The message you selected is no longer available for viewing.

Okay I don't want to be that guy that compares but..

#1Azure01Posted 3/21/2014 8:21:56 PM
if I hated Dishonored and was disappointed with that purchase, will I enjoy this game? I found the videos to be interesting but didn't jump in to buying it because I kept hearing about numerous glitches.
---
Most of you idiots who say skip DMC 2 probably haven't even played it, stop following! RIP Bernie Mac ,and Isaac Hayes who died a day after Bernie.
#2HotsumaruPosted 3/22/2014 1:57:42 PM
It's very different to dishonored has a greater emphasis on stealth and even fully upgraded you can't just run through a level beating everyone unconscious in open combat.

There are no magic abilities other than perhaps focus which at most grants bullet time in some situations and highlight loot/interactable objects and can be turned off.

In dishonored you are playing a trained soldier with a vast arsenal of magic and weapons in this one you are a thief with a few cool trick arrows I know people compare them but they aren't all that similar really.

I haven't encountered any glitches and I loved the game but then again I loved dishonored also personally I think liking or disliking one doesn't mean you'll feel the same about the other.
#3Azure01(Topic Creator)Posted 3/23/2014 12:08:57 PM
Hotsumaru posted...
It's very different to dishonored has a greater emphasis on stealth and even fully upgraded you can't just run through a level beating everyone unconscious in open combat.

There are no magic abilities other than perhaps focus which at most grants bullet time in some situations and highlight loot/interactable objects and can be turned off.

In dishonored you are playing a trained soldier with a vast arsenal of magic and weapons in this one you are a thief with a few cool trick arrows I know people compare them but they aren't all that similar really.

I haven't encountered any glitches and I loved the game but then again I loved dishonored also personally I think liking or disliking one doesn't mean you'll feel the same about the other.


Thanks for the response. Well I think I'll make the purchase tomorrow.
---
Most of you idiots who say skip DMC 2 probably haven't even played it, stop following! RIP Bernie Mac ,and Isaac Hayes who died a day after Bernie.
#4obliviondollPosted 3/24/2014 4:47:38 PM
Both games are viewed from first-person, and have a lot of first-person animations as a way to make you feel connected to the character.

Both games allow for the possibility of stealthy and non-stealthy approaches to encounters. Dishonored is far better at the non-stealthy options, where Thief discourages them, but doesn't really do anything to make its own stealth options perform better.

Dishonored has a lot more of a sense of freedom for the player to control and use the environment, while Thief feels like the environment is being used to control the player.

If you want a more directed, linear and cinematic story and an emphasis on stealth, you'll probably prefer Thief. If you want more freeform gameplay, Dishonored is the better option.

If you don't mind the poor graphics of a 90s game, track down the first 2 Thief games and play them instead. They're better than Dishonored and the new Thief in many ways. Including a few ways in which the developers of the new Thief specifically blamed on modern technology not being good enough to handle it.
---
"I want my meals to think for myself"
#5JolteonPosted 3/24/2014 9:18:24 PM
obliviondoll posted...
Including a few ways in which the developers of the new Thief specifically blamed on modern technology not being good enough to handle it.


???

I'm sure this would make sense (or maybe just sound like a dumb excuse, but at least have some context) if I read the article, but how can "modern technology" not accomplish something that previous generations could?
---
Is this finally a conundrum that CAN'T be solved by helicopter theft?
#6obliviondollPosted 3/26/2014 2:40:50 AM
Jolteon posted...
obliviondoll posted...
Including a few ways in which the developers of the new Thief specifically blamed on modern technology not being good enough to handle it.


???

I'm sure this would make sense (or maybe just sound like a dumb excuse, but at least have some context) if I read the article, but how can "modern technology" not accomplish something that previous generations could?

When asked why they chose to limit rope arrows to hotspots instead of having the freedom the old games had where you could attach them to any wooden surface, the devs said it was the limitations of modern hardware.

http://sneakybastards.net/theobserver/thief-hands-on/

ďIf I give you the possibility to shoot the rope arrow everywhere, I will have to cut something. I will have to reduce our intention for the narrative. If itís everywhere, the cost of it is to block your view, because itís still a console. Itís still tech."

There are other interviews, but that one says it pretty well. They had other priorities they considered more important than living up to the gameplay the franchise is known for. They needed to tell their story, and didn't want player freedom to get in the way of that.
---
"I want my meals to think for myself"
#7J-FlyPosted 3/26/2014 10:19:59 AM
TC, I'm surprised you didn't like Dishonored. I only put in about 30 min of Thief so far and there seems to be less options than with Dishonored (guns, magic, etc.). Meaning that Thief is strictly stealth where as you could get a little action going with Dishonored. This is not a bad thing though because the game is setup for a stealth atmosphere. If you're into MGS and like the patient approach (which is preferred in MGS games), then you'll like Thief. But it's definitely not Dishonored and I'm not sure why people keep trying to compare the two games.
---
---
PSN: J-Fly
#8JolteonPosted 3/26/2014 6:05:27 PM
obliviondoll posted...
When asked why they chose to limit rope arrows to hotspots instead of having the freedom the old games had where you could attach them to any wooden surface, the devs said it was the limitations of modern hardware.

http://sneakybastards.net/theobserver/thief-hands-on/

ďIf I give you the possibility to shoot the rope arrow everywhere, I will have to cut something. I will have to reduce our intention for the narrative. If itís everywhere, the cost of it is to block your view, because itís still a console. Itís still tech."

There are other interviews, but that one says it pretty well. They had other priorities they considered more important than living up to the gameplay the franchise is known for. They needed to tell their story, and didn't want player freedom to get in the way of that.


Hmm...

Well, it's nice to see it in context, but now it really sounds like an excuse. Like, seriously, if the story was more important than the gameplay, and the story was (let's face it) overall extremely weak, then where does that leave us?

I have been enjoying the game in spite of the really bad design choices they made at times, but it's kinda disappointing to consider that it was such a conscious decision to erase so much of what made the older games fun.

Still, thanks for the link.
---
Is this finally a conundrum that CAN'T be solved by helicopter theft?