It's been stated by Raphael Parent that the player will have to reach a certain goal and that it'll be up to him / her how he's / she's going to approach it.

The three buttons system the game is going to use will enable Sam to use an object on multiple ways while still keeping the controls realtively simple to newcomers.

Normal, Stealthy, Aggressive

So for example, instead of throwing a chair, you could also use it to - theoretically - reach a higher point, sit on it, or use it to barricade a door in order to avoid confrontations with the authorities. If you think about it, this concept is pretty similar to lots of objects in SCCT like the fuel powered generators (you could simply turn it off, you could drill a hole in it and wait 'til it ran out of fuel which also turned it off or you could jam the power generated by it using the OCP on the Five Seven..uh...SC Pistol). It's also very similar to the closer-than-ever-system used in SCCT. Depending on which button you pressed on your mouse or the gamepad, Sam would either stab an enemy with his knife, knock him out from behind, slit his throat or use the OMEGA PUNCH STRIKE (I loved that name)!

It's maybe a little far fetched, but I think the devs noticed that a lot of people made use of the different options and decided to evolve them even more in order to enrich the gameplay / provide the player with more freedom.

Those small things are ok with me. Choking from behind and tossing small things is good. But wrestling down 3 younger, and trained police officers? No way.

quote:

Originally posted by scworld:
Those small things are ok with me. Choking from behind and tossing small things is good. But wrestling down 3 younger, and trained police officers? No way.

Well, Sam might be a bit old, I agree but then again he still has years of experience as Navy Seal and of course as Third Echelon's "Flagship" Splinter Cell, so he's very well trained and most likely not just in Krav Maga but also in other CQC techniques. Plus his mind is definitely sharp enough to improvise, if it's necessary.

Just to give you an example for the fact, that experience often outweighs muscle power:

I read an article in our newspapers a few weeks ago which stated that a young thief (appr. 21 years old) tried to steal something from a blind man (I believe he was 45 or so) on an open street. The thief even threatend him with a knife. However the 21 years old man had a bad day, because his blind prey has been a Judoka and was wearing the black belt since years - had even won multiple championchips, because of that he could easily overwhelm his attacker. Meanwhile a man who was observing the situation, had informed the cops which arrested the 21 year old thief.

In addition:

There are points on your body, that are so sensitive, that you're able to incapacitate even the strongest man with one strike, if you want (Taekwondo fighters know these points and I really don't think Sam wouldn't know them).

Considering all this, I'd say that if there would be a fight between Sam and 3 guards - my money would be on Sam because of his experience.

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
It's maybe a little far fetched, but I think the devs noticed that a lot of people made use of the different options and decided to evolve them even more in order to enrich the gameplay / provide the player with more freedom.

Having choices is fine, but how can SCC be the best stealth game it can be if resources are being used on action options?

Ubi's goal is to attract customers; selling SCC as a stealth game to the stealth buyers, and an action game to the action buyers. Knowing that, regardless of what side you're coming from, do you really think you're going to get something amazing in the end?

Even if it ends up being good, how can you not wonder what it could have been like, had the resources not been divided?

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
It's maybe a little far fetched, but I think the devs noticed that a lot of people made use of the different options and decided to evolve them even more in order to enrich the gameplay / provide the player with more freedom.

Having choices is fine, but how can SCC be the best stealth game it can be if resources are being used on action options?

Ubi's goal is to attract customers; selling SCC as a stealth game to the stealth buyers, and an action game to the action buyers. Knowing that, regardless of what side you're coming from, do you really think you're going to get something amazing in the end?

Even if it ends up being good, how can you not wonder what it could have been like, had the resources not been divided?

A valid question, Coastal Girl.

First, I don't think that we'll only have 3 buttons - it's more than likely that the devs are going to use more and the 3 button system is only meant to replace the interaction boxes from the previous games (except SCDA) - at least I haven't seen any interaction icons or boxes but then again it could be that the built is simply a bit too early and that a later version will have them. Who knows.

I also don't think that they spent all the resources on the action options, especially not since Sam is still going to use equipment gained from the black market and / or from someone / somewhere else.

However, you asked if I'd think that we will get something amazing in the end and although the developers are the ones that will have to prove it - yes, I think they might be able to pull it off and I'm saying that as a gamer, not as Moderator.

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
Having choices is fine, but how can SCC be the best stealth game it can be if resources are being used on action options?

Ubi's goal is to attract customers; selling SCC as a stealth game to the stealth buyers, and an action game to the action buyers. Knowing that, regardless of what side you're coming from, do you really think you're going to get something amazing in the end?

