New Thief Screenshots Won’t Make You Check Your Wallet

By Graham Smith on November 14th, 2013 at 12:00 pm.

First-person games, maybe all games, need “a thing”. “A thing” is a technical term, referring to the unique mechanic that defines a game and make it seem exciting. It’s separate from theme, or character, or setting. It’s specifically something you’re going to get to do if you buy the game. ‘I can’t wait,’ you’d say, ‘to [fight that Big Daddy/ride those skyrails/explore that island/free run across those rooftops/toss physics objects into those faces/vault myself with a portal].’

Thief‘s problem is that it doesn’t appear to have a thing. Let’s go looking for one in these seven new screenshots.

Alright. Combat against guards. Garrett has a club, and massive hands. The other guys have swords. There’s no thing here. This is just normal fighting. There’s a wooden post to the left there, which looks like maybe one of the few, scripted things Garrett can rope to in this new game, but I’ve played over an hour of it and the rope arrow featured only once at the end of a mission. Ropes are not its thing.

This is just a picture of a rainy street. The textures look high resolution, I guess, but nothing is happening here. Also, that man on the right should share his rain-resistant fire with his friend. Don’t be rude. Also, the City just seems really dark and grey and depressing. I like that they’ve wound time forward a little, to a point of industrial revolution, but thus far that seems mainly to involve electric fans like that big one on the wall.

Oh, stealth! Stealth is a thing, right? Look, Garrett is hiding from that other chap.

No, stealth is not a thing, sorry. Stealth was a thing when the first Thief came out, when all first-person games were about killing everyone all the time. ‘In our game you can hide from the monsters and avoid them,’ you can imagine the designers saying. Now if they were to say that, people would respond, “Yes, like in a stealth game. And?” Their thing became a genre. Now it is no longer a thing.

Massive hands? Maybe massive hands are this game’s thing. Or bum-pinching? No. This is just crouchy pickpocketing. This is not a thing.

Oh, this looks pre– Hey! Get out of here Dishonored, you’ve had your turn. Yes. Yes, I know, you had many things. Yes, I did like being a magical ninja who could teleport and possess those stilt guys. Yes, now go. Geez.

I wish they had done more with the art style. I feel like maybe Eidos Montreal has been too conservative for fear of a fan backlash.

Hey, another fan on the wall. And one on the desk. Is this city really hot all the time? All it does is rain outside.

Alright, I take it all back. Massive hands are definitely this game’s thing. That guard is about to trip over it.

I am, despite appearances, slightly more positive about Thief than other people. But I can’t help but worry. I’d really like Thief to surprise me when it releases next February.

, , , , .

122 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. BreadBitten says:

    You’re wrong budday, massive hands were a thing when BioShock came out. After BioShock 2 and BioShock: Infinite it’s definitely a genre now.

  2. Eclipse says:

    I think it looks very good for me. Better than Bioshock Infinite and surely not worse than Dishonored. If it plays half as good as the first Thief then I’m in.
    But I fear it will be filled with hints and tutorials and I’ll get bored after the first 10 minutes of the game trying to explain to me stuff I probably already know or want to discover myself. That’s not this game problem anyway, all this AAA games are just like that

    • Stardog says:

      Why didn’t you like Dishonored? If you’re a stealth fan I don’t see why you wouldn’t like it.

      • Smarag says:

        Because it didn’t actually make stealth the best way of playing the game. And the upgrades didn’t make you stealthier they made you a better rambo machine.

  3. Alien426 says:

    Graham, I think you mean Thief 4. Thief was released in 1998!

    • rustybroomhandle says:

      Nope, it’s being branded and marketed as Thief. Much like the new Sim City is just called “Sim City”.

      • Low Life says:

        I miss Thifourf.

        • Ridnarhtim says:

          They should’ve stuck with Thi4f. At least then it would be apparent right from the cover what a joke this game is.

      • Alien426 says:

        Why should RPS care? Why should the players let the publishers go through with this bullshit?
        All that these new games with old names do is sully the names of their predecessors!
        Was Alone In The Dark better in 2008 or 1992? Aliens Vs Predator in 2010 or 1999? Medal Of Honor in 2010 or 1999? Prince Of Persia in 2008 or 1989? Tomb Raider in 2012 or 1996? Flashback in 2013 or 1993?

