Thief Project Lead Says a New Game Needs New Combat

[Andy Chalk]

Thief Project Lead Says a New Game Needs New Combat

Stephane Roy says Thief will employ QTEs and bullet-time in combat sequences because the swordplay of the original games just doesn't work anymore.

Combat in the original Thief trilogy was generally something to be avoided. Killing was always best done from the height and distance afforded by an arrow (although true pros don't kill in the first place), and while your sword could occasionally prove handy against a spider or a zombie, if you found yourself swinging it at a guard you were more likely than not in very deep trouble.

But that kind of thing just doesn't fly anymore, according to Roy, who said the studio playtested the original combat and found that it's just too far out of date. "I don't know if you remember with the previous game? Let's say I've been detected; it was really, really tough to survive. You know? It was unforgiving," he said. "Game over."

The tricky part for Eidos is that Garrett is a thief, not a soldier, so while they don't want him to be helpless in a fight, they're not interested in turning him into a killing machine either. Thus the new combat system, which he said is a "fair balance" that will focus on escape rather than victory. "Don't try to kill them, just try to push them or make sure they are disabled," he said. "Don't finish the job, just get the fuck out."

He acknowledged that the new system still needs work but insisted that the change is necessary, and for the better. "How we used to play games ten years ago and how we play games today is different," he said. "So that's why we are supporting this new way to play."

Source: Official PlayStation Magazine [http://www.officialplaystationmagazine.co.uk/2013/06/25/thiefs-slow-mo-combat-designed-to-let-you-get-the-fck-out-old-fighting-system-tested-but-doesnt-work/]


Permalink

 

[Gormech]

Sounds like a possibly good change. Maybe have a single chance to slowdown time and target a limb or something that doesn't become available for use again till you have avoided combat for X seconds.

 

[Zhukov]

He's reasoning is good but his results are uninspiring.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Never played the old Thief games but am I right in assuming that the combat was so difficult that it persuaded the player to be more careful? (You know, play the game properly).

I get the whole accessibility thing, but rebooting a series should be first and foremost fan service in my opinion. Basically, give the established fan base what they want and they'll be the ones to market your game for you through word of mouth (or typing positive things on the internet).

Doing things this way just serves to alienate the original fan base and they'll be ones telling everyone how 'bad' the new game is.

 

[XX Y XY]

""I don't know if you remember with the previous game? Let's say I've been detected; it was really, really tough to survive. You know? It was unforgiving," he said. "Game over.""

This is exactly what I loved so much about the original games. You're a thief! Not a soldier, not an assassin, a THIEF! The whole point is to get in, get the loot, and get out without being detected. Ergo, being detected should have a very stiff penalty. That's what set Thief apart from the rest of the action game crowd.

While I see where Stephen Roy was coming from, I think he's going about fixing the problem in the wrong way. Or at least offer an old school/hardcore mode that disables the QTEs and bullet time and force the player to deal with the consequences when they slip up and get caught. I would find that an acceptable compromise.

 

[piinyouri]

The "swordplay" didn't work because it wasn't supposed to work. You're not encouraged to fight head on. : /

I mean in Deadly Shadows I could get to a point where I could use my fire arrows, mines and gas bombs to pretty much knock out/kill anyone I came across, but I could never win in a "sword fight" (lol dagger) with more than possibly 3 guards.
I don't believe I even want to pick this up in the future when it's cheap.

 

[lacktheknack]

Uh... I thought the reason the swordplay didn't work is because you're supposed to ghost it.

This doesn't inspire faith in me.

 

[Jamous]

This just sounds worse and worse. I mean really? All that seems to be remaining is the premise and Garrett, and even he has a new voice actor...

 

[DoPo]

Never played the old Thief games but am I right in assuming that the combat was so difficult that it persuaded the player to be more careful? (You know, play the game properly).

Correct - few sword swings and the next treasure you'll have to swipe are your guts. Only you won't be able to because you'll be too busy being dead. You can otherwise slit a guard's throat or try and snipe them with arrows and they are really vulnerable when unaware, however if you miss with the arrow (hit them in the body instead of the head, or outright not hit), they aren't unaware any more and you'd better leg it if the guards haven't actually spotted you yet. Sword do...dagger, fights aren't impossible but guards have the nasty habit of calling other guards for help. Cowards. You can probably take one out, perhaps two but it's better to not try in the first place.

The "swordplay" didn't work because it wasn't supposed to work. You're not encouraged to fight head on. : /

In other words, pretty much this.

I don't believe I even want to pick this up in the future when it's cheap.

I'm not sure myself - maybe if there are really positive responses to it and even then if it's really cheap. I don't really like reboots to begin with, so this game should try really hard to make me want it. For the record, so far it's not trying.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Never played the old Thief games but am I right in assuming that the combat was so difficult that it persuaded the player to be more careful? (You know, play the game properly).

