Nothing stays the same

[Revanon]

First of all I must say it is a complete honor to post on this board. I have been reading everyone's remarks since Pandora I believe and you are all extremely funny, brilliant and great people..regardless of your opinions.

But nothing stays the same. Look at Mario...we loved that series...then it switched with Mario 3...then 4...then SUPER MARIO 64 and everyone wondered what that would be like...and as you can see, that series is great.

Metal Gear Solid has changed...It was great on the playstation...then it converted to MGS 3...with that combat fighting...and now it's going on to MSG 4...it even had a card type game.

Let's not forget RESIDENT EVIL...omg how that game has changed...

and what about THE LEGENDARY GRAND THEFT AUTO? the change from 2d to 3D?

I love Splinter Cell...I thought Montreal did a wonderful job with SC1...they had that part where Sam had an interview in a real setting about making a sequel...they just made it fun...who could remember the NSA TRAINING VIDEOS to introduce Choas Theory? Once again..brilliant game and it was fun to see those videos...it made all the competition take notice...

Now Montreal is back with Conviction. MONTREAL people...they have ALWAYS...ALWAYS amazed us with their intelligence..their savvy...and their creativity...their games are incredibly deep and fulfilling...let's give them a chance...trust me...what we're looking at is NOT CLOSE to a final version...not by a long shot. They are just giving us something to look forward to. And yes, it looks suspect...but with all the hype of MSG 4 coming out...trust me...I think Montreal is biting at the bit to shut them up once again...

Change is uncertain...but just like Mario, Resident Evil...Final Fantasy...MSG...change can be wonderful!

I have faith in this game...it is in great hands with UBISOFT MONTREAL...they can't make a terrible game.

[Knot3D]

That post is the perfect Ubi executive TOOL and thus, this remark is funny too.

btw. you cannot compare the jump from 2D to 3D general gaming industry evolution to the selling out of a very specific game franchise.

[Sir_Jams]

That was well said. All we can hope now is that fellow community forumers agree with our opinions.

[XBfreak_101]

ignore knot3d, hes another tool that doesn't know what hes talking about.

[Stealth_chill]

Originally posted by Revanon:
and what about THE LEGENDARY GRAND THEFT AUTO? the change from 2d to 3D?


*gasp* I remember that! that totally changes the gameplay of grand theft auto from car jacking police killing guy to......car jacking police killing guy.

That didnt change the gameplay, it was the same. I didnt hear n e one complaining about that.

[scworld]

Thanks for pointing out the "change" stealth_chill http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Saves me doing that.

[Knot3D]

Originally posted by XBfreak_101:
ignore knot3d, hes another tool that doesn't know what hes talking about.

No, YOU'RE a tool, because you're demonizing people who actually think for themselves instead of lapping up everything a company throws at him.. and oww... did i mention, you are probably gonna pay for that stuff ?

Quit bashing people who just state their opinion on a game. That's as low life as it gets.

[I.S.F-Dixxhead]

I gave DA a chance and was utterly dissappointed. However, this time it's montreal on the works and I'll just have faith in them.

Reavenons Resident Evil comparsion is quite good actually. Resident Evil 4 played totally diffrent from all the others and can be considered to be the best Resident Evil out of all.

Changes can be good, but honestly I also feel a bit worried about loosing all I liked about SC with this "Sam against the rest of the world" kind of setting...

[Revanon]

I worry about the change as well I.S. F....and about the change from 2D to 3D...with Grand Theft Auto, there was more you could do with the 3D setting..it wasn't the same game with a 3D premise...and you know that...same with Mario...it was totally different.

But back with Splinter Cell...here's my take...the game had to CHANGE based on Double Agent ending in a TO BE CONTINUED state...Sam couldn't be allowed to still do missions with 3rd Ech...in either version..current gen or next gen...he was leaving that agency...period. And in the end of DOUBLE AGENT..he didn't even have his gear...he was in a SWAT uniform...

So the goggles had to go..the gear had to go...where was he going to get that back? Who was going to supply him...now..he could of infiltrated the NSA and got that gear back...but this game had to change with the current storyline...

I think if they decide to introduce a new splinter cell..as they have been HINTING TO in CT and in Double Agent...then you'll get back to the light and dark with some variations. But we have to be willing to accept that change...we accepted it with the James Bond series...and we have to have that frame of mind with this game...we must.

Here's why we can't get past Sam Fisher....cause they kept SNAKE...they tried to pass it on to Raiden and got skewered...so why should they change Fisher? We're so used to it...We got to be able to change...and when UBI sees that we're comfortable with that...you'll get a more interesting and branching series...

The game is SPLINTER CELL...not SPLINTER CELL w Sam Fisher....

[Darkeye321]

man i cant believe nearly all the old SC fans (Knot3D, SCworld) all hating conviction...why? its still splinter cell guys...with SAM FISHER!!!

[MKCC14]

I guess the active stealth doesnt appeal to them.

[scworld]

Correct.

I think you can name everything stealth then.
Not doing bad things while you're cycling to school is Cop-Evasive Stealth.
However, for the next level, which involves FBI-Evasive Stealth, you need to cover your tracks.

Need for Speed's got a new marketing term: Stealth Driving. Drive so fast that you are always 1 corner ahead of the other cars =/ So they never notice you.

Super Mario for the GBA has 2D Stealth: you wait under a block till the enemy is gone, then jump up and jump the enemy from behind! He didn't see it coming (of course if he would have looked down..., but he doesnt do that).

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

So yeah, this new 'active' stealth doesn't appeal to me. I prefer planning my movements. Ghosting SC1 (my 1 kill walkthrough with extreme ghosting coming soon!) is still hard enough and you need to be creative. With ConViction, I am sure there'll be hard parts. But to really time your movements and need to get creative with NOT using gadgets... that's not in it anymore. All on the fly. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[MKCC14]

Yeah, we been there and we all loved it. From SC1 to SCDA, and its been my favorite series since, but doing the same thing over and over in a game's sequel will wear off over time. I think it would have been like buying the same game over again. But now something to spice it up a lil bit, take it to the next level.