        • Premium User Badge

          drewski says:

          I’d actually probably give Tomb Raider to the 2012 version…

          Not sure how exactly gamers are supposed to not accept this sort of thing. Go around a game store with a Sharpie scribbling a 4 into the middle of the title when it gets released?

          • Premium User Badge

            VelvetFistIronGlove says:

            Yesss! Guerilla rebranding! Let’s do this!

          • Alien426 says:

            Using the proper name in comments and articles would be a good start.
            And the 4 in the middle is about as bullshit a name as without it.

            EDIT: For guerilla rebranding to work we’d need to infiltrate Amazon and Steam/GOG/… as well.

          • MichaelPalin says:

            I always brand the new games with the old titles as [GAME_NAME] ([YEAR_OF_RELEASE]) so everybody remembers. I’m a rebel, I know.

          • Premium User Badge

            drewski says:

            @Alien426 – Thief (just plain Thief) *is* the proper name. You might not, y’know, like that, but it’s the registered name Ubisoft are releasing the game under.

        • bill says:

          I vote that RPS should call it Thief 4 from now on.

        • Premium User Badge

          Don Reba says:

          Prince of Persia was probably better in 2008, to be honest. Loved the art style.

    • Convolvulus says:

      I think you meant Thief: The Dark Project. Anyway, this new one is a reboot, so it isn’t technically the fourth installment, which is also why The Amazing Spider-Man wasn’t Spider-Man 4.

      • Alien426 says:

        Fallout 3 can be considered a reboot, too. But it didn’t crap all over its legacy. That is one of the reasons why I like Bethesda a lot.
        Don’t get me started on reboots, though. “We can’t come up with a new story, so we re-tell an old story. But differently. Because our vision is soooo-ho unique.”
        And how was Sim City Online (as I call it) a reboot of The Original Sim City? Don’t tell me Medal Of Honor rebooted anything.

        These companies like the power of certain names, but they won’t honor what made them great.

        • trout says:

          “Fallout 3 can be considered a reboot, too. But it didn’t crap all over its legacy. ”

          i think we’ll have to agree to disagree on this point good sir.

          • Snargelfargen says:

            Whether Fallout 3 did a good job is certainly up for debate, but at least it tried something new, in a different genre.

          • hotmaildidntwork says:

            And it acknowledged that it was the third game in the series instead of taking the name of the first.

          • The Random One says:

            And Fallout 3 acknowledged the events of Fallout 1 and 2, so it wasn’t really a reboot, either.

    • Keyrock says:

      No matter what they want to call it, it will always be Thi4f to me.

  4. draigdrwg says:

    ” I feel like maybe Eidos Montreal has been too conservative for fear of a fan backlash. ”

    Really don’t think this is the case given they’ve tossed out most of the groups/language/setting/medieval magic clockwork stuff from the first 3 games in favour of something that looks an awful lot like Dishonored.

    Not to mention how the game seems to play compared to the originals. I don’t think they’re that interested in attracting fans of the old game back.

    • Ansob says:

      I would imagine he means “conservative” as in “apes modern aesthetic design (brown and grey)” rather than “too much like the (good) old Thief games.”

    • vedder says:

      Fan backlash from Dishonored fans than, not Thief fans of days yonder.

    • TheTingler says:

      I think including that Dishonored screenshot illustrates quite well that it really DOESN’T look like Dishonored.

      • draigdrwg says:

        In terms of art style, no.

        In terms of vaguely victorian/steampunk design.. the two are quite similar.

    • Premium User Badge

      Bradamantium says:

      I thought that backlash line was a joke, considering that they’ve taken, er, some pretty significant strides in the gameplay department.

      It does look like Dishonored to me, but if someone dropped a massive dollop of Amnesia into its interiors and covered the exteriors in rain rather than inexplicable haze. The main difference is that Dishonored took some chances, featured a fairly stylized world and definitely stylized designs, especially for the characters. Thief, on the other hand, looks like someone hosted a renaissance fair in the warehouse district of a mid-sized modern city, considering all those homeless folk and massive electric fans and the odd carriage hanging around.

  5. InternetBatman says:

    A good player can unlock an item that lets you crush people with your fingers.

    • frightlever says:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t4pmlHRokg

      God bless Amer-Canada!

