I just wanted to say that I think the THI4F article rocks. Thanks, everyone who contributed to that. --Larris 11:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

No probalo larry. Big McLargeHuge 19:36, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Hahahah! Hope the game rocks the same way. BTW I didn't contribute, but I found the forum links very informative, so thanks from me too! Dan7 15:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! It was fun, especially writing the header/"intro" para and "Confirmation" section and sorting out the links, etc. -- Tom Jenkins (Reply) 01:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Article name Edit

I really think that the article should be renamed "Thief 4". The only sentences containing "THI4F" I've seen were sarcastic remarks of fans of the first 3 games. All official sources spell it with 4 outside the word. Another thing: that logo was probably made by the same people that wrote "Dεus Σx 3 - DΣvel˚pmεnt Teαm" on a banner on some presentation of DX3 assets. You gotta forgive them.--Nathan2000 13:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thief 4, and now Thief4 redirect here. More than likely the game won't be called "Thief 4", maybe "Thief: something...", so when the official title is announced the THI4F page will be moved to that TITLE and the redirects will be changed. Right now when people do a search they will still find the right page. As for the logo, I don't think they have an art team yet anyway.--Sxerks 16:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Whatever happened to THF 4? Edit

I think it's either safe to say Thief 4 is dead in the water, or everyone's moved to another site. Considering the fact that it's December 2011 and nobody's been back to suggest anything, I'm going with the former. 11:45, December 10, 2011 (UTC)

What are you talking about?--Sxerks 16:13, December 10, 2011 (UTC)

Deus ex is done so they have got to be starting t4 any time. Besides, they would have sent a press report about the cancellation of the project. There is a long time between when a title is announced and what it gets released anyway. 04:51, December 11, 2011 (UTC)

Thief (reboot) Edit

The whole page needs a rewrite. And I'm wondering how much of a problem this reboot is going to be for wiki articles. As in disambiguations and other naming conflicts. It's like the alternate universe reboot of Star Trek, are there any other large gaming wikis that have original and reboot info on them? I have set up a placeholder wiki if we end up needing to split this info off: w:c:thiefgame (since that is part of the new official url), if it is not needed it can be closed and redirected here.--Sxerks (talk) 19:08, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Who says it is a reboot? The notes say that Garrett has "been away a long time". As for how it connects to DS, I don't know... I would just do as we normally do. It looks like the water arrow is replaced, so we make a new article for it, and append the water arrow article with a note explaining that it is replaced in thief 4. It will be a lot of work, but even now I don't think it will be as complicated as you think. Big McLargeHuge (talk) 20:00, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

I just read this, "Garrett’s scar represents that his past has left long-lasting effects on his life" which says to me that this is more of a reboot-sequel, like Wasteland 2. However, the next line reads, "Eidos being vague about how faithful the team is remaining to the original Thief lore". That is scary. Correcting and modifying canon is a complicated thing. We will have to watch closely in terms of Thief Canon for this one. If Deadly Shadows caused stirs, imagine what this could do... Big McLargeHuge (talk) 20:03, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

It's a reboot/reinventing, go read the gameinformer article, and watch the video. It's going to be a mess for canon, but it won't be release till 2014, so we have time to see exactly what it will be, and why I set up the other wiki just in case.--Sxerks (talk) 20:35, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
From what I saw, it seems like a strange amalgam of Assassins Creed and Hitman, with a bit of home decorating on the side. --Fish Preferred (talk) 21:21, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

I can see what you mean by the reboot, but I'm not seeing it as "lets start from square one" with the series. I think it is a continuation of the series with a new look. As for canon... we will have to see. Expect the best, but prepare for the worst. I'm guessing the worst is your portal idea. I can only hope that will never be used. Big McLargeHuge (talk) 00:48, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

The first developer in the video says "reinvent the franchise", it has Garrett, The City, and The Baron, that's about it. So if it ends up not having anything to do with the original 3, it will get it's own wiki, so as not to confuse elements in this one. If they manage to make enough connects to the past canon without blatant contradictions then it will stay here.--Sxerks (talk) 01:07, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

And the clocktower, which appears to have been fixed. I'm just glad they didn't end up using this idea. --Fish Preferred (talk) 01:42, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not entirely certain about a separate wiki either. The F.E.A.R. wiki has two timelines to deal with. Star Wars and Trek both have canon issues. Perhaps it can be a portal on the wiki without being completely separate. Big McLargeHuge (talk) 02:18, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

FEARs 2 expansions were the problem there and are easily footnoted. Star Wars has movies, books, and games, which they throw into one article, and is very ugly. Star Trek has movies & tv, the canon stuff is on memory-alpha wiki including the reboot which has different (alt universe) pages for each character and so on, and memory-beta wiki has all the licensed works such as books, and games, and the ST Expanded Universe wiki has fanon (that's 3 wikis). Are we going to have to make alt pages for everything, or lump it all on one page, or just separate it, and this is just the 1st game of the reboot(will more cause other problems?), so the other wiki is just a precaution, either way I can close the other one and have it redirected here easily. It really depends if the new game is placed after the events of the others, or if just concepts of the original 3 are used to create something new.--Sxerks (talk) 02:52, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

Why you called it a reboot? It's written somewhere that the game will be re-made? In this case, I'd like to read it somewhere, so a link should be welcomed. Massimilianogoi (talk) 03:08, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

There are a couple links in this section, and scans of an article somewhere. They also changed the website from to, so thi4f and thief4 are no longer working titles.--Sxerks (talk) 05:32, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

im still speculating that it is a continuation of the series. that alone will make it a whole lot simpler than a complete series reset, Builder forbid. Big McLargeHuge (talk) 16:50, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

I hope so. Changing all the factors should not be productive. On the other hand, there's yet that "reboot" label to clarify... Massimilianogoi (talk) 12:59, March 17, 2013 (UTC)

From a new interview at Rev3: "There is no number in the title.... It's not a sequel or prequel", "bringing in elements of the original to keep the essence". There is a new voice actor for Garrett. So this reboot is a restart with a different story line, just using the essence of the original. It's really not the same game, and either having article with different headers(, or alternate articles "Garrett (new thief), and so on for all the items, locations, and people" is just messy. I'm leaning toward using the other wiki at the moment.--Sxerks (talk) 17:29, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Makes no sense.Edit

OK, is it just me, or does “We want you to play as a thief, but we don’t want to force you to play as a thief.” make no sense whatsoever?

trust me anonymous contributor, the fans are denouncing this one. Big McLargeHuge (talk) 08:02, October 14, 2013 (UTC)

It does make sense. The developers would prefer to have the game played the way it was intended. They just aren't going to make it mandatory to do so, because that would make the gameplay too linear. Fish Preferred (talk) 14:47, October 14, 2013 (UTC)

It goes deeper than that. The levels are segmented for one, making the player do the levels as the developers intended, instead of dropping us off into the world space to do as we please. Eidos' biggest flaw in TINO is that they are trying to please everybody and so far its making everything convoluted. This would be a great game on it's own, but putting this game in the same series as thief, well, it just doesn't quite compare. Big McLargeHuge (talk) 20:20, October 14, 2013 (UTC)