[XBfreak_101]

Originally posted by Knot3D:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by XBfreak_101:
ignore knot3d, hes another tool that doesn't know what hes talking about.

No, YOU'RE a tool, because you're demonizing people who actually think for themselves instead of lapping up everything a company throws at him.. and oww... did i mention, you are probably gonna pay for that stuff ?

Quit bashing people who just state their opinion on a game. That's as low life as it gets. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

actually, you're the one "demonizing" people that this game is going to suck when you just based it off one short trailer. Yes im going to pay for this game, is that supposed to be an insult?

[Revanon]

I've seen this on the Transformers site. "What?! Live Action? That will never work! Megatron looks like an insect! Bumble is a camaro? WTF?" It's just insane...EVERYTHING CHANGES...

Star Wars changed...Star Trek changed...cars changed...we are always cautious when it comes to change...

They call it social stealth...it's hiding...plain and simple...and it's original. No one else is doing it...

Trust me...this will not be DOUBLE AGENT...you will be happy. And I don't work for the company...hahahahhaa...

I was VERY RELIEVED when SC 1 came out. It was so good, I tried playing MSG afterwards (and I loved MSG 1) and I couldn't. Couldn't. Quit cold turkey.

[XBfreak_101]

Actually Assassin's Creed is doing it.

[Revanon]

Ugh...it's not EXACT...it's similar...it's like saying MSG has guns...come on....

[Stealth_chill]

Originally posted by Darkeye321:
man i cant believe nearly all the old SC fans (Knot3D, SCworld) all hating conviction...why? its still splinter cell guys...with SAM FISHER!!!

ok let me give you a little hint of why we are feeling this way. What you said is like saying...

" ok in Splinter cell 6 sam is teaming up woith the care bears to save happy land but its still splinter cell!! He now uses rainbow vision to find the nasty huggies and uses skittles to pummle his foes! But its still sam!"

Its not the game we all knew and loved they completely threw everything that made th game of the year award winning game so great out the window. Its not splinter cell anymore

[ivnuzi]

realize that anyone who disagrees with active-stealth can be called an idiot because it takes more brainpower to think of a plan in 2 secs out in the open rather than sit in the shadows for 2 hrs and make a foolproof well timed plan. Its also more interesting when your 2 sec plan screws up and you have to deal with the consequences with another better thought out but still 2 sec plan. Theres also more of a rush.

[I.S.F-Dixxhead]

I can see the point of scworld and the other long-time splintercell fans (like I am aswell).

What Splinter Cell has been lacking since SC: CT (yep, Chaos Theory) is the tipical Splinter Cell Atmosphere. In DA it was almost gone entireley, if it was not for exeptions like Shang-Hai and the likes. What made Splinter Cell so appealing was the fact to truley be a ghost; the enemy should have never understood in the first place that you were there. You didn't exist. This feeling slowly faded away with SC:CT (Shetland thingy) and finally almost disappeard with SC: DA...

In Conviction it feels like the whole world knows that Sam is around and that makes me worried. But still, I kind of like this new gameplay aswell. Perhaps you can go through it in the old-fashioned way aswell? Who knows... All the developers showed up until now did neither hint to that, nor dismiss it.

Anyhow, long story short: I'd wait up a bit, before declaring SC as dead. Perhaps the changes aren't all that bad and a new, even better game comes out. Or perhaps the changes aren't as drastic and we get our Splinter Cell delivered, just like we wanted.

I know, it's wishfull thinking, but the hope is the last to die and as Revanon already pointed out, changes can be good. (pointing at Resident Evil again)

[Revanon]

I totally agree. I think what they have showed us is EXTREMELY SMALL...Montreal knows what they are leaving behind and I'm sure through board meetings and such they would not abandon the light and dark technique if they didn't have a better substitute. I think they needed to go this route like I said before because of the STORYLINE Fisher got himself into...there's no other way...you couldn't go back unless it was a prequel because the NSA knew of Fisher's actions..they have his bio's...records...they have to find him. He's a threat. So is it SPLINTER CELL as we know it? No...not at all..but it could never be following the DOUBLE AGENT storyline...maybe SC 6 goes back to it's roots...who knows...but they have to conclude Sam Fisher's story first.

And why do I think that Sam's daughter is still alive...I mean...what if they just said that so Sam would take that mission in Double Agent?

I know in the earlier story boards...they had Sam at the funeral..but they never put that in the game unless it was discussed in Essentials...I didn't see it...they showed her getting run down..but maybe that was in Sam's head.

hahhaha..sorry...I just like Sarah and can't believe they would kill her off...

[scworld]

Essentials shows Sam at her graveyard, It's the first basic training level.

[MKCC14]

Lol, I actually had a dream before which the producer of the game said that Sarah is alive again and she didnt die.

[LoneInTheDark]

Originally posted by MKCC14:
Lol, I actually had a dream before which the producer of the game said that Sarah is alive again and she didnt die.

It would be great to find out Sarah is alive, but I think the odds of that are very low.

[FSA_shadow]

I agree with people saying its not Splinter Cell anymore... I mean Ubi do seem to be throwing everything that we loved away... and to me Conviction just looks like Hitman: Blood Money... which I didnt like that much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif but... I'm not gonna go and judge Conviction yet I just hope they bring a demo out soon... I love the Splinter Cell games... always have since the first and it would be a shame for such a great series to crash down but I'm keeping my faith in Ubi

[marinius]

Originally posted by ivnuzi:
realize that anyone who disagrees with active-stealth can be called an idiot because it takes more brainpower to think of a plan in 2 secs out in the open rather than sit in the shadows for 2 hrs and make a foolproof well timed plan. Its also more interesting when your 2 sec plan screws up and you have to deal with the consequences with another better thought out but still 2 sec plan. Theres also more of a rush.