    • Berzee says:

      Goodness me, why hasn’t that game been made yet? Has that game been made yet? A game with strange perspective tricks that is mostly about framing objects with your first-person-hands and then pinching them (or less violently, just picking them up and moving them to a different depth). (Like surgeon simulator + that Merlin movie where Sam Neill takes the moon down and flips it through his fingers like a coin). Yes.

      Probably it hasn’t been made yet because I just tried to think about how to program something like that and got a headache in the side of my head.

      I guess that one perspective game (Perspective?) from DigiPen was kind of like this already, in its own way. Just without giant hands. =P

  6. demicanadian says:

    I like the tags today.

  7. Maxheadroom says:

    I’ve become much too suggestible in my old age. I now have no intention of buying this where as i was looking forward to it.

    Much like you ruined State of Decay for me with all your nay-saying (despite never having played it myself and therefore never formed an opinion of my own)

  8. Premium User Badge

    RedViv says:

    Why would he share that rain-resistant fire? He was born with it!

  9. Premium User Badge

    drewski says:

    Maybe they’ll put the thing in one of the 43 trailers that are still to be produced before this is actually released.

  10. Utsunomiya says:

    Well, it looks like new Thief has good dynamic lightning engine. Unlike that other *ahem* game it’s always been compared to.

    Really, I’d like to know more about the sound design aspect. Thankfully, it doesn’t look like this game has “SATAN VISION MODE” (at least I haven’t seen one mentioned), so this surely means that the sound must be really good!
    Or maybe it will be bad, and the whole game will suck. Oh well.

    • bill says:

      I thought it had Satan Vision Mode?

      I’m not following it that closely though.

    • Premium User Badge

      lowprices says:

      Not having seen the term ‘Satan Vision Mode’ before, I assume it’s a mode in which you can see a list of all the sins of each NPC? Or perhaps a percentage rating of how corruptable they are?

      If it isn’t any of those things, I will be most disappointed.

    • Gryz says:

      The game has “focus-mode”.
      I believe focus-mode will allow you to see through walls.
      I don’t know if that is what you mean by “satan vision”. But I think it’s probably not much different.

      • Utsunomiya says:

        It will? That’s… awful!

        • Snargelfargen says:

          I believe it “just” highlights guards behind walls and objects that can be stolen or interacted with in some way.

          • Emeraude says:

            Can see through walls (and is used finding and disarming traps by following mechanisms you can see highlighted when you do – which really makes me question *how* exactly the game is going to behave if you turn it off), can see guard footsteps, and I *seem* to remember can see sound propagation, but don’t quote me on that one.

    • jonahcutter says:

      The game has an xray vision mode. There’s video of it around.

    • Faxmachinen says:

      All the thief games have dynamic lighting. And T:DS and TDM have good dynamic lighting (read: dynamic shadows).

    • Stardog says:

      “Unlike that other *ahem* game it’s always been compared to.”

      Thief 1 & 2?

  11. Rao Dao Zao says:

    Get out of here, Denton!

  12. Yosharian says:

    I really don’t get this article. I don’t think Thief 4 needs ‘a thing’ and I don’t agree with many of the assertions you make next to these screenshots, such as ‘I wish they did more with this art style’ – to me it looks fine.

    And inserting a Dishonored pic and acting like that game was some sort of masterpiece, that’s just embarassing.

    • Premium User Badge

      VelvetFistIronGlove says:

      What Dishonored had in spades was imagination. Thief appears to be completely lacking it.

    • Prokroustis says:

      Dishonored is one of the best games of the past 2 years, and the closest thing we’ve had to a Thief successor. So, yeah..

    • bill says:

      It doesn’t really have an ‘art style’. It just has old and brown and realistic.

      And that ‘s fine.. many people like that kind of thing. Personally I like something a little more original and stylish.

      • drinniol says:

        Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but that really is an ‘art style’.

    • Ross Angus says:

      I completely agree that games don’t need a “thing”. I get quite enough out of games, without having some new game play baubles being dangled in my face. It’s like “all M. Night Shyamalan films need a twist” or all romantic comedies need a quirk (“She’s dead, he’s from the past: they get it on”). If it’s good, who cares?

