"Believe me, if I started murdering people, there'd be none of you left" - Charles Manson
Shovel from Hell badge by @OneDollar
Twice moderator, twice retired, four times permanently banned. All posts before 17.11.2012 were deleted by previous administration. Wielder of the Blood-Stained Shovel and the local sick evil fuck. Owner of the CL News, oldfag, terrorist, slayer of admins, veteran lurker and the person who gets things done no matter how many people would die in the process. Approach at your own risk.
Kirn joined on May 4th, 2010, since that has made 960 posts that are still accessible today, 45 of which are threads. Helping shape the community, Kirn has given 1301 upvotes, and was last online on Mar 12th, 2014.
Alright, since noone is posting here, I might as well write something here. Now, I though a bit about what you wrote here, and I guess I will debate some points.
First of all, I'll put up here my definition of 'necessary evil' as I see it based on what you wrote. The definition will be 'something, that is seen as bad, but used as a reason to unite people'. Actually, would have been easier to restrict it to just people, but you went and mention even nukes there, so I will have to make a broader definition. Yes, it's not exactly the same as yours, but that's how I see it.
Now, there are certainly many examples for that. Even US itself, and I don't mean now. Back in the day the evil for colonies was the homeland, which they fought against, and that made them into a proper country that we all now have to suffer from. And you can get a lot of such examples, and, thinking logically, back in the early stages of humanity, people actually created proper structured society because they were threatened by other people. So they banded together, they defended against outside enemies, they made laws to protect themselves from inside violence. Obviously, with us being deeply flawed, up to this day we don't really have a good solid working system. But the fact is that we based our society because of such 'evils'.
However, I do not agree that this is something that we truly need. Or something that really works.
Take nukes for example. We got them. So we don't have WW3. But are the wars the thing of the past? Fuck no. We just moved to a cold war where major powers clashed with each other supporting smaller countries that had no nukes. Also, it seems the nukes don't really prevent terrorist attacks (which became the new 'evil' pretty fast too). So, with nukes I would argue that they don't really prevent or support anything, they just change the way the game is played.
However, fuck that. The are things lesser than nukes that are used for purposes of uniting people. I kinda think about US again and the 'war on drugs' slogan. Now, I know it's a pretty much political slogan first of all, and that US prisons are pretty much overflowed now, and all that. But I wonder, do slogans like that unite people? Fight against not something outside, but something on the inside that is more complex than an enemy overseas?
The reason I ask is because I want to use my country here as an example - because it's a great example these days, you know. And my example is that we did not have those 'evils'. At all. Follow me please.
Historically this country always was under some other countries - partly or fully. That tend to bring a lot of hate, there was a lot of 'evils' around, there was constant struggle of sorts - military, political, social. Then, suddenly, USSR broke and Ukraine became totally independent. And, with the 'civilized' ways of the world now, that independence was guaranteed by all sorts or documents recognized by a shitton of countries. You have to remember that it's something that never happened before - the state where you are guaranteed not to be attacked by... well, anyone.
Still, the thought didn't really sink in for a while. The country had hard time first, inflation, all sorts of troubles, high crime rate... Them came the period... pretty much since a bit after we started having hrivnas and up to 2004, which would be, I think, about 7-8 years, where we kinda had it alright.
By alright I mean that we never had any wars. Never had any enemies. Terrorist didn't bother with our country. Our politicians were too busy dealing with each other to even try to influence people with anything even resembling a big uniting cause. Thanks to our location and access to sea, we became big in trading. And, being a big enough country, we felt overall stability. Sure, things were not good as in some countries or progressive or whatever. But we developed, we never had any real problems, and we were reasonably content.
Now we are to bring a hammer to this nice picture, because in 2004-2005 events of Orange Revolution people were given 'evils' to fear and fight against. Which quite easily separated the country in two. And, funny enough, those two 'evils' were the same major powers that always had sights on this country historically - Russia and whatever European country was closest atm. Well, by then Europe became a Union, so we can now count it as a single entity for our purposes. Now, that revolution pretty much split the country in two, with family members arguing to no end with each other.
