Thief: A Final Conclusion

Thief

Comparing Thief (Gold) and Alien: Isolation

Thief Gold: Can A Game Have A Setting Without A Plot?

Thief: A Final Conclusion

This third article about Thief: The Dark Project will conclude the series, and explain why the experience failed to thrill as I'd hoped.

Thief was birthed by developers (Looking Glass Studio) bored of the classic corridor shooters, like Quake and Doom, and eager to put the first person perspective to another task. Looking Glass developed a game like Quakes, but used the first person window for a new purpose. Instead of shooting hordes of foes, the player could use their perspective to see shades of grey, to hide in darkness, moving swiftly across patches of light. And the Thief series, excluding the remake by Edios Montreal (based on what I've heard), became a classic. Part of my disappointment may result from the expectation one has when reviewing a game which earned this title.

Appraisals of Thief: Gold contrast its expansive levels to the narrow, pre-scripted paths of modern stealth games. But this compliment hides frustrations which the player will observe, like Garret discovers treasure. Thief offers three difficulty settings; normal, hard, and expert. While each alters small aspects of the map, the most significant change is the objectives. Each mission has starting objectives, and can add more as Garret explores. A level is complete when all the objectives are fulfilled. Normal has fewer, easier objectives to complete per level. Expert difficulty often has twice as many objectives as normal. The layout of each level felt as if it was designed with Expert as the assumed difficulty. With fewer objectives, normal is half empty. Massive levels, innumerable rooms, all empty, or cluttered with useless treasure.

While all levels have objectives related to the castle, graveyard, or underground city Garret is exploring, most include a loot requirement. Scaling with difficulty, the player is required to recover a minimum amount of valuables. What an unnecessary, make-work condition! Normal's minimum was so low, casually picking the obvious treasure was often sufficient. Most of the time I didn't bother to pick up some treasure, because it wasn't necessary. But one level required a significant amount, and required a second search, because I'd completed all the other objectives but hadn't found enough gold. While searching for treasure should be a part of the game, it shouldn't have been allowed to negate the completion of a level. Instead gold should have another implementation. Between levels Garret can buy items. Items cost money. Yet, it never seems as if the gold collected from previous missions was added to his purse. Instead, the amount of money always seemed random. Which was fine, because I completed each mission without any purchasing items. Frustratingly, conserving items never mattered much either, as each level reset Garret's supply.

With large levels, it's easy to deceive: the layout can look open while being restricted. Though Thief allows players the freedom to move around, ultimately they were constricted by quest objectives. Objective have only one solution, while appearing to offer multiple options. Thief's use of area and objective is comparable to open room, but after entering it, discovering it's full of invisible, unbreakable glass walls. While the world may be open, objectives are vague, with no assistance to locating hidden objects. Better yet, instead of wandering open-eyed around glass walls, add a blindfold, and now you're playing Thief.

As the game finally approaches something resembling a plot, halfway through, human enemies are replaced by monstrous foes. Odd lobster like men, with giant claws instead of hands. Giant praying mantis monstrosities spiting bee swarms at Garret. And nervous rat soldiers, eager to charge one minute, and flee the next. But while these descriptions make the opposition seem diverse, they feel frustratingly similar to the human knights, archers, thieves, and Hammerites Garret has already vanquished. They are different visually, but are as similar in function as a gala apple is to a fuji: a slight distinction in flavor. All succumb the same to the surprise of the blackjack. All engage in the clashing dance of a melee (except the mantises, who are like archers). And all couldn't find an elephant in a haystack.

On normal difficulty, the game never prohibits the player from killing humans (it does on other difficulties), but I avoided needless death for the first eight missions. This required a significant amount of reloading, but I preferred to let Garret's blackjack do the hard work, and keep the sword clean. As the game neared its conclusion, in rooms full of inhuman foes, it felt unnecessary to spare them. In the final two or three levels, Garret killed more creatures than he'd seen in all the other levels combined. The most common enemy, the ratmen (who may be monkeymen, but no one is certain), are susceptible to either a single strike from behind, or a charged swing to the face (which stuns them), and allows two more quick hits to finish them. I left a trail of dead bodies behind me on the way to the final confrontation with the Trickster.

While some games require a cataclysmic final battle, and many stealth games (Deus Ex: Human Revolution) foolishly include a boss battle, Thief ignores the temptation. The Trickster can't be bested by force, and a bit of quick, quiet footwork (and slight of hand) finishes him for good. But the whole final level could have required a more stealth and puzzle solving. Even the conclusion (and it would be incorrect to call it a confrontation, because the Trickster never even knows Garret is there) lacks challenge.

If I may briefly, I'd like to compare it to Alien: Isolation. A:I has the benefit of many years, concepts, and graphics to draw on, and these create a superior game. They are not entirely similar, but Thief's inclusion of zombies, ghosts, dragons, and other monsters, allows a relatively straight line to be drawn. A:I includes a challenging foe, tense stealth gameplay, a useful collection of weapons and items, an engaging plot, while still existing in a expansive, detailed universe. Thief can not make these claims, nor does it increase the challenge, offer evolving gameplay, or develop a collection of characters as unique as Ripley and co.

I've decide to implement a new rating system, to judge games. Instead of the usual numerical scale, I've often judged games on a simple question: Would I rather be playing Dota? And in the case of Thief: The Dark Project, the answer is yes, I would rather play Dota. While Thief may offer gamers a complex world and expansive levels, the lack of cohesion in the plot, the vague quest directions, coupled with an inventive, but unsophisticated gameplay which fails to develop over the course of the game, made the game an initially interesting adventure, but eventually a dull plod.

Thief 2, also called The Metal Age, is reputed to have improved on the formula, and I do plan to play it, but I will be exploring some shorter games first.