    • Snargelfargen says:

      The point was that the Dishonoured pic could be mistaken for being from Thief. I think Smith is accusing the game of being a collection of compromises instead of going for a specific playstyle or atmosphere. Sounds about right, the dev team has gone through several purges and the game’s direction has definitely changed from previous publicity.

      Combining scripted escape sequences with slow paced sneaking, open world world exploration and fast-paced combat does seem like a weird, dissonant mix. It’s going to be interesting to see what elements of the game actually stand out, because the individual elements as presented in the videos completely contradict each other.

    • dogsolitude_uk says:

      I quite agree. I’m not sure what the point of this article was, it looked it exactly like the kind of Thief game I was hoping for, and expecting.

  13. Exterus says:

    There has to be a thing? A gimmick? I hate games that are defined by their gimmick.

    • Acorino says:

      The original Thief was gimmicky? I think “innovation” is the word you’re looking for…

      • Exterus says:

        I don’t know if the original Thief was gimmicky. It was years and years since I last played it. But what the original Thief was or wasn’t feels a little irrelevant in this instance.
        Far from all games with a “thing” or a gimmick are innovative. Most often they’re just cosmetic variations of established game mechanics.

        Oh, and lots of games without a gimmick game mechanic manage to be great games. But perhaps I put too much stock in silly things like setting or theme. Honestly though, I’m not sure this new Thief will be a good game, but to sarcastically mock a it for lacking a “thing” judging from a few screenshots seems overly petty to me. But I guess that was the point? Some kind of humour piece.

        • Premium User Badge

          Bradamantium says:

          What the original Thief was or wasn’t is entirely relevant in this, considering it’s a game in the Thief series, one that goes as far as simply calling itself Thief, even. I don’t think a “thing” is simply a gimmick. No one’s asking for them to include a button that Garrett presses that someone’s temporary eldritch abominations at specific junctions, or a unicorn to ride between levels. But a Thing in the overarching sense of “What makes this game worth playing?” Some Thing that makes this a separate but worthy experience compared to the original Thief games, or spiritual successor Dishonored, or at all different from Action and QTE Filled Generic Modern Gaming Project #46: Now With Fantasy, “Stealth,” and Less Jumping.

    • Wulfram says:

      I do think there’s a place for games where the gimmick is that there is no gimmick. A game where they just did the sneak thief thing.

      But you’d need to make it really good at the sneaky thief thing, which I don’t know if this game convinces on

    • Dave Money says:

      Lots of really innovative games are defined by some sort of gimmick. Then it becomes a genre. Then we can hate it.

    • dE says:

      Funny thing, I wouldn’t say First Person Games need a gimmick, but 2D Platformers seem to be welded to them.
      “Try our new and innovative 2D Platformer, that uses a liquid gun!”
      “Try our new and innovative 2D Platformer, that uses a clone gun!”
      “Try our new and innovative 2D Platformer, that uses time travelling!”
      “Try our new and innovative 2D Platformer, that uses level shifting!”
      “Try our new and innovative 2D Platformer, that uses …”

      And since the trolls are probably foaming already, neither of these games have to be bad. But it’s a singular gimmick that is the driving force behind the game mechanics.

      • Stardog says:

        And the worst part is when sites like this label those “innovations”.

  14. Lemming says:

    Aren’t all these fans a bit modern? Or is this Thief set in a medieval theme park during the noirish 40s?

    • DatonKallandor says:

      The Thief world already had robots, and grammophones were common. While the wave of high tech gadgets was pushed back when it turned out the guys building it were trying to destroy the world, it’s not unreasonable to assume some of the tech would stick around. They got rid of the robots, but there’s no reason to get rid of the fans – or the bionic eye with built in nightvision (which makes absolutely no sense in the new Thief game – if it’s a reboot there’s no reason for him to have a bionic eye).

      • Lemming says:

        I thought all that was clockpunk though and keeping in the theme? These fans just seem like direct anachronisms.

    • The Random One says:

      They’re going with popular fan models to avoid fan fan backlash.