Forward a bit. We not had hammer brought to us a second time. And, humorously enough, it's pretty much the same reason, same revolution, same split. Difference? About 10 times more fucking violent. Quite honestly I am not sure if we will survive this as a country, and I know that if we do, there will be a third strike in the future which will finish us and we will go the merry path of Korea. All that because we were presented and pushed to a set of 'evils'. 'Evils' we quite happily did without.
So, the point I would like to make is - yes, I fully recognize the concept of necessary evil. And I agree that it works in some cases. However, I strongly disagree with the notion that it is something we actually require to sustain whatever it is we want to keep sustaining. Which means, I accept those evils, but I really don't think they are that necessary.
For all fans out there. Volume 2 is in the works, and these guys are giving us the production diary.
Since it's a production diary 1, apparently, there will be more at a later date. Now, not a lot of info out there, some character making and stuff... I am glad though that they are working and we can expect things soon. And also I like the idea they expressed that first season was pretty much introduction, and in the second one, with all this out of the way, they can pretty much get to the cool stuff right away. I felt that in season one was not that much action scenes, even if there were some really nice ones, considering it's Monty Oum's production.
So. Yesterday night I pretty much finished the story of Thief. I will now take time to talk about the game having seen it full and proper. WARNING: there will probably be spoilers ahead, but I will try to keep them to a minimum and won't mention really important bits anyhow.
First thing to get out of the way - in me post on 'currently playing' thread I mentioned that this is not a restart of the franchise. However, interestingly enough, it is. And, even more interestingly, it is a restart that doesn't feel like a restart. I will explain.
Main character - Garrett. Master thief, cynical grumpy secretive guy who fully indulges his inner kleptomaniac. You know, I haven't played Thief games for 10 years now, obviously, but I feel that yes, this is the Garrett as we knew and loved him. And main character feeling the same is pretty much the effect that makes you feel that no, it doesn't feel exactly like a restart. For some examples, remember DmC and Tomb Raider - two recent restarts with distinctly new characters. DmC characters sucked ass, new Lara Croft was awesome, but in both examples the characters were the main sign of 'this is new'. Garrett is old. In a good way.
What next? We have The City, which is as dark and lootable as ever. Interestingly enough, it feels a bit like Dunwall city from Dishonored - mainly because of the bridge area. There's a grand river and there's a grand bridge with a ton of houses on it.
Oh, and we have the usual Thief theme - things start out with simple enough heists, but quickly turn to story-driven events of epic proportions where Garrett, quite unwillingly, have to make things right. This is exactly what we will be doing here.
So, we have all the elements of the Thief game setting in place. But is the game any good?
After some deliberation, I would say that the game is good, though at times it can piss you off mightily. Mostly you will be getting trouble with controls... actually, you will struggle with exactly two things - pressing button to loot some desk drawer and peeking from the corner instead is one, and the second one is character at time now wanting to jump where you need him to jump. Imagine you being on a roof and wanting to jump on a rope and from there - to the next roof. Well, even having the rope right in front of you, pressing jump button would probably just make you jump off the ledge, breaking your legs and having to restart from the last save. Frustrating to no end.
However, if you would dismiss those troubles, the game does play similar to Thief games with all the familiar elements. You hide in shadows, you use your blackjack to knock out the guards, you have a wide range of arrows - like fire and water to interact with your surroundings, broad arrows to kill stuff and even blunt arrows which cost 1 coin each and allow you to press buttons from afar. You also carry food which restores your health and local brand of poppy flowers which restores your focus. In addition to your arsenal you can pick up bottles or glasses on levels and carry then with you to use as throwable distraction for guards. Strangely enough, you do not have a sword or a dagger, which is weird because you clearly have arrows to kill people but have nothing to kill them from close distance. Actually, even in cutscenes, when Garrett feels danger, he takes out one of his arrows and holds it as a knife. Weird.
In addition to selectable things, you have items that are used automatically, like claw, which allows you to get to higher ledges (received after introduction mission), wrench to unscrew bolts on grates, small knife to cut out paintings and a wirecutter to disable traps - those last three items you have to buy from a black market vendor, who also sells a lot of very useful upgrades to your gear.