Lol, that's as solid and well thought out an argument for calling people like myself idiots as I've ever heard! Cudos to you and your immense brainpower my friend...

Of course, with that level of intelligence, no wonder you're missing a tedious little detail about why we idiots as you so eloquently put it "disagree with active stealth": the gameplay we know and love seems to be out the window. Being the idiots that we are, we will for some reason miss the old kind of gameplay.

[ivnuzi]

I apologize for that. I was honestly not thinking when I wrote that because if I wrote it while I was thinking it would make sense to me (which it doesn't) and it would have less loose ends. Again I apologize.

Another thing I have noticed. Why is nearly everyone saying that the CORE game play has changed. As far as I can see the CORE game play hasn't changed whatsoever.

[Knot3D]

Originally posted by ivnuzi:
Another thing I have noticed. Why is nearly everyone saying that the CORE game play has changed. As far as I can see the CORE game play hasn't changed whatsoever.

No more splitjump - no more inverted neckgrab - no more watching out your Light meter- no more rapelling - no more sticky cam fun etc.

All replaced by Ai which should convince the player that a police man will respond in a coherent manner, to any suspicious action/impression Sam makes.

[Azanode]

Originally posted by ivnuzi:
Another thing I have noticed. Why is nearly everyone saying that the CORE game play has changed. As far as I can see the CORE game play hasn't changed whatsoever.

Trust me it has changed, that you have to admit. Ubisoft themselves have said that they changed it intentionally. It's active stealth instead of passive stealth and when gamers play Conviction they aren't supposed to experience anything like the previous Splinter Cell games.

[MKCC14]

I think the CORE gameplay of the SC games is stealth, the whole game is based around that one thing. All those moves(split jump, inverted neck grab, quick knife stealth kills, etc)and gadgets(sticky cam, sticky shockers, diversion cam, etc)are just add-ons. I dont really think the light & shadow gameplay is actually the main core gameplay...

[FSA_shadow]

of course its the main core gameplay thats what we've come to love over the years... ok... if we wanted a SC game to be more like hitman im sure we would all say it... but that is not what we want... we want SC to return to how it was... its not that much to ask for... the first 3 SC games were amazeing DA... well... not so great but still... we have come to love splintercell because of the light/shadow gameplay... keeping quiet and trying not to get heard/seen is what we all love... the new SC has none of that from what i've seen... its hitman with fisher and the SC name on it

[ivnuzi]

Thank you MKCC14. Your the only one who figured it out. For the others:

The CORE game play is the same thing as genre. And last time I checked the genre was stealth. NOT HIDE IN THE SHADOWS STEALTH. And seeing as stealth is defined as doing something undetected, this game still has the same root game play. The hiding in the shadows stuff is just the GAME PLAY not the ROOT game play.
Chew on that why don't ya. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

[Azanode]

Originally posted by ivnuzi:
The CORE game play is the same thing as genre. And last time I checked the genre was stealth. NOT HIDE IN THE SHADOWS STEALTH. And seeing as stealth is defined as doing something undetected, this game still has the same root game play. The hiding in the shadows stuff is just the GAME PLAY not the ROOT game play.
Chew on that why don't ya. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

"The new Splinter Cell is a big change in the evolution of the brand, because we used to see Sam as a special agent hiding in lights and shadows. But now Sam is a fugitive, a major turn-around in such a concept is the impact on the core game play experience because after four episodes working on lights and shadow and infiltration types of set-ups we are now changing all the core mechanics." - Mathieu Ferland on the evolution of Splinter Cell, video on Gametrailers.com

[Brownsnakeeyes]

Originally posted by Azanode:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ivnuzi:
The CORE game play is the same thing as genre. And last time I checked the genre was stealth. NOT HIDE IN THE SHADOWS STEALTH. And seeing as stealth is defined as doing something undetected, this game still has the same root game play. The hiding in the shadows stuff is just the GAME PLAY not the ROOT game play.
Chew on that why don't ya. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

"The new Splinter Cell is a big change in the evolution of the brand, because we used to see Sam as a special agent hiding in lights and shadows. But now Sam is a fugitive, a major turn-around in such a concept is the impact on the core game play experience because after four episodes working on lights and shadow and infiltration types of set-ups we are now changing all the core mechanics." - Mathieu Ferland on the evolution of Splinter Cell, video on Gametrailers.com </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


<span class="ev_code_RED">I'll help</span>

Gameplay includes all player experiences during the interaction with game systems, especially formal games. Proper use is coupled with reference to "what the player does". Arising alongside the development of game designers in the 1980s, gameplay was used solely within the context of video or computer games, though now its popularity has begun to see use in the description of other, more traditional, game forms. Generally, the term "gameplay" in video game terminology is used to describe the overall experience of playing the game excluding the factors of graphics, sound, and the storyline. The term "Game mechanics" refers to sub-elements of the gameplay, but particularly the primary control and movement features of the game (thus excluding things like level design or AI).

Many current game design theorists from the background of art theory argue that gameplay is a largely meaningless or empty term, superseded by other concepts established in the repertoire of perception, anthropology, and general diversified psychology. Others see the very term as an indication that current game design theories remain primitive and underdeveloped noting that, for example, cinema does not require "movie-watch" nor novels "book-read" in order that these (non-interactive) media be described formally. Current academic discussions tend to favor more practical terms such as "game mechanics".

