Slashdot Mirror
Third Thief Title Transitions To Third-Person
Thanks to GameSpot for its article revealing further details and screenshots from the third game in the Thief series, now named Thief: Deadly Shadows, which makes a change in supporting "...what publisher Eidos is calling a 'third-person cinematic action view'." The piece continues: "This new perspective will be in addition to the series' traditional first-person view, which was first created by long-defunct developer Looking Glass Studios." Blue's News also has information from the full press release, which notes: "Characters and objects cast real shadows that effect stealth gameplay, requiring the player to manipulate darkness and light to create your own shadows to hide in."
"third-person cinematic action view"
:(
ARRGH! Its been consolified!
In come the consoles to ruin another PC game. Don't get me wrong, I love my consoles, but for the love of God, make console games or make PC games, when you make one for both you hobble it.
It's sad when choosing an installation directory on your own qualifies you as an "advanced user."
I think the largest factor in people being upset with this move is that it signals a similar direction that Deus Ex 2 took. Having a third person option isn't all that bad on it's own, but the potential reasons behind it and more recent releases from the same studio make me really stop looking forward to this game.
As long as the player has the option to be in first person it should be ok, but this game is really being weighed against a hefty legacy and I myself am a huge Thief fan that recoils in pain at this news. I just don't want to be let down.
Morrowind for Xbox managed to make very quick load transitions that gave the illusion of one huge, seamless world. Don't blame it entirely on the RAM - blame it on developers who don't want to do the extra work.
I anticipate comments here mirroring many of the comments on the web forums discussing this, consisting mostly of the assertion that third person loses some of the immersion that first person supposedly provides. Consoles have again "ruined" what would have otherwise been a great PC title.
Now, I played Thief 1 & 2, and they're both great games, classics to be sure. Still, I can't deny that after having played Metal Gear Solid and especially Splinter Cell, there's something to be said for the third person perspective, particularly when used in stealth games. What the first person perspective may add in immersion, it detracts signficantly in peripheral view. Ok, sure, I can see around a corner that I probably wouldn't be able to see around without third person. But the fact remains that playing a game in first person is really like looking at the world through a narrow cardboard box. If someone is standing next to me as I type this, I can see them even though I'm not looking directly at them. Likewise, I can see things to the side in a third person game. Conversely, in a first person game, I can't do that. Personally, I'll take the "unrealism" of being able to see around corners over the lack of peripheral vision anyday in a stealth game. Besides, I'm not really sure how this unrealistic looking around corners really differs that much from the infamous lean keys in FPS, and more recent games (like Splinter Cell) add the cost of being seen when you peek around corners.
With regards to the belief that consoles have ruined yet another title, I think that the PC industry (consumers and publishers alike) needs a good long introspect look at itself. The fact that we're sitting close to the end of this console lifespan and yet I have yet to see graphics, and far more importantly *good* gameplay, truly exceed that of what exists on my consoles as they once did at this point in the Playstation lifecycle is significant. Moreover, PC game piracy, both pre-release (i.e. HL2) and after is at least as rampant as it ever is if not much more so. The charts are dominated by The Sims, and yet PC publishers think that the market with the money will orgasm over a monthly screenshoot of Doom III with super-vexal-triple-z-buffer-120fps screenshoots. I remember when this all started at the beginning of this console cycle, and all the PC gaming magazines said it wouldn't last. Well, it's obviously lasted, and I personally think that it'll only get "worse."
Basically, this: stop bitching about Ion Storm and kin making console games and stop pirating. Moreover, petition (and demonstrate appropriate patronage, or the lack thereof, towards) companies to release final products that don't require 4 years of IT certification to install and get operational (obviously including Ion Storm). In relation to the PC market, the console maret is merely the path of least resistance, both consumer and publisher wise. We're in a (generally) free market, and by and large companies, who are in business to make money, will go where the making money is good. If that's not in happy utopia PC land, we have only ourselves to blame.
Does it really make it that much more unrealistic than a first-person shooter? In real life, I always know exactly where every part of my body is (unless I'm "impaired"), I can stick just my head and eyes past a wall in order to see around (with a concomitent reduction in counter-detection), I have peripheral vision and I can turn my head without turning my entire body - all things the first-person perspective in video games traditionally has trouble with.
Whining about this news (and there's a LOT of whining posted here so far, though not in your post) is a knee-jerk FPS-centric reaction considering nobody here has played even a minute of the game. I guess it's just the double-edged sword of hype in that a game can have interest stoked well in advance of release, and/or a game can be raked over the coals without ever having been seen or played.
Erm, maybe you've never played Thief. the first-person perspective was a bit difficult to use at times, since you need to be aware of exactly where you are. How about Splinter Cell, have you played that? The games are remarkably similar -- minimal combat, what combat you do is preferably melee -- That's a club in his hand, not a throwing knife.