Levels are structured in a way you would expect them to - you have a place where you need to break into, and you have usually like 3 ways of getting in. Usually your options are going from bellow - like severs or basements, above - by getting to upper windows, or through the front door, like a boss. Obviously, you are met with traps, guards and safe combinations - pretty much like you would imagine in a stealth game where you have to rob everyone blind.
I have to admit though, that as levels become more story-driven and less heist-driven, the layout becomes more linear. Prime examples would be second part of House of Whispers mission and last two missions. In first example you are, after a while, find yourself just moving in a straight line to your prize and in last missions you are pretty much just moving to the final confrontation.
One of the things I hear about from people who don't like the game, is that it became too simple compared to previous thief. I think, there are three major point there.
Waypoints. Yes, your objective is now pretty much shown to you, and you just have to follow the waypoints.
Map. Instead of crude drawn maps that made me go crazy back in the first thief, you now have very clear map of the area. It doesn't show any secret locations - those are added as you discover them - but yes, it does make the process of moving around that much simpler.
Magic powers. Now, in the end of introduction mission, Garrett is caught in a magic blast, and part of the magic lodges itself in his right eye. Actually, this is pretty much the only major point telling us it's a reboot - Garrett has magic eye instead of mechanical one. It's still the right eye though, and it's still green. But anyways, by using focus energy - local mana - you can move faster and, more importantly, you see all the hidden switches and loots highlighter. This makes game much easier, especially since you can further upgrade your focus powers. I have to tell you, I use it to find hidden things I might miss, and I can tell you tight now, using focus power made one boss battle piss-easy.
Those are actually valid points. The gameplay is changed to be easier, and that's the tendency in major games. Thief couldn't escape that. However, the game has extensive difficulty settings, and it is said that you can make it as freaking hard as you yourself would want. Haven't tried that, but I hear even compass can be turned off, so there you go.
I also want to mention that the gameplay, while being mostly stealing and sneaking around, has some elements that serve as a small change of pace. First of all, you get cutscenes, and those are pretty nice and well done. Second, they added a sort of gameplay feature of scaling the walls - sorta like you would see in modern 3D platformers. Lastly, there are action sequences where you have to run as fast as you can escaping from danger. Actually, there are only two parts like that, so they don't feel overbearing and turning this game into an action. And it's actually rather classy. The scene where you run, fall through a window and land on that table where... no, you better should just see that.
Now, saying all that, I want to finish it with how the game felt for me. Here I mean more like story and setting aspects.
The main problem about the story you will all notice - the totally unlikable female character we get here. On your first mission you get to work with Erin - who is both crappy thief and an impulsive assassin. She disregards your experience, charges in and, well, dies. However, after making your few next robberies, you find out that you can't get her out of your head. Quite annoyingly, and not in a way you may think. And even while she is dead, she is a complete bitch! I mean, there are a few scenes that are aimed and you making feel sorry for her, but those don't have any lasting effect on you as a player. Ironically enough, this actually provides a viable reason for Garrett to get involved in all the struggle that is going on - he just wants to remove the voices from his head before he goes completely crazy. And that kind of selfish goes does kinda work.
The setting itself is pretty grim and bloody. You are caught in a struggle between the baron - current ruler of the city - and the revolutionary force that is even more brutal than the guards. And in the shadows horrible creatures start lurking... Locations you visit are mostly dark - local crematorium, catacombs and, which is the most creepy level of all, the abandoned asylum full of ghosts. Then again, you visit some nice places too - houses of rich people, brothel, those kinds of places.
What I have to give credit for - this game, while being very story-oriented, never forgets that you have to steal things. And you can be as cynical as you want about that. I mean, it's Garrett we are talking about, he will steal anything that isn't bolted down. And, since you have a wrench, things that are bolted down he will unbolt and then steal. I mean... a bunch of guards gets caught in the explosion? You walk among the dead and pick up their wallets. A half-dressed hooker walks to her client room? You follow her and steal her earrings. Guy killed himself? Let's see if he got anything in his pockets. Hell, you even steal from the damn ghosts! And even when the world is literally burning. No, seriously, you are escaping fire, running through some house... you can stop and loot the place. How would you like to pick the lock on a box while watching with the corner of your eye how the fire creeps up closer and closer?