Despite these criticisms, the term gameplay has gained acceptance in popular gaming nomenclature, as it succinctly indicates a domain of perceptual concepts not readily accessible by other phrases. Some gaming reviews give a specific score for gameplay, along with graphics, sound, and longevity. Many consider "gameplay" to be the most important indicator of the quality of a game. Many game critics feel that gameplay in games is analogous with narrative in fiction, and serves as the foundation to which other elements (for example, story) are added. Those who counter the art theory of game point out that games are essentially playing. Playing is as old as or even older than art in the history of humanity. Therefore, it may not be appropriate to define or evaluate games in the same context as art. In fact, a few Japanese game makers have their origins in toy making, the most famous being Nintendo. A notable contemporary play theorist is Jesper Juul who works on both pure play theory and the application of this theory to Computer game studies. The theory of play and its relationship with rules and game design is also extensively discussed by Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman in their book: Rules of Play : Game Design Fundamentals.

ivnuzi, have you started chewing yet?

[capteenix]

Imagine SPlinter Cell: Chaos Theory as a Lacrits Candy with a superTaste.

Then Manufacturer changes next fiscal year the taste to milk taste.

Will you still buy those Lacrits Candy's as they changed candy's taste?

Or simplier put imagine SCCT as a Chocolate and SCC nugget.

[Achiko19862007]

Yes, you are right Revanon.

Ubisoft team from Montreal have great passion to create video games. By the way the Chinese team to Ubisoft created horrible "splinter cell Double Agent". I must say, i'm rather stonished
by "Ubisoft Milan", horrible Versus Mode for Double Agent and multiplayer.
I believe our Canadian friends, they have great
skill to create SC Conviction.

Good Luck!!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

[ivnuzi]

Brownsnakeeyes, maybe I just misread it or maybe I'm missing the point but how do those three paragraphs have anything to do with what I'm trying to say?

[Knot3D]

Originally posted by ivnuzi:
Brownsnakeeyes, maybe I just misread it or maybe I'm missing the point but how do those three paragraphs have anything to do with what I'm trying to say?

Read books about videogames/videogame culture like Steven Poole's "Trigger Happy ; The Inner Life of Videogames" ...then you might understand what Brownsnakeeyes was talking about.

[Release_15]

First time poster, longtime lurker.
This is not exactly my desired entry into this forum, but I need to rant for a second...

Seriously, what's the deal with so many people's 'please return to light and shadow gameplay' requests?

UbiSoft Montreal is not EA.
I'm pretty sure they don't believe in endless sequels based on the exact same gameplay.

Double Agent and Conviction are proof of that imo.

I sincerely hope all SC fans will embrace this game once it hits. It's about time they brought true next-gen gameplay to Splinter Cell. This series is one of the main hallmarks of stealth gaming. If MGS can change, so can SC.

I'm a longtime SC fan. I've been following and buying the games for years, ever since the original SC released, and I can't wrap my head around why people consider this game controversial. Logically speaking, everyone should love it. It's still Sam, only now they've made him a bigger badass than Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne combined.

And it's still stealth-oriented. Where is the downside? I've been hearing people complain for years about how this (imo) excellent series doesn't seem to evolve over time.

I hope they continue in this new direction, and whatever happens, do not bow to partial fan demand.

If Hisham Hamza turns up wearing an exoskeleton and robotic high heels, we'll have our answer.

[/rant]


The CORE game play is the same thing as genre. And last time I checked the genre was stealth. NOT HIDE IN THE SHADOWS STEALTH. And seeing as stealth is defined as doing something undetected, this game still has the same root game play. The hiding in the shadows stuff is just the GAME PLAY not the ROOT game play.


As said before: They changed the core GAMEPLAY, but not the concept.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that imo.

[ivnuzi]

I'll take you up on that offer, Knot3D, in about a month.

[FSA_shadow]

NO ONE can be a bigger badass then bauer lol...


anyway... you know... i'm not gonna judge this yet because i love SC... and i really hope ubi dont make a complete mess of it like they did with DA

fingers crossed!

[Achiko19862007]

I think everything based on engine.
Lights and shadows those two things based on
good physicall Engine and profesionall programers and so on. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

[marinius]

Originally posted by Release_15:

I'm a longtime SC fan. I've been following and buying the games for years, ever since the original SC released, and I can't wrap my head around why people consider this game controversial. Logically speaking, everyone should love it. It's still Sam, only now they've made him a bigger badass than Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne combined.



Wow, your logic is hard to refute sir! It is in fact illogical that quite a few people on this forum seem to be rather sceptical about this complete break of gameplay in the SC-series. Why should they be? After all, as you point out, the main character's name is still Sam Fisher, albeit a very different Sam Fisher from the character we used to play. And now that Ubi makes him a bigger badass than Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne combined, what in the world could people find troubling about that?

[LoneInTheDark]

Originally posted by marinius:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Release_15:

I'm a longtime SC fan. I've been following and buying the games for years, ever since the original SC released, and I can't wrap my head around why people consider this game controversial. Logically speaking, everyone should love it. It's still Sam, only now they've made him a bigger badass than Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne combined.



Wow, your logic is hard to refute sir! It is in fact illogical that quite a few people on this forum seem to be rather sceptical about this complete break of gameplay in the SC-series. Why should they be? After all, as you point out, the main character's name is still Sam Fisher, albeit a very different Sam Fisher from the character we used to play. And now that Ubi makes him a bigger badass than Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne combined, what in the world could people find troubling about that? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You make a very good point, which I really appreciate, even though I am one the the possible defectors, not of Sam, but the game style itself. I love Jack Bauer, I don't miss a minute of 24. Jason Bourne, well those DVD's have been sitting in my stash for a long time and I still haven't watched them...I don't know if I can take 4 hours of Matt Damon to be honest.

