki articles: Obstipedia

Texture Blending in DR: DR ASE Blend Exporter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When talking about the sound, the sound of footsteps in the original Thief's (1 & 2) were pretty hilarious anyway, as if Garrett was wearing high heels or anything. That was A. very unrealistic, as the sound of hopping onto metal was so loud that it surely could have hear from 500 metres away, and B. very unrealistic that someone who was into making as small noise as possible was wearing such shoes, In Thief (new one) i would say, the sound of footstep is about right. But it was already improved massively in Deadly Shadows already so.

 

Talking about the effect of movement noises, i don't know if you noticed, but, when you're crouching through ventilation shafts, when you touch the metal walls, nearby guards will notice you, so you have to be carefully that you don't accidentally bang into the shat's walls too, which is pretty cool actually. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What i miss a bit is a cover system like in Deus EX: HR, i think it would have added to the game well. What i'm often a bit unsure about is whether i move to a shadow or not, it's not 100% visible to see where is shadow and where not, they could have done that better.

 

A cover system would require using more 3rd person, which IMO is not a good thing. Not very thieflike. Not to mention it (a cover system) is really designed for games where you're being shot at, so again, not really a good match for Thief. The light gem is supposed to be your tool for gauging whether you're in the shadows or not, but EM pretty much screwed that up too.

Edited by brethren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with such a system is the usage of 3rd person, as brethren already said. But it is not really a matter of what you use it for. The problem imho is, that you can see someone who cannot see you, as you are in 3rd Person. This is really bad and takes away alot of the chalenge. The peeking system falls under the same category imho.

 

In TDM, leaning around a corner is more safe then really walking around it, but it still provides the chance of beeing detected. So it requires more skill and is closer to reality. The original Deus Ex had leaning, too iirc. I prefer this system to be honest. In DX:HR the cover system made my life pretty easy. (Although playing under the highest difficulty level.)

  • Like 2

FM's: Builder Roads, Old Habits, Old Habits Rebuild

Mapping and Scripting: Apples and Peaches

Sculptris Models and Tutorials: Obsttortes Models

My wiki articles: Obstipedia

Texture Blending in DR: DR ASE Blend Exporter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like games that have done a cover system that is first person. So you press USE when you're behind cover to peek over the top and otherwise just use lean left/right on the sides of the obstacle. So much better IMO because you're not bound/stuck to the object in question having to press a button to be released from it. Its less awkward, more immersive, and much more realistic without pulling the players vision back so they can see things the enemy can't.

Edited by Lux
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not like Dishonored. It had a bad story especially in comparisson to the classical Thief games - so if Thief 4 is similar to Dishonored, well it's not a good game to me.

I guess you could play it, but it's not the same.

"I really perceive that vanity about which most men merely prate — the vanity of the human or temporal life. I live continually in a reverie of the future. I have no faith in human perfectibility. I think that human exertion will have no appreciable effect upon humanity. Man is now only more active — not more happy — nor more wise, than he was 6000 years ago. The result will never vary — and to suppose that it will, is to suppose that the foregone man has lived in vain — that the foregone time is but the rudiment of the future — that the myriads who have perished have not been upon equal footing with ourselves — nor are we with our posterity. I cannot agree to lose sight of man the individual, in man the mass."...

- 2 July 1844 letter to James Russell Lowell from Edgar Allan Poe.

badge?user=andarson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with such a system is the usage of 3rd person, as brethren already said. But it is not really a matter of what you use it for. The problem imho is, that you can see someone who cannot see you, as you are in 3rd Person. This is really bad and takes away alot of the chalenge. The peeking system falls under the same category imho.

 

In TDM, leaning around a corner is more safe then really walking around it, but it still provides the chance of beeing detected. So it requires more skill and is closer to reality. The original Deus Ex had leaning, too iirc. I prefer this system to be honest. In DX:HR the cover system made my life pretty easy. (Although playing under the highest difficulty level.)

Good points actually, i take back the request for a cover system then. :D It's just that it was fun in HR, but it's another game for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've long wanted a cover system for TDM. A player that is standing behind a pole should be harder to spot than one standing in a comparable spot out in the open. Too much processing power though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it really require that much more processing power? What if you had the ability to set objects in the world as "cover"? Then, if the player is right next to the cover object, his light gem is less affected? This is instead of doing some super-complex lighting method.

--- War does not decide who is right, war decides who is left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wouldn't make sense if the AI was on the same side of the cover as you.

 

Right now there are about 4 targets on the player model, and if the AI sees any one of those targets, you're spotted (based on lightgem, distance, etc). So if you're leaning around a corner and one of the shoulder targets peeks out, you're spotted just as easily as if you stepped entirely around the corner. Same thing if you peek your head over the top of a desk...to an AI there's no difference between poking your head up and standing up entirely.

 

I'd like a system with 20 or so targets spread over the AI model, and traces that randomly target them, so that if you poke 5% of your body out from behind a corner, you have only a 5% chance of being spotted. Crouching would then make you harder to spot because some of the targets would be obscured. Pressing into a corner could also make you slightly harder to spot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the more targets revealed the more chance the AI will trigger ?

 

I like the sound of that.

 

20 targets sounds a lot though, say 2 per limb, 1 per shoulder, 1 for the torso and 1 for the head so 12 targets, maybe a couple more for the hips to encourage people to keep their bum out of sight.