I wouldn't say the combat was difficult, it was just based on the premise that if you tried to take on two or three guys at once, you were probably going to get killed. On the other hand, if you could get behind a guy without him knowing you were there, you could (usually) take him down quite easily and quietly. Roy's comment that you were basically boned if you got into a fight is a huge overstatement - avoidance and evasion were key (and the point of the whole thing, really) but you were far from helpless if you got into trouble.

 

[StoneMcKnuckle]

I love how they had the gall to spout silly lines like "we think we've really respected the DNA of this franchise" during their E3 demo, which displayed mechanics like XP rewards for headshots among other silly stuff. I'm not sure it's humanly possible to miss the point more badly. As far as striking a combat/stealth balance goes, they seem to be following in Dishonored's footsteps, which in itself follows in Thief's footsteps. Are we moving in circles now?

As far as Dishonored's mechanics go, the combat was definitely the weakest (read: most potent) part of the game. If you want a game with a focus on stealth, combat should never be rewarded or encouraged.

I'm honestly downright furious after seeing the E3 demo. I think I'll stop writing here before I start using spicy words. Either way, I can definitely say this is one game I'll be staying very far away from.

 

[TheNaut131]

Look, the game is called "Thief."

A thief is not supposed to fight. If a thief ends up having to fight something has gone very very wrong. But alas, something will go wrong and you'll have to deal with it. However, it shouldn't be easy. You're a thief, not a robber. You're not suppose to be seen, heard, or even exist really. So if you fuck up, you shouldn't be able to just fight your way out of it. You should struggle.

Frankly, I'm sorta sick of this idea that every stealth game needs to have a blatant "combat option." No one complains when you can't hop an enemy to death in an FPS.

 

[oldtaku]

As long as you can completely avoid combat, still, this is okay. It's a failure condition, so it doesn't really matter if it's a failure condition with some QTEs - in fact that's mighty appropriate.

 

[Roander]

Never played the old Thief games but am I right in assuming that the combat was so difficult that it persuaded the player to be more careful? (You know, play the game properly).

I get the whole accessibility thing, but rebooting a series should be first and foremost fan service in my opinion. Basically, give the established fan base what they want and they'll be the ones to market your game for you through word of mouth (or typing positive things on the internet).

Doing things this way just serves to alienate the original fan base and they'll be ones telling everyone how 'bad' the new game is.

Combat was weighted heavily against you. Guards had more health than you or took less damage, you'd be making noise while fighting which could attract more guards, and if you did whittle their health down enough most guards would try to run and find help. But you had the option of trying to run away yourself, hiding again, then playing a sort of cat and mouse game in the shadows until they got tired of actively searching for you.

Even if Roy has a point about the combat being dated (and I don't think he's even sold that point here) quick time events are not an improvement. I'm part of the original fan base but I probably wont be telling people how bad this game is because I probably won't be playing it any time soon.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

And the games fate was forever sealed with Yahtzee. I predict death and taxes.

 

[mirage202]

"How we used to play games ten years ago and how we play games today is different,"

Um, no, no it isn't. How you have trained younger gamers to play easy mode everything in your quest for ever increasing profits through "streamlining" and homogenization has changed. Gamers are still the same, game makers however are not.

 

[Ohlookit'sMatty]

Didn't even finish reading the first sentence before I dropped my phone crying "Nope!"

I love the opening paragraph:
"Combat in the original Thief trilogy was generally something to be avoided. Killing was always best done from the height and distance afforded by an arrow (although true pros don't kill in the first place), and while your sword could occasionally prove handy against a spider or a zombie, if you found yourself swinging it at a guard you were more likely than not in very deep trouble."

Congratulation, you have just discribed a stealth game, where the emphasis is on Stealth& Stealth kills // Welcome to the world of Thief, a Stealth game where you Never want to get into melee combat because this is a Stealth game // The hint for that is in the title of the Game you are making, Thief

-M

 

[2HF]

I was hoping and wishing and praying that they'd do right by one of my absolute favorite series and specifically by Thief 2 which makes my top 5 list without doubt.

Now I know I won't be picking this one up at all. Lucky GOG sold me all 3 of the originals for $15. I'll be adding custom missions and replaying those as well as Dishonored. The first time I climbed up onto some pipes in Dishonored, made my way across a room via those pipes, and didn't alert a single guard I knew I was where I belonged. The shadows are my home.

R.I.P Garrett.

At this point I'd think they were purposefully trying to piss Yahtzee off. I can't wait to see his review.

 

[dakkster]

Yeah, I won't be getting this one. Who put this clown as the project lead when he CLEARLY has no fucking clue at all what the Thief series is about? Goddamn poser, ripping out the soul of one of the most venerable franchises in the industry. Clearly everything has to be sacrificed on the altar of streamlining and accessability. Fuck this noise.