So, I must admit in a way you made me feel somewhat quilty for turning my back on Sam the only man (if he were real) I would leave my husband for. I guess in a way I do, every night when I get my Sam fix. So thank you for forcing me to revisit my heart and reminding me why I play every single one of these games continously.

[Knot3D]

I hate Jack Bauer and i hate Jason Bourne.

Ontopic : I don't stay the same either. The molecules of my body change on a daily basis. I learn new stuff as time passes by, which add to my persona.
But i bet if i commit acts of crime and behave like a jackas, my popularity will certainly drop to a zero level (given, if i have any. lol).

i hope you get my drift...

[Release_15]

I hate Jack Bauer and i hate Jason Bourne.
Too bad. You're missing out on a great series and a pretty good film trilogy...

[sgt_brent]

Originally posted by LoneInTheDark:
...I don't know if I can take 4 hours of Matt Damon to be honest.


I thought the EXACT same thing when it came to the Bourne series - But in my opinion, they're really great movies..

As for SP:C - I think there is one simple reason why some of us (myself included) have issuse with how things have changed this time around.. We got SOO used to how Sam is intended to move through the envoronment.. all the other games were so similar - and that "splinter cell" gameplay is what we know and love.. I have been whining about how thigns have changed so much too - about simple things like - Sam can't whistle now!! But given the situation, it's not applicable anymore.. Sam doesnt have those rules of engagement anymore.. He (we) can just shoot our way through a mission.. Or - the devs SAY we can stealth our way through.. But who knows..

The title of this thread I think is pretty true, that nothing stays the same.. but - I think we need to be open to what Convictions has to offer - I think it could suprise us skeptics!

[StealthyCrow]

I only despise Jack Bauer. So ''badass'', yet so insipid...

[sgt_brent]

I don't hate Jack Bauer.. But I hate Kiefer Sutherland.. I'm embarrassed that he's Canadian.. Suuuch a ******bag..

[FutureVenturer2]

Originally posted by I.S.F-Dixxhead:
I gave DA a chance and was utterly dissappointed. However, this time it's montreal on the works and I'll just have faith in them.

Reavenons Resident Evil comparsion is quite good actually. Resident Evil 4 played totally diffrent from all the others and can be considered to be the best Resident Evil out of all.

Changes can be good, but honestly I also feel a bit worried about loosing all I liked about SC with this "Sam against the rest of the world" kind of setting...
Maybe a lot of people enjoyed the changes that were made in Resident Evil 4, but I was not as happy about it. This is due to the fact that many new survival horror titles now have been reduced to nothing more than focusing on the action and nothing more. They don't even try hard enough on scaring the gamer anymore. Instead, their game developers just decide to slap together a storyline and a bunch of enemies, hoping that this will validate their intentions of making the game so centered on action. What gamers are left with are titles that do little to impress in terms of fear, as well as in the mystery factor that has made previous titles' stories pretty compelling to explore.

It really irritates me that this has happened to franchises like Silent Hill and Resident Evil, which I really was impressed with before their major changes took place. I don't even see what is the point in calling games like RE4 or RE5 survival horror anymore because the scare factor has really squeezed out of them. RE1 the remake was the last RE title to really do it for me, and I lost interest after that, not even taking much time at all to play through RE4. If anything, these franchises that were so based on the horror factor should be called "survival action" games, not "survival horror." Or, they could just be known as action-adventure titles, nothing more.

While I have not been very pleased with franchises like Resident Evil and Silent Hill's changed directions, I still see some hope in Splinter Cell. And now that a multiplayer component has been announced, I definitely think that there is at least one good thing to expect from SCC. It looks as if even those people (like me) who didn't like the changes made for Splinter Cell will have their hopes lifted up, even if only a little bit. Plus, the Uplay achievements system that Ubisoft has put together seems like the best achievements system thus far, so that is also pretty good to know.

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Very well put.

RE5 is not Resident Evil. MGS-4 is a glorified action game with crappy stealth and this title has become a basic sneak'n'shoot

[Jazz117Volkov]

I've heard a few people say that about RE4 and RE5.
I have never played any other Resi games than 4 and 5. I purchased RE5 (for 360) a few months ago and my brother and I love it; there's hardly a night that goes by when we don't play split screen, whether that be story mode or mercenaries. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I got RE4 about six moths ago (for PC, after a few mods and an update patch it’s a thing of beauty) it's high on my favourite games list. I've finished it several times and on Professional and gotten 5 stars for every character in the mercenaries. And I started playing through it again the other night. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

No media or magazine tempted me to buy RE4, I had hardly ever given the game a thought until I saw it cheap one day and picked it up. Played it and instantly loved it. The story’s fun, I like the character’s, isn’t particularly scary, (the chainsaw dude is way freakier then in RE5) I guess survival action would describe it pretty good. Anyhow, I love them and wouldn’t be without either. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

RE4 and RE5 are what Resident Evil is for me; it would seem strange to play a Resi game without the action. However I'm currently trying to get hold of the older ones. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

[FrankieSatt]

Originally posted by Revanon:
First of all I must say it is a complete honor to post on this board. I have been reading everyone's remarks since Pandora I believe and you are all extremely funny, brilliant and great people..regardless of your opinions.

But nothing stays the same. Look at Mario...we loved that series...then it switched with Mario 3...then 4...then SUPER MARIO 64 and everyone wondered what that would be like...and as you can see, that series is great.

Metal Gear Solid has changed...It was great on the playstation...then it converted to MGS 3...with that combat fighting...and now it's going on to MSG 4...it even had a card type game.

Let's not forget RESIDENT EVIL...omg how that game has changed...

and what about THE LEGENDARY GRAND THEFT AUTO? the change from 2d to 3D?

I love Splinter Cell...I thought Montreal did a wonderful job with SC1...they had that part where Sam had an interview in a real setting about making a sequel...they just made it fun...who could remember the NSA TRAINING VIDEOS to introduce Choas Theory? Once again..brilliant game and it was fun to see those videos...it made all the competition take notice...

