Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
The graphics were never good. The were passable and functional, but by the time the first game released, they were outdated.
Funny, how easy it is to state they were outdated, when each new game with amazing graphics had its graphics completely outdated after 6-8 months at that time, because that's how fast the technology was improving.
Comparing to Unreal's empty levels (with reacher environment overall) - I'm calling bs on Thief's graphics being outdated at its time. Thief II graphics on the other hand - I'm pretty sure that... even someone from LGS even stated, that they didn't want to force you to have a rig capable of running Quake 3 to enjoy Thief II.
The first game was delayed by more than a year at a time when improvements in 3D graphics technology were coming thick and fast. It's not that the graphics were bad, but I recall several negative comparisons to Half-Life and Unreal in contemporary reviews. Had it beaten those games onto shelves, as was originally intended, it probably wouldn't have gotten any negative attention in that department, but there's no denying that the game's delay drew attention to its slightly outdated graphics engine.
Anyway, regardless of the technical capabilities of the Dark Engine, I much prefered the artistic direction of Thief to anything else out at the time, and technology can only go so far if there isn't the creative design behind it.
Really, Half-Life? A game that was delayed multiple times? I mean, I don't question what you wrote - it's likely, what you've written might have happened - I just find it funny... and no - the graphically I don't see Thief being (much) behind Half-Life. It's just the other tech used in Half-Life (a lot of which is related to character animation and AI is more complicated - oh and obviously, the polygon limits for characters in Half-Life weren't that drastic).
Looks bad, it keeps interupting gameplay for sequenced events. That ruins immersion and atmosphere and all the good stuff.
Technically, it was outdated in some aspects, like not supporting colored lighting (unlike Quake 2 from 1997), only supporting 16-bit undithered video modes which resulted in a loss of details in dark areas (although some might consider that a kind of artistic effect; it is also fixed by newer "unofficial" patches), the game used textures with 8-bit palettized colors, and generally low-ish polygon counts. Thief 2 fixed some of these, and added weather effects, fog, and better sky, however, it was released in 2000, when there were other games with more impressive visuals.
On the other hand, the engine was also advanced for its time in other aspects, like its object system, AI (not in terms of being "smart" in combat, but sensory abilities, alertness/awareness levels, pathfinding, noticing bodies, informing each other, etc.), and sound. It also had objects with simulated physics (mass, elasticity, friction, buoyancy, etc.) that the player could freely move, pick up, stack, or throw. The various technical advantages not related to graphics do contribute to the gameplay still holding up well today.