When I played the first two Thief games I often found myself wishing for a third-person perspective, to help me see how much of me was hidden in a niche, see how close I was to stepping into the light, ensuring that I kept walking on the moss and didn't accidently make a fatal, noisy step onto the flagstones.
Riiiight.
Because PC games are such an original bunch. Heaven forfend that such a bastion of originality be infected with the herd mentality. Now we have a game that is neither
a) An FPS. (but with really good graphics and killer multiplayer!)
b) An RTS (but this time there are 6 factions, each up to 5% different from the others!)
What is happening to gaming?
According to my dictionary (and I do mean *my* dictionary):
Consolidation \Con*sol`i*da"tion\, n. [L. consolidatio a
confirming: cf. F. consolidation.]
The act of removing enjoyable and involving gameplay from a promising video game in order to accommodate the less mature and undiscerning tastes of 14 year olds for the purposes of selling more units sooner. For unfortunate examples see: Deus Ex: Invisible War, Halo: Combat Evolved. It usually involves 640x480 title screens too.
A consolidated game is pretty much guaranteed to be crap.
There's a reason Looking Glass is out of business: As brilliant as their games were, nobody was buying them.
I guess PC gaming will be doomed to lame console ports and the few cool games that small developers manage to put out. Much like the old days. I'm not entirely sure that's a bad thing, but it is kind of sad that truly good games don't get the attention or sales that they really deserve, and yet so many console games that are complete crap manage to sell so many copies. Guess it's the same reason there's so much crap on TV.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
You have to admit that little 'lightness' jewel in the HUD wasn't exactly the greatest immersion tool. 3rd person, so long as its optional (as they seem to suggest it is), could only be a potential improvement. if it sucks, you never have to use it. I'll go so far as to suggest it would be an improvement. How can you convey visibly some of the more interesting 'sneaky' moves with a first person-only camera?
propping yourself between the walls above a hallway, hanging from a chandelier, pressing up against a wall, swinging from a rope, hanging off a ledge, etc?
Splinter Cell has a predominantly 3rd person camera view primarily to facilitate many of these features. Features that are prominantly mentioned when it's hailed as the greatest of such games in the last few years.
Console games are not necessarily dumbed-down or crappy. Heck have you seen half the titles on the shelf? There's no qualitative boundary between console titles and PC titles. Most is dreck, and if either side has a hit, it's invariably ported to the other.
If you think Deus Ex 2 suffered because it was refined for the console you're just being elitist. The game wasn't harmed, and the changes didn't adversely effect the story, so who cares? Name one 'involved' gameplay element they removed? I'll sympathize with many of the technical problems that were on the PC (sluggish UI, blossom lighting, etc) - but downloading that 1.1 patch to be able to play a new game is the calling card of PC gaming. You can't exactly blame the developers for maintaining status quo.
It sounds to me like once again the primary pc vs console rift is forming because of the loss of keyboard/mouse aiming. 3rd person angles removes the advantage of keyboard/mouse precision. Using a control pad obviates the precision advantage as well. playing on a TV removes the advantage of high resolutions on aiming. Yes, resolutions are nice - but they are not the end-all. I've yet to see a game where having PC resolutions was a requisite for the gameplay.
What enjoyable or involving gameplay has been removed from a game to accomodate consoles?
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
You know, I'm really going to have to disagree with you here.
/. a few times, you'll see that the majority of those that own console systems are in their mid twenties to early thirties, not teenagers.
"...in order to accommodate the less mature and undiscerning tastes of 14 year olds..."
Now, besides that sentance being a bit imature itself, I think it's backwards.
I've been playing games since I was very young (atari 2600). As soon as my family got our first 386 I switch to playing PC games almost exclusively. And for years I did that. Why? Well, because back then each new game didn't require a major hardware upgrade. And honestly, if it did, I often had the computer to play it on since my dad enjoyed upgrading the computer.
But now, as an adult, I don't have nearly as much time to play games as I used to. This makes upgrading my PC to the absolute latest and greatest less worthwhile. It's also amazingly expensive and I have things like rent to pay. So whilst you say that only 14 year olds play console games, for me it's been the other way around. With a console I know that my $300 investment in the xbox is going to pay of over the course of many years. And I'm not going to have to upgrade aside from the purchase of a new controller or perhaps xbox live. A better bang for the buck if you ask me.
So please, remember that the reason that developers are flocking to consoles is because gamers are flocking to them in droves. And if you look at the latest numbers, shown here on
Either way I cannot wait for this game, and I hope you can put your dislike for consoles aside for a moment and give the game a chance.
Go here for teh [sic] funny.