a lot of great films were made on low budges... primer, cube, and moon come to mind. i'm sure there are more. 

Pulp Fiction's budget was minuscule. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_HEeHUmzjI 

They have taken out so many things that make it a thief game it's embarrassing. I don't buy their reasoning for not having Stephen Russell do the voice acting either 

...and so have no allegience to the series. Thus while I sympathise with the fanboiz concerns and alarms about rebooting the series full of vulgar consolised hand-holding, crazy camera angles, finishing moves and all that bullshit, apart from that the atmosphere and style looks great and if it turns out to be Dishonoured Ex : Thief Revolution in a dark fantasy world, I could be quite happy with that. 

This is a new Thief game taken in a different direction by a different team for a different fanbase. The franchise name is purely being used as a rubber stamp to indicate design pedigree to new fans who don't know otherwise. 

But briefly. What exactly has been taken out?

From what I can see in the video there's less undead and those hammer guys, but both could easily turn up later. 

Everything else is a disgrace. 

Are you basing that on the video or have you played it? 

Even thou is has a different vibe (seems more combat focused) I still love the new visuals and think the environmental traps are cool. From the video it looks like there is going to be a lot more stuff to play with. I am just wondering what platform it is really aimed at, because this will influence how well the controls are setup. 

Basing that on all the previews/interviews I've read + all the videos I've seen. It's more than enough to tell me this will suck. 

Here's a cool video on Dungeon Keeper, regardless of your liking or hatred for TotalBiscuit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DJmS7prcmE 

Are you basing that on it being a 'Thief' game, or being a game in it's own right?? 

Since it has the Thief title. If it were named something else I couldn't care less, but as a Thief title it stinks. 

for them to hijack the thief brand if they're going to dismiss everything. There'd be a shitstorm if DC sold the rights to Superman and they basically retconned the original storyline and villains. Yeah he's no longer from Krypton or called Kal-El, he wasn't raised on a farm and Lex Luthor is no longer the badguy. But he flies and wears blue spandex so he's still Superman.

How about no? If the main character was not called Garrett then fair game tell a new story and keep the name Thief, hell make Garratt a side character who taught the main character the Thieving craft. But don't throw the baby out with the bath water, FFS. 

"Whatever homie"

Maybe tippex over the box art and loading screens so it says something else instead??

People could and did say exactly the same thing about Doom 3 and Wolfenstein reboots, but they were still good games in their own right. 

Which was not a good game in its own right. I found it dull and boring gameplay wise. 

in a way.

It doesn't really have the problem of Thief as the game never really had much of a story. It was a horror game and I don't think at the point it was released it would have worked as a 90mph running shooter.
Looking back I think mistakes were made, id were trying to blow people away with tech (which is historically what id did best), but I think at the point when it was released that we were more than satisfied with the graphics of games of the day. Even Rage was an expensive and needless under-taking with the graphics, it was beautiful but the game wasn't there.
id should have been making lower risk games, like quake 3 was, to please fans. Even Carmacks favourite game is Q3. 

Is Q3A. 

I actually love Quake 3 a hell of a lot. It's one of the most perfect multiplayer shooters of all time, great balance and gameplay. Graphics are still lovely too. 

...if it didn't have a horrible floaty feel, appallingly broken damage feedback, indistinct player skins, juvenile bouncing items and arcadey aesthetics, no pretence at single player at all, and in general had rubbish feeling MP gameplay compared to Q1, Q2, and UT all of which I was enjoying at the time.

The engine was quite nice though. 

...I guess this shows something. I'm not judging it because it is a failed pseudo-sequel to Q1 or Q2. I'm not judging it because it uses the Quake name. I'm not judging it because of it's relation to an established franchise.

I'm judging it purely on it's own merits. Or rather I would, if it had any.

FWIW even HL2 deathmatch with it's sluggish movement and weapon changing, felt far more fun gameplay. 

Well that argument has convinced me to see the error of my ways! - said no-one on the internet ever. ;)

Yeah I loved it and I still play Quake Live today. I enjoy the arcadey-ness of the game, and I don't even care that the singleplayer is just bot matches :P 

I'm not sure what it has to offer in terms of better multiplayer game play than Quake 1. 

lol bler, you must have mixed up UT and Q3A in your memories.