  15. BLACKOUT-MK2 says:

    While I think it can be good to have a ‘thing’, it’s equally as important to make sure that the times to use that thing are implemented appropriately. Something like Portal is good because the Portal gun is neccessary for every puzzle in the game. If the certain thing that makes it different isn’t implemented correctly it just feels gimmicky and gives gamers the impression that it’s not being creative enough by revolving around that one gimmick. Though it is a shame that, like the article mentions, stealth went from being Thief’s thing to a genre. The other problem is when it comes to adding a gimmick to an older franchise, fans are so often quick to yell ‘why the hell did you put such a useless feature in?’ or will look at it as being a cheap way to make noobs find the game easier such as a new power. Like the vision in Hitman Absolution; some people liked it, more hardcore fans thought it was making the game too easy being able to tell an enemy’s path.

  16. Abendlaender says:

    So many fans. This is the city from Blade Runner, isn’t it?

    [quote]I feel like maybe Eidos Montreal has been too conservative for fear of a fan backlash. [/quote]
    Well, duhhh. Don’t you see? The fans are EVERYWHERE in this game! I wouldn’t want to mess with them, they look sharp and/or rusty!

    • hotmaildidntwork says:

      I think that might actually be the same fan stalking Garrett around. I mean the blades are in the same position each time, and it’s never running…

  17. Zekiel says:

    Loved the Dishonored gatecrash.

    Also agree with the premise of the article.

  18. friik says:

    Good lord. I’m one of those guys who’s probably going to buy this thing no-matter how it looks in the end, just cause it’s Thief.

    But they’re trying damn hard to convince me to not do it – these screenshots do not tickle me the slightest. How many like me, are they hoping for?

  19. Premium User Badge

    psepho says:

    Interpolating the Dishonored screenshot is rather naughty…

    But it does make the point and is exactly what I had been thinking as I read the article. It looks virtually indistinguishable from Dishonored visually and, as you note, Dishonored has already hogged all the things. Thief may have had its supper stolen.

  20. Shadowcat says:

    Okay, we all know that the new Thief clearly has some problems, but did you really just complain that stealth gameplay in a Thief game is a big yawn of an idea? Is that what you did? Because… I mean… WTF?

    • Grygus says:

      This whole concept confuses me. What was Baldur’s Gate’s thing? What is XCOM: Enemy Within’s thing? Remember that your answer has to show up in screenshots.

    • Trespasser in the Stereo Field says:

      Yea I totally agree. I was enjoying the article until I saw this:

      “No, stealth is not a thing, sorry. Stealth was a thing when the first Thief came out…”

      I then furrowed my brow, sat back in my chair, rubbed my chin with my index finger and thumb, looked at the spots on the ceiling, re-read the paragraph, and finally resigned to my confusion. Stealth is a “thing,” and it is Thief’s “thing.” Just because it’s been done before doesn’t mean it’s not a “thing.”

      • Gnarf says:

        Yep. Stealth is Thief’s thing. That and thievery I’d guess.

        Graham meant gimmick, not thing.

    • Contrafibularity says:

      My initial response as well, because nothing would be more refreshing than an actual Thief game. I actually think this looks more promising than the recent trailer (for one it seems like Garrett has perhaps stopped being the floating magic ghost of the recent videos, but that might be foolish to deduce from just a few screenshots).

      I’m not sure if Graham Smith has ever properly played a Thief game, but I can assure him that Thief’s stealth has definitely NOT turned into a genre. Dishonored is literally the only game that actually follows in Thief footsteps, which is obvious considering its made by former Looking Glass devs, but beyond that, nothing. Sure there are many lame “third person action stealth cover” games but, come on, saying Thief no longer has a thing is absurd.

  21. uglibugli says:

    Even if they blatantly ripped off Dishonored and did it well I’d be satisfied. Dishonored was brilliant and if Thief is like that, then I think it’s job well done.

    “Thief‘s problem is that it doesn’t appear to have a thing. Let’s go looking for one in these seven new screenshots.”

    Let’s hope the Thiefs “thing” is that it’s fun to play. They can have the industry standard ass numbingly horrible plot and laughable voice acting with however much brown coating they think is needed. As long as the gameplay is good I’m fine with it and they shall receive my money. It’s still *much* more than pretty much anyone else if offering in the stealth game genre.

  22. Dances to Podcasts says:

    I thingk the word(s) you’re looking for is ‘unique selling point’.

  23. oyog says:

    Big hands, I don’t think you’re the one…

  24. Premium User Badge

    Stellar Duck says:

    I’m more interested in whoever is making it to explain to me why I should play it.

