Thief (2014) Review

Your name is Garrett. You live in a dismal world. The clerics control your world, the Baron controls the clerics, and the General controls the Baron. You didn't ask to be altered, to be able to see into a psychic world controlled, possible created, by your friend and protege, Erin. But here you are.

A year has gone by while you lay in some sort of a coma. Asleep, oblivious to the changes in your world. Political chaos has broken loose. There's a strange disease called the gloom affecting the population of your town, and it doesn't have a cure. Most likely, because the governing forces don't want a cure. Control the citizens by disease and hunger. An effective way to keep the people in line.

Few are willing to help the people. Those that do must work in the shadows. Betrayal of the law means a fast "trial," followed by an even faster hanging. The underground movement needs someone with a special skill set. Someone that can control his fear, his emotions, and do what must be done. Someone that knows the shadows, embraces the safety of the darkness. The people need you. Garrett. Thief.

If you've read any part of my walk through for the game, you know that I am not a big fan of Thief. Granted, it is more playable than the many sequels to Assassin's Creed (the first game), but doesn't quite measure up to it. I know, it doesn't seem fair to judge this game based on a different franchise. The trouble is, this game is so obviously a "spiritual successor," that you have to.

This game feels very much like AC 1. The only things missing are the Leap of Faith, and the Templar Knights. And the pick pocketing. But I'll go into that one later. All of the other important elements are here, but changed just enough to legally call it a different game. You climb walls, jump around on rooftops, try to avoid being seen, and when possible, use stealth attacks.

I really did want to love this game. Not just like it, but love it. It truly had some potential. Unfortunately, the way the city is mapped out makes it too damn annoying to get from point A to point B fluidly. For instance, there is one place where you have to enter an area through a building's back window, deal with a load screen, and enter out the front. In order to progress to the building just across the street (too far to jump to the next ledge), you need to leave the area, deal with another cut scene, and enter through the back of the building.

Some of the paths are far too clever as well. There are some areas with piles of crates, lumber, or whatever, that you need to squeeze through. You're supposed to be playing as a fairly well built, adult man. Not a muscle bound type, but definitely not someone that should fit through an opening as small as you're expected to. As such, it seems more annoying than anything, that you have to locate these passage ways.

I am all for SMART game development. CLEVER, however, is a major breaking point for me. What's the difference? Let's say you're playing a game where you need to collect rabbits for some reason. A smart designer will look at the game environment, and place the rabbits accordingly. Behind a tree, inside a hole, beside a bush. Boring, but places that a person would think to look.

A clever designer wants to beat the player. S/he'll put the rabbits on top of a tall tree that you'll need to climb. How did the rabbit get up there? Who cares? At least you didn't find it, unless you bought the cheat book. This is the kind of logic that can kill a game, especially for people that want to figure out the puzzles themselves, not using the internet or a book. This game fails people that want to do the mental work themselves in too many areas.

And speaking of puzzles, you aren't always given the clues to figuring out a safe. I had to look one up at IGN, and even the person writing the walk through for them said the designers failed to provide the clue for a specific safe. When a professional for a major game site can't figure out what is supposed to be a simple puzzle, you know the game designers didn't do something right.

To make things worse, some puzzles don't even feel like a puzzle. At best, they're busy work, to stretch out your game time without making the developers work. All you have to do is rotate a tile in one puzzle, until it snaps into place. Move to the next, and repeat. Since each tile that you rotate controls a few others, all you have to do is rotate a couple of them to finish, no real effort involved.

When I started to write this review a few minutes ago, I actually had a higher opinion of it. I had wanted to give it a better recommendation, due to it getting some things right, and giving a reasonable amount of fun and game time. But now, it's really hard for me to do that. I was planning on saying that it would be a good weekend rental, or maybe something to fill out your GameFly list, in between the big, AAA titles. Now, I think I can't even honestly say that.

IF you are really in the mood to rent a game from your local brick & mortal establishment (not everyone lives in a big city), and your GameFly rental hasn't arrived yet, give this a try. But ONLY if you're truly bored, and don't mind a game with too many load screens, a lack of information, and only a hint of originality. Otherwise, break out your last gen console, and play the first Assassin's Creed. You'll have a whole lot more fun that way.