It seems that I got a little bit of flak from my review of Thief 2014, because I gave the score a 2 out of 5 (but I also got praised for writing an honest review). If you said you enjoyed the game, well, good for you. If you didn't, well, at least you were honest enough to say so. I respect opinions, and I call everything down the middle. It isn't often I give games low scores, but when I do, I provide a good reason to do in the review itself. Remember, the scores reflect my honest opinion about a game. This isn't a popularity contest; it's reviewing a video game.
With that said, here's a slightly deeper explanation as to why I gave Thief 2014 a 2 out of 5. I felt that the features in the game weren't necessary, and I felt that they shouldn't have been included. I also felt that this game isn't as fun as the previous games. I felt rather bored playing this game. The stealth mechanic left a bad taste in my mouth. The other games made stealth fun and rather simple. This game? Heh, not really.
While I did admit that the Challenge mode and Custom difficulties were the better features, I also felt like that they really didn't need to be there. Another thing that I wasn't too crazy about were the new arrows: the Blunt arrow and Sawtooth arrow. I really didn't like the Blunt arrow that much, as I felt that this would've made the stealth mechanic even more redundant than it should be.
I also wasn't too keen on the closet hiding creating save points. Why have that, when you have a simple Click Save, Save game, done? It sort of defeats the purpose of having closets in the first place.
I also felt disappointed by the treasures themselves (but not all of them). If you owned a pair of scissors that are silver or gold, you deserve to be robbed by Garrett. While the game does offer unique treasures, I felt like they shouldn't have been included, or instead implement them better. Instead of showcasing them, why not just make them like the rest?
The last thing I want to point out is the use of birds and dogs as alarms. It was a stupid idea from the get go. In the first game, it was just you and the enemy. In the second game, it was you, the enemy, and machinery (some of the machines acted as sentries). The third game had factions (which I admit was pretty cool) that you can either team up or go against. What's wrong with this picture? Are we missing something? Oh yeah, variety. This game had NONE of this.
Okay, I hope this clears things up. If it didn't, well, you're going to have to take this with a grain of salt.
Ken Kriho is an upcoming videographer. He will write anything (except for non-fiction and children's literature). Ken is also a graduate with a degree in Art from UWEC.