I will say, while the story felt quite short and Erin is a total bitch, I rather enjoyed the game. The game became much more action-y than I remember, but it's not a bad mix and it is still a game mainly about stealing stuff and not getting caught. Right now I still have all the side-misions in the city area to deal with - I saved them for after the main story - so I am not done having fun with this game yet.
@johan_5179 you bastard.
Tried to think of a character that would have been like me. Came out with nothing so far. I never had a feeling of 'this character is exactly like me!' anyways. Ever.
Made post on the 'games you are currently playing' thread. Will probably give some insights here later too.
Feel like this thread should be bumped. Not everyone knows to look at readme section to find it.
So, after playing a few hours of Castlevania LoS2 and new Thief, I decided to try and get Thief done first.
Ten years since the last Thief game. A lot of time. People these days will tend to compare this game to Dishonored, especially with common themes of city being damn fucking sick. Still, the difference between Thief and Dishonored is, unsurprisingly, as the one between a thief and assassin (not game names this time ))).
So far, I'd say I like the game. I like how the character grabs items or interacts with things - gives a feeling of immersion. I am also quite grateful that this is not a remake of the franchise, as it is with so many games. No, we get the old Garrett, experienced and grumpy and not shying away from stealing the last coin from a poor person's house.
One bad thing for me is that controls are not exactly the best. Quite a few times I couldn't jump the right way or started looking from the corner of the desk instead of lock-picking it. It does get frustrating it times.
@Ecstasy I am expecting you on a tank here soon.
Oh, the humanity...
freely identify themselves as Russian security forces when asked by the international media and the Ukrainian military.
Moreover, these individuals are armed with weapons not generally available to civilians.
Have you heard, btw, that right-wingers raided military storages in the west part of the country and got military weapons? No, I know you didn't.
Instead, he packed up his home and fled, leaving behind evidence of wide-scale corruption.
The deal with the opposition was made. After which they were the ones who refused to make things civil and continued the riots.
President Putin himself acknowledged the reality that Yanukovych "has no political future."
Yes. But still a president until a legitimate elections.
After Yanukovych fled Ukraine, even his own Party of Regions turned against him, voting to confirm his withdrawal from office and to support the new government. Ukraine’s new government was approved by the democratically elected Ukrainian Parliament, with 371 votes - more than an 82% majority.
With armed maidan people right there in the parlament building threatening the Region Party. Very democratic.
To date, there is absolutely no evidence of a humanitarian crisis.
Right-wing marches right in me city, armed, yelling slogans that are close to fascist.
Furthermore, since the new government was established, calm has returned to Kyiv.
I laugh in your face. There are talks about hanging pro-Russian people on the squares, monuments are demolished, and there are threads to send train of fully armed people, not military or police, mind you, to 'deal with' people in the east.
bases are under threat.
I'd say Ukrainian bases are under threat from Ukrainian people. Right now the military and police forces are being fucked by the new 'government' without any logic.
All of Ukraine’s church leaders, including representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate, have expressed support for the new political leadership
This one I don't know. I do know that some fucking church people were on maidan stage, but those people are fucking crazy anyways. And trust me, if Jews are actually expressing anything on the matter - it's in their business interests.
The government in Kyiv immediately sent the former Chief of Defense to defuse the situation. Petro Poroshenko, the latest government emissary to pursue dialogue in Crimea, was prevented from entering the Crimean Rada.
True. And also that Poroshenko guy is supporting this coup only because he was made to share some of his money during the last government. We all know the guy, he's a candy maker and just has personal reasons to have Yanukovich government. Not the best mediator.
The Rada is the most representative institution in Ukraine.
Rada is a joke now. Actually even more than in any previous years. Pretty much blinded by their own success in this joke of a revolution. First day they gathered, it was literally painful to hear. And even now, prisoners were freed, people who did nothing wrong are sued... I am surprised they didn't pass any laws removing Putin from power. That's the expected amount of stupid there atm.
But, naturally, you have no idea about any of that. Just your bogus 'facts'. Well, those are my facts, and to confirm those you had to be here when it all went down. Still, for some of those it's enough to just walk outside. But yeah, you, from there, watching you US sponsored news, yeah, you are obviously the expert.