Even if it ends up being good, how can you not wonder what it could have been like, had the resources not been divided?

A valid question, Coastal Girl.
First, I don't think that we'll only have 3 buttons - it's more than likely that the devs are going to use more and the 3 button system is only meant to replace the interaction boxes from the previous games (except SCDA) - at least I haven't seen any.

I also don't think that they spent all the resources on the action options.

I don't think they've spent all the resources, but as a hardcore stealth person, I see using any resources on things that aren’t stealthy as a waste.

quote:

However, you asked if I'd think that we will get something amazing in the end and although the developers are the ones that will have to prove it - yes, I think they might be able to pull it off and I'm saying that as a gamer, not as Moderator.

Fair enough; we'll just have to wait and see who ends up being right.

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
It's maybe a little far fetched, but I think the devs noticed that a lot of people made use of the different options and decided to evolve them even more in order to enrich the gameplay / provide the player with more freedom.

Having choices is fine, but how can SCC be the best stealth game it can be if resources are being used on action options?

Ubi's goal is to attract customers; selling SCC as a stealth game to the stealth buyers, and an action game to the action buyers. Knowing that, regardless of what side you're coming from, do you really think you're going to get something amazing in the end?

Even if it ends up being good, how can you not wonder what it could have been like, had the resources not been divided?

Well, they call it a STEALTH-ACTION game for a reason.

Was it ever a "stealth" game or "action-adventure" game? A blend of two I think.

quote:

Originally posted by MKCC14:

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
It's maybe a little far fetched, but I think the devs noticed that a lot of people made use of the different options and decided to evolve them even more in order to enrich the gameplay / provide the player with more freedom.

Having choices is fine, but how can SCC be the best stealth game it can be if resources are being used on action options?

Ubi's goal is to attract customers; selling SCC as a stealth game to the stealth buyers, and an action game to the action buyers. Knowing that, regardless of what side you're coming from, do you really think you're going to get something amazing in the end?

Even if it ends up being good, how can you not wonder what it could have been like, had the resources not been divided?

Well, they call it a STEALTH-ACTION game for a reason.

Was it ever a "stealth" game or "action-adventure" game? A blend of two I think.

Come on now, do you really think there's much action in the first SC games?

They need to start coming up with some new genres; SCC will be "Very Actiony Stealth-Action".

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by MKCC14:

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
It's maybe a little far fetched, but I think the devs noticed that a lot of people made use of the different options and decided to evolve them even more in order to enrich the gameplay / provide the player with more freedom.

Having choices is fine, but how can SCC be the best stealth game it can be if resources are being used on action options?

Ubi's goal is to attract customers; selling SCC as a stealth game to the stealth buyers, and an action game to the action buyers. Knowing that, regardless of what side you're coming from, do you really think you're going to get something amazing in the end?

Even if it ends up being good, how can you not wonder what it could have been like, had the resources not been divided?

Well, they call it a STEALTH-ACTION game for a reason.

Was it ever a "stealth" game or "action-adventure" game? A blend of two I think.

Come on now, do you really think there's much action in the first SC games?

They need to start coming up with some new genres; SCC will be "Very Actiony Stealth-Action".

Well, there was action in there that was forced and other situations where you could if you wanted. In the first two games it was rather difficult since they both emphasized stealth a lot. But after those, an action scene in the games could be taken out almost anywhere.

These werent the majority of the game at all, but this is what I remember at the top of my head:

1. SC - Oil Rig, Kalinatek(half the mission), Abbatoir, Presidential Palace
2. SCPT - Paris-Nice Train(I think they were able to be optional), Jakarta, TV Station
3. SCCT - Bath House, Kokubo Sosho
4. SCDA - The last mission on the xbox version, it was supposed to be a boss fight or something?

quote:

Originally posted by MKCC14:

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
Come on now, do you really think there's much action in the first SC games?

They need to start coming up with some new genres; SCC will be "Very Actiony Stealth-Action".

Well, there was action in there that was forced and other situations where you could if you wanted. In the first two games it was rather difficult since they both emphasized stealth a lot. But after those, an action scene in the games could be taken out almost anywhere.

These werent the majority of the game at all, but this is what I remember at the top of my head:

1. SC - Oil Rig, Kalinatek(half the mission), Abbatoir, Presidential Palace
2. SCPT - Paris-Nice Train(I think they were able to be optional), Jakarta, TV Station
3. SCCT - Bath House, Kokubo Sosho
4. SCDA - The last mission on the xbox version, it was supposed to be a boss fight or something?

