Thief 3 preview

Game developers owe you nothing.

The original PC games were already quite successful. That was just a branding thing.

The first Deus Ex might not have been a big hit, but at least it was a hit.

Well duh.

If they want to stay in business, oh yes they do.

Perhaps you might notice, but what Ion Storm is doing by making the game more accessible is trying to stay in business. You overvalue your hardcore contribution to a niche game.

But the question remains, when has this ever been successful? (I honestly don’t know.) Most games start at a certain level of complexity and get more complex as they get sequel-ed.

In this case, might they have been better off creating something from scratch that was simpler as opposed to trying to make existing, complex designs and franchises more accesible?

Oh hell, let’s face it, we can sugarcoat this in whatever manner and you guys can argue about this till the sun goes down, but the fact is Spector sold out big time.

I liked his talk at GDC. I recommend you check it out! He wants to make a Harry Potter game.

Well, Quake II and Q3A were simpler than Quake, at least online. Counter-Strike has gotten simpler. The Need For Speed games have been simpler since Need For Speed: Porsche Unleashed.

But yeah, you’re right, Steve. Simpler may work, but rarely ever in the same franchise. If they simply renamed Thief 3 to something else, the game would get more acceptance from at least the original core audience.

I, too, think he’s quite the charismatic speaker. I’m guessing he’s the type that could probably sell you some beachside property in Nebraska.

I don’t mean to bash the guy that much. He has an amazing resume and certainly deserves recognition for his accomplishments, but I think he’s lost it. Yeah, yeah, maybe I’m jumping to conclusions based solely on one title, but that’s my intuition at any rate.

Was GTA3 simpler than Deus Ex? Was Baldur’s Gate simpler than Deus Ex? Deus Ex was more complicated than your typical shooter, but it wasn’t a terribly complicated game compared to others that have sold well.

To answer Steve’s question, I can’t think of any. Usually it’s the opposite. Sequels tend to add features and options.

That’s a great point. When 3do decided to fuX0r the Might and Magic universe up with a third person shooter or whatever the hell it was, they didn’t call it Heroes of Might and Magic 4 or Might and Magic 6 – they kept the Might and Magic in there, but tagged it as Crusaders of M&M. That allowed them to sort of coattail on the popularity of the established universe, while at the same time not angering and ultimately alienating a lot of the built-in fanbase of the other, successful franchises. If they had called it HOMM 3 and the TBS crowd hated it, then they would almost certainly have reduced the sales numbers for HOMM 4 when it was released, because those guys would still be thinking “never again, 3do”.
Developers can do what they want - they’re putting up the capital and time to make the product. But you have to wonder about what the hell they’re thinking sometimes.
I still contend that the best approach for this one is a name change. You could still use Thief somewhere in it, just don’t call it Thief 3. I sorta like “Taffer Cell: It Is To Thief What Mystic Quest Was To Final Fantasy”.

edit: to add one question - what inna heck does “rarely never” mean? :D

Do I really want someone called “Old Man Gravy” agreeing with me? Hmm…

Or for another example, look how Interplay handled the Baldur’s Gate brand on the PC and consoles – they created separate games for each. They would have killed the BG brand on the PC if they had released Dark Alliance on the PC as the next installment in series.

Keep making fun of my handle and I’ll probably rarely never agree with you again. :)

Anyone know approximately how many copies DX2 has sold?

Well if Spector bastardizes the great Thief franchise I sure won’t be buying it.

I was there. It was sorta meh.

He was just saying that a license isn’t a bad thing.

All the game title art I’ve seen is showing it as Thief: Deadly Shadows (of death) not Thief 3: Deadly Shadows (of death) - so that may be what they’re trying for.

Only problem with that argument is that the website for Deadly Shadows (of death) is