Now Montreal is back with Conviction. MONTREAL people...they have ALWAYS...ALWAYS amazed us with their intelligence..their savvy...and their creativity...their games are incredibly deep and fulfilling...let's give them a chance...trust me...what we're looking at is NOT CLOSE to a final version...not by a long shot. They are just giving us something to look forward to. And yes, it looks suspect...but with all the hype of MSG 4 coming out...trust me...I think Montreal is biting at the bit to shut them up once again...

Change is uncertain...but just like Mario, Resident Evil...Final Fantasy...MSG...change can be wonderful!

I have faith in this game...it is in great hands with UBISOFT MONTREAL...they can't make a terrible game.

I don't mind change as long as the core game mechanics stay the same. They haven't. They have diluted Stealth, and in my opinion pretty much removed it, for action. They have dumbed down the game for the "Casual Gamer" instead of keeping it a game that makes one have to use some of their brain matter.

Some things SHOULD stay the same if they expect people to buy and play a "Supposed" sequel.


Wow, your logic is hard to refute sir! It is in fact illogical that quite a few people on this forum seem to be rather sceptical about this complete break of gameplay in the SC-series. Why should they be? After all, as you point out, the main character's name is still Sam Fisher, albeit a very different Sam Fisher from the character we used to play. And now that Ubi makes him a bigger badass than Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne combined, what in the world could people find troubling about that?

I love Jack Bauer and I love Jason Bourne. However, Sam Fisher is NEITHER one of those. Splinter Cell is NOT 24 and is NOT The Bourne Idendity. That is the whole problem. The Devs took a great series and changed it to an interactive movie based on popular TV shows and Movies. That has got to be the worst thing they could have EVER done.

[Makempay]

Originally posted by FrankieSatt:

I love Jack Bauer and I love Jason Bourne. However, Sam Fisher is NEITHER one of those. Splinter Cell is NOT 24 and is NOT The Bourne Idendity. That is the whole problem. The Devs took a great series and changed it to an interactive movie based on popular TV shows and Movies. That has got to be the worst thing they could have EVER done.

And THIS, in a nutshell, perfectly describes why there are those who are so vocal about how Conviction is turning out. If Ubi wanted to make a Bourne, Bauer, or Bond game, aquiring one of those licences would have been a good idea. Instead they went ahead and made a Bourne, Bauer, and Bond game and slapped the Splinter Cell name on the package.

[blacktieaffair]

I like the direction of single player as long as i don't have to always shoot everything moving. I mean he literally kills everyone in the game other the pedestrians in the street from what we have seen.

I like mark and execute and the projected movies and style of the game. LKP, not picking up weapons, no dragging bodies are all the things i don't like.

My biggest worry is the multiplayer. DA sucked balls plain and simple when compared to chaos and PT. If its dumbed down like DA then i can't support. This game has taken half a decade to come out the least they can do is give their fans ONE multiplayer mode we want. And that is a excellent deep Spv vs Merc with gadgets for both sides.

Bring on the co-op story and terrorist hunt with lkp and mark and execute. But spy vs merc has to be there.

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Originally posted by Jazz_117:
I've heard a few people say that about RE4 and RE5.
I have never played any other Resi games than 4 and 5. I purchased RE5 (for 360) a few months ago and my brother and I love it; there's hardly a night that goes by when we don't play split screen, whether that be story mode or mercenaries. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I got RE4 about six moths ago (for PC, after a few mods and an update patch it’s a thing of beauty) it's high on my favourite games list. I've finished it several times and on Professional and gotten 5 stars for every character in the mercenaries. And I started playing through it again the other night. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

No media or magazine tempted me to buy RE4, I had hardly ever given the game a thought until I saw it cheap one day and picked it up. Played it and instantly loved it. The story’s fun, I like the character’s, isn’t particularly scary, (the chainsaw dude is way freakier then in RE5) I guess survival action would describe it pretty good. Anyhow, I love them and wouldn’t be without either. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

RE4 and RE5 are what Resident Evil is for me; it would seem strange to play a Resi game without the action. However I'm currently trying to get hold of the older ones. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Well that's the problem right there.

Resident Evil was never about the action. The action was a very minor part of it. The whole beauty and genius of the game was the suspense and tension that it created throughout your experience that at any moment you would be utterly helpless and that infected zombies would pop out of nowhere and scare you to death. This fear would then panic you and force your gaming instincts to react, rather than control. From the beginning, you had no idea what was happening or why and it was this theme of "the unknown" right throughout the game that made it so compelling to play.

The whole atmosphere of the game was built around suspense and fear of not knowing what was going to happen next - not the actual shooting/action part, which Resi 4 and 5 made far too central. This change made the game become about engaging wave after wave after wave after wave of target practice "zombies" that pose no real threat to you, so are not very effective and evoking fear in the player.

Resi 4 is a great game and does offer a fantastic entertainment experience (especially on the Wii!!!), but that's because it has the benefit of many more years of gaming development experience under its belt. It's incomparable to the original in many ways because it's trying to do something completely different. It still manages to keep the Resident Evil feel, but takes it in another direction, but in doing so also loses alot of the power the originals had.

Resi 5 is weak and average IMO. It does some things well and is a very well produced game, but on a whole, it doesn't do what Resident Evil games are supposed to do: build immense suspense and make the player fearful for their character's life and that their next engagement with the infected could very well be their last! Something that the originals did very well ...

When you lose focus of what your franchise is about and start to refocus it on "action" (like so many have), simply because it's the best selling, lowest common denominator in gaming, then it's sad to see that the people behind the development haven't got enough imagination to push an idea further.