 

So 12 to 14 targets on the player should do.

 

The closer the AI is the fewer targets would need to be visible so from the other end of the street you'd need most of the targets visible to be definitely spotted, if the AI is on top of you you'd only need 1.

 

You'd probably need a speed of movement multiplier on it as well so running has more chance of being spotted than creeping.

 

Below whatever limit on visible targets you've got from distance you roll the dice based on how many are visible say 10% chance of no reaction, 10% chance of a definite alert, 40% gets the AI wandering over for a closer look and 40% gets a "huh ? is there something there", if the AI isn't alerted this is recalculated every couple of seconds or so while the player is in their sight cone.

 

This is me just thinking aloud btw, I don't seriously expect anyone to implement this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fewer you have the less accurate the percentage is. You don't want to have just one in the head and one in a foot, because a head is much easier to spot than a foot. You'd group them in the areas where the player is most likely to be seen. If 20% of the targets are in the player's head, then you have a 20% chance of being seen if your head is poking out, as an example.

 

The closer the AI is the fewer targets would need to be visible so from the other end of the street you'd need most of the targets visible to be definitely spotted, if the AI is on top of you you'd only need 1.

 

No, under this system you would still only need one target to be succesfully spotted. The random traces are what give you your 'chance of being seen'. It's still possible, with only a single target visible, that you'll be spotted, but because the traces are random there's only a 1 in 20 chance every frame (or however often traces are done) of that one being targetted. Even if it is targetted, however, since the next trace probably won't be the same target, the AI may not register enough of an alert to actually come investigate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that really computationally expensive? I can see it being an issue from the point of view of needing to program, test and implement it - but surely the difference between checking 4 points and checking one randomised point isn't gonna make anyone's PC overheat. Among other things, one is less than four. It seems like a pretty good idea tbh.

 

A possibly cheaper and alltogether gamier solution might be to have just one target for the centre of the player and another target on the front of the AI's head. If AI can see the player target... you're likely rumbled. If Player can see the AI target... fudge a small chance you get rumbled.

Edited by jay pettitt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that really computationally expensive?

The problem is not checking whether the AI can see the player, I think. It's keeping track of 20 points. This can be reduced by just keeping track of one point (the players center) and then infer the location of the chosen point from that and the player status (crouched, leaning, etc.) before checking whether or not the AI can see it, but it's still an extra calculation.

You can call me Phi, Numbers, Digits, Ratio, 16, 1618, or whatever really, as long as it's not Phil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

That wouldn't make sense if the AI was on the same side of the cover as you.

 

Right now there are about 4 targets on the player model, and if the AI sees any one of those targets, you're spotted (based on lightgem, distance, etc). So if you're leaning around a corner and one of the shoulder targets peeks out, you're spotted just as easily as if you stepped entirely around the corner. Same thing if you peek your head over the top of a desk...to an AI there's no difference between poking your head up and standing up entirely.

 

I'd like a system with 20 or so targets spread over the AI model, and traces that randomly target them, so that if you poke 5% of your body out from behind a corner, you have only a 5% chance of being spotted. Crouching would then make you harder to spot because some of the targets would be obscured. Pressing into a corner could also make you slightly harder to spot.

 

But I'm not sure this is really computational too expensive. It is more expensive if you use more points, but not nec. makes a performance difference.

 

Also, it could be spread out by time. Instead of checking all the same four points every X frames, check one point every frame, but randomly choose it. Then integrate the info over time ("saw the feet" (2 points), "saw the shoulders" (5 points), "did not see the eyes" (-5 points) and so on).

 

Something like this (about 35 seconds in the video)

 

 

Performance wise, I think the engine also does a poor job of allowing multi-traces - if you have multiple traces from the same source, in a cone, then a lot of the information from trace #1 can be re-used by trace #2 and so on (after all, they are all close together). But so far each trace does the same computations all over again.

 

Plus, one might not need to do traces if the AI cannot be able to see the player, like in full darkness - although this optimization is probably already done.

 

Edit: To expand on the random-traces a bit more:

  1. First lets define the points. 20 is probably overkill, but 12..14 sounds good. How many we use, however, is not that important.
  2. For each point, define a price (5 points for feet, 3 for hand, 10 for head, 20 for torso, maybe 5 for the eyes which might shine and so on)
  3. Set a count to 0 (AI cannot see player).

 

Every frame, pick a random point, and add small random offset (a few units at most). This is to counter the "player is standing still behing a grating and every point is covered by accident). The do a trace. If the point is visible from the eye of the AI (add in peripherical vision simulation), then add the price to the counter.

 

Every frame, decay the counter (subtract some amount).

 

So, over time, the chance that the AI will spot the player goes up if parts of him are visible, the more parts, the faster the chance raises. If the player hides, or becomes hidden, then the counter will only decay and so the chance will be reduced each frame.

 

The values need some tuning, of course.

Edited by Tels

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer  »  DeTeEff

      I've updated the articles for your FMs and your author category at the wiki. Your newer nickname (DeTeEff) now comes first, and the one in parentheses is your older nickname (Fieldmedic). Just to avoid confusing people who played your FMs years ago and remember your older nickname. I've added a wiki article for your latest FM, Who Watches the Watcher?, as part of my current updating efforts. Unless I overlooked something, you have five different FMs so far.
      · 0 replies
    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...