    Why should I play Thi4fzorz when I already got Thief 1 and 2 and The Dark Mod and even deadly shadows?

    Why should I play a game with contextual jumping, QTEs and pointless rope arrows and what seems to be a terrible story and godawful voice acting?

    If they can tell me that, then I may buy it.

  25. jonahcutter says:

    Do games need a thing? A highly debatable premise.

    But even taking that premise as a truism for the sake of the article’s joke, Thief does have a thing: Stealing shit.

    And Garrett is clearly stealing shit (or about to) in at least one of the screenshots. So it does have a thing, and the player is doing that thing.

    Yes yes… Big hands. Perspective.

  26. kael13 says:

    I ha-haayted how Dishonoured played, but I do give it credit for having a very original setting. This looks bland and boring. I’ll give it a miss.

  27. db1331 says:

    This was added as one of the free games you can get with an AMD card in their Never Settle Forever program. I’m not sure I want it even for the cost of free. I will probably wind up getting something that could also be had for $3 in a Steam sale instead.

  28. Snargelfargen says:

    I don’t think games necessarily need a “thing”, but the Thief that we have been shown is struggling to be all things to all people, and that can only end in disappointment.

    • FRIENDLYUNIT says:

      Usually it helps if that thing is being really fun to play. Which I’ve experienced from a game that is derivative and/or doesn’t have a thing otherwise, but is well executed.

  29. jonfitt says:

    This is an entirely comparable post about Dishonored.
    http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/24/dishonored-shots-are-mixed-in-quality/

    On the flip side to that argument, that post is from Aug 2011 and the game came out in Oct 2012 more than a year later. Thief doesn’t have that much time to find a ‘thing’.

  30. Jerykk says:

    This game’s “thing” is that you steal stuff. Just like in the highly-acclaimed previous games. There aren’t many games that revolve around stealing stuff. It sounds like Smith is just bored of stealth gameplay in general and thus needs some sort of gimmick to spark his interest.

    • Emeraude says:

      This game’s “thing” is that you steal stuff.

      That’s a very superficial way to frame things, and even then, our dear Thiaf seems to not be really taking even that in stride (quoth that developer saying “We don’t want to force you to play a thief”… yeah… right….).

      • Jerykk says:

        Stealth games have always been a matter of restraint. If you wanted to, you could go around killing people in the previous Thief games as well. However, the game rewarded you more for stealing and being sneaky. From what I’ve seen and read, the new game is no different. Players who ghost through levels and steal everything they can will be rewarded the most.

        • Emeraude says:

          Yes, and as far as engineering restraint is concerned what we’ve seen of the game so far hasn’t been promising.

          But what I meant is that, you could say that, say, Gradius and Doom’s thing is that you shoot stuff.
          Technically true, I guess, but mostly insignificant when trying to describe the games from a critical standpoint.

  31. dogsolitude_uk says:

    I get that RPS wants to put the boot into Thief 4 whenever a new trailer/screenshots or whatever come out. That’s fine.

    There have been some real howlers in terms of design decisions, what with the Garrett design being done by Cradle of Filth, the replacement of Stephen Russell as voice actor, the now-abandoned XP system, ‘Focus Mode’, what looked like QTEs in one of the videos and so forth. I think anyone can accept that these kinds of things are a bit worrying to say the least.

    But… But… This article was just *desperate*. Why should Thief have a ‘thing’, other than stealing?

    “No, stealth is not a thing, sorry. Stealth was a thing when the first Thief came out…” Erm, that’s kind of what I was hoping the Thief game would be about. What ‘other’ thing were you hoping for? For a start, could you give an example of a ‘thing’? I’m pretty sure stealth is a ‘thing’, because you can tell the difference between a game that has it, and a game that doesn’t have it. So that makes stealth ‘something’ rather than not a ‘thing’.

    For my part I found these screenshots rather reassuring: no huge HUD, no ‘Press X to activate’ stuff, just a bunch of screenshots that looked like exactly the kind of Thief game I was hoping for.

    And really, the Dishonored thing: it was pretty obvious that Dishonored was inspired by Thief in so many ways. So Thief 1+2+3 inspired Dishonored, you can hardly expect Thief 4 to not resemble Dishonored in any way at all. That’s just silly.