[singularity_]

At the end of the day, for me, it boils down to this:
Resident Evil 4 was not the same game I poped into my Playstation a decade prior -- in almost every sense of the word it was different. I even played it on a different console, made by a different company (Nintendo Gamecube). I still loved it as a fantastic game. When I want a great survival horror experience, I still have Resident Evil 1, 2, Silent Hill 2, Dino Crisis and Fatal Frame to fall back on.

RE5 was not Resident Evil. It wasn't even Resident Evil 4 (much t0 my dismay). But it was an awesome co-op experience (campaign and Mercenaries) for me and a close friend. We still play it to this day -- crank up the difficulty and feel the tension. When I want RE4, I pop in RE4. When I want old RE, I pop in RE1 and RE2 (and 3 around Halloween). RE5 is still fun in context.

Metal Gear Solid 3 is not Metal Gear Solid. It is easier to fight out of a situation than in previous games and the survival mechanic changes the tempo of gameplay completely. But it is still an intense, cinimatic experience that was highly enjoyable. When I want MGS, I still have MGS 1 and (gulp) 2 to play (and I still do.

Rainbow Six Vegas was not Rainbow Six. At all. I really don't even like R6V much (or GRAW for that matter), but I can't deny that it isn't half-bad online and reasonably addictive on those nights when I don't have much else to do. I still have Rouge Spear on my laptop when I want it (and if I look hard enough, the original and Raven Shield are around here somewhere...).

Same can be said of MGS4. More combat. Stealth is more intuitive and less forced -- still so much fun (and an awesome story to tie it all off).

And even GTA has changed. From a more focused, 2D experience to the poster child to 3D hardware and "sand-box" gaming. I still enjoy GTA 4 as much as I did GTA 2. Zelda, Mario and Megaman all belong in this catagory too.

Don't even get me started on Final Fantasy... they actually TRY and make every sequel 100% unique.

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory WAS old Splinter cell... mostly. The inclusion of of a "save anywhere" function, one-hit knock-outs/ kills and a "sound meter" made it a little less "hard-core" and an easy launch point for newbies... but it was still SC (my favorite SC thus far, actually). SCCT isn't going away. When I want it, I can dust it off, shove it in my machine and have a good time. Same with the original, PT and even DA.

The OP is right (more or less). I've been playing video games for a long time, and in the end, it all changes. If SCC is completely different from past SCs, I admitt I will be a little sad. It will be unfortunate. But if SCC is good, then in the end, it doesn't matter a lot to me. This is nothing more than a form of entertainment to me, and if it is enjoyable (and well made, and fairly intelligent with some decent replay involved) I will pay money for it. The same way I bought and enjoyed RE4 and 5, GTA 4, MGS 3 and 4, Every Final Fantasy since #2 and a host of other titles from Rainbow Six to Bomberman. If I want SC, no one is taking it from me. But if someone wants to give me something new that is also enjoyable, I won't complain.

As for those who argue "if it isn't Splinter Cell, it shouldn't have SC on the box!" I say you must be new to virtual entertainment. This arguement has been around since Zelda 3 and FF 2. Stop whining.

[Vth_F_Smith_]

Originally posted by singularity_:
Splinter Cell Chaos Theory WAS old Splinter cell... mostly. The inclusion of of a "save anywhere" function, one-hit knock-outs/ kills and a "sound meter" made it a little less "hard-core" and an easy launch point for newbies...but it was still SC (my favorite SC thus far, actually). Sorry, but I disagree here. How could Chaos Theory be less hardcore, by introducing the sound meter, which made the game more difficult, as you not only had to make sure you're in the shadows but also pay attention to the noise you create? That would be illogical. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Actually what they did with Chaos Theory was, to introduce new gameplay elements that made the game easier and at the same time implement whole new elements that made it tougher. Basically catering to both target groups at the same time. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
SCCT isn't going away. When I want it, I can dust it off, shove it in my machine and have a good time. Same with the original, PT and even DA. Absolutely. To be honest, I appreciate that Ubi is trying to make something different each time instead of just copying everything they did before. I mean, let's be honest. They could have easily taken Chaos Theory or Double Agent and use the same formular over and over again, basically rushing out "Mission Packs" one after another, but they are brave enough, to do something different with each title and based on the setting, so every game is unique and more than just an expansion pack to it's predecessor. Personally, I think that's a lot tougher and bravier than doing it Call of Duty style (no offense to the CoD gamers) which has been keeping the formula since day one and only changed / evolved the narrative & presentation part a little or changed the overall setting but is at it's core the same 'duck, shoot, throw grenade & take cover' game it has been since CoD1. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
The OP is right (more or less). I've been playing video games for a long time, and in the end, it all changes. If SCC is completely different from past SCs, I admitt I will be a little sad. It will be unfortunate. But if SCC is good, then in the end, it doesn't matter a lot to me. This is nothing more than a form of entertainment to me, and if it is enjoyable (and well made, and fairly intelligent with some decent replay involved) I will pay money for it. The same way I bought and enjoyed RE4 and 5, GTA 4, MGS 3 and 4, Every Final Fantasy since #2 and a host of other titles from Rainbow Six to Bomberman. If I want SC, no one is taking it from me. But if someone wants to give me something new that is also enjoyable, I won't complain. Hear, hear. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
As for those who argue "if it isn't Splinter Cell, it shouldn't have SC on the box!" I say you must be new to virtual entertainment. This arguement has been around since Zelda 3 and FF 2. Yes, although I still say it is Splinter Cell game, even if it plays a little different than the previous games, but I guess that depends on how you define a Splinter Cell game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Stop whining. That's a bit harsh and too easy to say IMO. Change, no matter if it's extreme or minor, is never easy to accept, so I think, those who want to, should be allowed to 'whine', but at the same time they should try to understand that there has to be a point in time when you have to move on and to change a little because if you don't, you're acting like a dinosaur and we all know what happened to their world. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

That said, I think it is important to appreciate the previous games and their gamestyle / characters / world, but it's also important to embrace new ideas and concepts, so the universe previous games helped to create over the years is not threaten with extinction but kept alive as long as you can enjoy it.

Besides...you never know what the future brings, maybe they will return to the more classic gameplay one day or a more similar mix. Maybe some day someone else comes up to take the game back to it's roots because stealth-action games are getting more popular and people want more challenging gameplay. It's important to keep an open mind because by doing so, you honor those who helped to create that universe in it's early steps and the titles it started to grow with. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

[Jazz117Volkov]

singularity_ Vth_F_Smith_, I seem to share your views. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

R6 Vegas 2 and GRAW 2 would have served their respective series a lot better if they were just expansion packs me think.

Hey singularity, have you ever played GRAW on PC, if not I recommend you give it a try. I haven't experienced anything quiet like the beginning of the last mission in the second GRAW ever. Crawling around between the cars and buses trying to avoid getting hit by the 50 cals at the border. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

A brief return to the Resident Evil topic: RE4 is perfect how it is, regardless of how the series began, I wouldn't change anything about it. If Capcom had of decided to keep Resi how it started and made another game instead of RE4, it wouldn't have been the game that it is. The awesome masterpiece that Resi 4 is would not exist. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif
Same could be said about RE5: if Capcom hadn't of changed the original concept we wouldn't have one of the best coop experiences around. And that would be a shame. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I'm a big Raven Shield fan. I've played that game to death, and I'm still in the process of playing Rainbow Six Vegas to death (it just won't wear out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif LoL) the change in the R6 series did do many things good and bad, but I love them both and nothing could part me from R6 Vegas. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

[H.A.R.M.s]

Change for sole purpose of changing things isn't good, in my honest opinion. CT offered variety and choices between combat and stealth approach (combar and stealth kit). I disagree that it watered down experience, I've played it as previous titles, so I didn't notice any change.

But with Conviction I have feeling that combat is forced upon player and that only choice is whether or not use M&E and where to use it.

[Nit3mare_]

This is completely incorrect. RE4 was only a change in control scheme, but it still had the suspense and intensity of prior games. RE5 butchered the Resident Evil franchise into something it's not, and SO many people are complaining.

What we have with Conviction is an action game that forgets its roots. RE4 was still a survival horror game, but it went through the natural progression every franchise should go through. Sure, there may be people who are against the franchise changing AT ALL, but at least it stayed within the same genre. Conviction? Yes, let's go run in pumping our shotguns at people. That's what we all want, right?

I have faith in Conviction only because it's made by Ubi Montreal. However, it's not even made by the same team that created Chaos Theory, the director was even switched. Don't give the game a passing grade and believe what the devs say just because it's Ubi Montreal. They may tell us all the time that you can complete a level with stealth, but they still haven't shown us anything like it. To me, the game reminds me of Assassin's Creed 2. You are able to sneak up on guys and kill them, but it's nothing more than walking behind them without making noise and getting out of their line of sight. If that's what they consider stealth, then they should seriously reconsider what they're doing with the franchise.

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Exactly!

That's pretty much what the stealth in this game is from the developments we've seen so far.

Staying out of LoS and shooting the environment with bullets to distract people.

[FrankieSatt]

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
That's a bit harsh and too easy to say IMO. Change, no matter if it's extreme or minor, is never easy to accept, so I think, those who want to, should be allowed to 'whine', but at the same time they should try to understand that there has to be a point in time when you have to move on and to change a little because if you don't, you're acting like a dinosaur and we all know what happened to their world. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

That said, I think it is important to appreciate the previous games and their gamestyle / characters / world, but it's also important to embrace new ideas and concepts, so the universe previous games helped to create over the years is not threaten with extinction but kept alive as long as you can enjoy it.

Besides...you never know what the future brings, maybe they will return to the more classic gameplay one day or a more similar mix. Maybe some day someone else comes up to take the game back to it's roots because stealth-action games are getting more popular and people want more challenging gameplay. It's important to keep an open mind because by doing so, you honor those who helped to create that universe in it's early steps and the titles it started to grow with. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

This is more than just a "Little Change" and anyone that had honestly looked at whats being done can't say otherwise.

What is so wrong with wanting a TRUE sequel to the Splinter Cell series? Why do people think you MUST change when what you have done in the past works and works well and still is just as much fun today as it was then?

I would have no problem with this game if it didn't have the Splinter Cell name. It DOES have the Splinter Cell name. It DOES have the characters and the story line. That MEANS something, at least to some of us anyway.

I have a very open mind and that is why when I see Conviction I see NOTHING that resembles Splinter Cell other than the characters and possibly the story line.

I'll say it again, I'm fine with change but this is more than change, this is "Throwing the baby out with the bath water".

[A Stealthy Lamp]

2007 post?

[sammyboy1981]

Originally posted by FrankieSatt:
I'll say it again, I'm fine with change but this is more than change, this is "Throwing the baby out with the bath water".

I tend to agree. As a fan of SC, what dissappoints me the most is the apparent change in the character. In the "Behind Closed Doors: Create a Hero" video, game designer Debay says that Sam "doesn't have any laws to contain him" and "he's enraged". If that's not the absolute opposite description of the Sam Fisher personality, I don't know what is. To me, Sam's always been the cool under fire, dark sense of humor type of guy that doesn't go out there to kill everyone he comes across. And while I understand that his investigation of his daughter's death makes this more personal, you would think that once the story evolves to see him stopping terrorists who have EMP devices, he would approach his objectives more rationally, as if he's "on mission".

This psycho rampage "Panther Sam" stuff is silly, and takes too much from the Jack Bauer, Rambo-style characters.