    I mean, honestly…

    • Grape Flavor says:

      “I get that RPS wants to put the boot into Thief 4 whenever a new trailer/screenshots or whatever come out.”

      That’s all there is to it. RPS has had an axe to grind with this game from the moment it was announced, the fact that they couldn’t find a proper grinding wheel this time sure as hell wasn’t going to stop them.

      • Stardreamer says:

        That’s all there is to it. RPS has had an axe to grind…

        Oh whatever. You say that as if RPS have collectively decided to run some kind of weird vendetta, which is absurd. To my mind they’ve been reporting their exact feelings about a game that has, from the moment the very first title was announced, “Thi4f”, proven to be almost the antithesis of what the fans expect/want from a game called Thief starring a man called Garrett. I actually think RPS have worked hard to be very generous to the game, when it’s clearly being designed by marketing teams rather than people dedicated to refreshing an honoured piece of PC gaming history. If they mock, it’s usually for a damned good reason. In this case, it’s because the game appears to have been stripped of everything we used to enjoy about the previous games.

        TL:DR – RPS are only reporting what just about every fan of the series is thinking.

  32. CookPassBabtridge says:

    Shit.

    I NEVER possessed a stilt guard in Dishonored. Was it really groovy? Someone tell me it wasn’t, so I can feel better

  33. Jraptor59 says:

    Wow, if consoles look like this…sorry guys! You are salivating over things my computer could do a year and a half ago. The new consoles are such a rip off. Consoles used to be current or ahead of the current gen of computers, but because consumers no longer care if their console is ancient (8 years…really?), the companies don’t try to push the envelope.
    Only if you stop buying “Whatever version 10″, games that look like crap, and 8 year old tech, will the companies start trying again. Stop being their biatch.

  34. Premium User Badge

    Andy_Panthro says:

    All in all, it’s just another fan in the wall.

  35. Mr Propellerhead says:

    ‘ “A thing” is a technical term, referring to the unique mechanic that defines a game and make it seem exciting.’
    And “mechanic” is a technical term for a person that maintains/repairs machinery.
    I continue to advocate the adoption of the [more correct] term “mechanism”.

  36. lautalocos says:

    i played thief 3, and i didn´t enjoy it very much. a lot of people told me that thief 2/1 was better. anyone can tell me why is thief 1/2 considred better than 3?

    • Emeraude says:

      The level design was better – more wide, more wild.

      That being said, if the core gameplay of Thief 3 didn’t appeal to you, it may just be that the genre is not your thing. It’s a slow, simulationist game that rely on system mastery and interactions rather than pre-scripted/planned events, and on the capacity to plan and act on partial imperfect information (one of the inspiration of the gameplay was submarine warfare).
      It was always rather niche, and trying to bring it to the mass market kinda seem absurd in and of itself to me.

  37. Numerical says:

    You know, knowing that this game is made from the same developer that made Deus Ex: Human revolution and from seeing that first attacky lungey type of screenshot, I’m gonna bet that Garrett is about to pull some very Adam Jensen-like moves on them thar guards. Kill, or just knock them out?

    Also, as far as a thing is concerned, well…I’d like to take his opportunity to point out that Thief basically INVENTED stealth gaming so saying that it can’t use it as it’s thing is like slapping the Pope for putting on a pope hat.

    • Premium User Badge

      drewski says:

      I don’t think I’d buy Pope 2014 if I already had Pope 2013 and the only feature they were advertising was the pope hat.

      I mean…yeah. It’s a Pope game. What else you got?

      • Premium User Badge

        phlebas says:

        They should have made it more like the first couple of Pope games, where on the harder skill levels you weren’t allowed to kill anyone.

  38. Lemming says:

    Maybe one day we’ll get a theif-type game based on Midnight Rogue and set in a fully-realised Port Blacksand. That’s right, I’m that old.

  39. knowitall011 says:

    why screenshots so close to release? show some gameplay videos!

  40. FRIENDLYUNIT says:

    Yes, I did like being a magical ninja who could teleport and possess those stilt guys.

    Hmmph! Young people, I don’t know. Show them perfectly lovely screenshots of a Thief game and they are demanding more sparkles. Guess he’ll have to wait for the next CoD or Borderlands game, depending.