Yeah...but while I hate the forced assault areas (with a very special, deep hatred for the one in the Abattoir), the rest is so awesomely stealthy that it makes up for it.

There may have been action moments in SC, but there never was much effort put into them compared to the rest of the game. I mean, Sam was too slow to be a useful Rambo, and it takes time to get out your gun, take aim etc... it was not designed as an action game. Can you really say the same thing about a combat system as robust as the one in Conviction? Once they are putting that much effort into the action, you know it will be more action-oriented.

However the more I think about it the more the combat system seems like it could be like the one in Hitman: Blood Money. That is, all animations and not a lot of depth. If that's the case, then I wouldn't really have a problem with it. Here's hoping.

quote:

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:

quote:

Originally posted by Knot3D:
Rumour has it that MS is developing a direct 360 competitor to MGS4, so.. i'd say ; "Hi MGS4 & New MS stealth IP game, bye bye SC !"

So basically you're complaining about a game you almost know nothing about (SCC) and sort of switch to a game you know even less about (the rumored MS game). Interesting point.

Usually you react quite sensible, but this is just BS.

Read what my post actually says ; 'MS is developing a direct competitor to MGS4,' I do think rightfully that by now, we already know quite a bit what MGS4 is about and that MS wants their own 'MGS4' badly ; as in ; a stealth game play based game featuring a spec op field agent with high tech weaponry.

Thus, the fact that you claim i was complaining is total BS. I am not complaining at all. I'm just providing Ubi's marketing team some sensible ideas about what, i estimate, which IP's will sell to me and which absolutely, not.

quote:

Originally posted by EskimoBob32:
However the more I think about it the more the combat system seems like it could be like the one in Hitman: Blood Money. That is, all animations and not a lot of depth. If that's the case, then I wouldn't really have a problem with it. Here's hoping.

Yeah .. I guess I'd be contented if it was like in Hitman, where you don't necessarily need to be offensive, but it still helps at times.

quote:

Originally posted by BasheD.:

quote:

Originally posted by EskimoBob32:
However the more I think about it the more the combat system seems like it could be like the one in Hitman: Blood Money. That is, all animations and not a lot of depth. If that's the case, then I wouldn't really have a problem with it. Here's hoping.

Yeah .. I guess I'd be contented if it was like in Hitman, where you don't necessarily need to be offensive, but it still helps at times.

So am I seriously the only one who can't do the Hitman games? I must be really bad.

i would like to comment on both sides to this issue after reading all 7 pages worth of opinions.

in defence of conviction, im really surprised why is everyone saying there is NO L&S? folks, it's not as though every location is brightly lit. there are dark corners, alleys, rooms, rooftops, pipelines in cities. sam has gone to so many of them around the world and what makes washington dc any different? the only thing that sets conviction apart from its predecessors is the ADDITION of new environment settings. i do believe what the team is trying to do is try to make their new concept known but it is highly possible there old L&S elements will still be in place, or else it won't be called a city or town. washington dc would be the surface of the sun. im pretty sure sam would not be so ignorant to walk in the day all the time. there has got to be instances when he has to operate at night. maybe without his goggles but with his experience in the military, they could probably make his vision at night slightly better than the ai, who would most prob be armed with the flashlight.

also pls do not use hitman as an example of stealth, because it is highly unrealistic ( though i love blood money ). even with the various disguises, 47's face still remains the same. the barcode is still on the back of his head. u could walk past the guard in ur suit and a min later in a guard's uniform and the suspicion meter will only raise by a bit in the green zone! the jackal ( bruce willis ) is a more realistic example of a professional assassin.

now to go to the old fanboys' camp, i agree that the direction ubisoft is taking is with a 'make more money' target in mind. i understand the fact that the usual style of play which has been replaced is making u all feel very uncomfortable. i just hope that everyone can think on a positive side until we get more information to clear our doubts.

it's alr 2008. im predicting a new trailer of some sorts this month! oh how can we forget endwar! one heck of a game!

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
[So am I seriously the only one who can't do the Hitman games?

I don't

quote:

Originally posted by benjaminlim36:
I just hope that everyone can think on a positive side until we get more information to clear our doubts.

Well, that seems to be the problem, doesn't it. My opinion (and everyone elses) is based on what we've seen so far, and all that has been confirmed is the gameplay we've seen in various UbiDay-kinda walktroughs of the Washinton DC level (the game isn't even finished and I can anticipate how I'm gonna play that level allready). And it would ruin you're perfectly written post, with a rocksolid base by saying that Light-Shadow-gameplay is still a part of the gameplay, because so far, that has only been denied, and a lot of people are basing their opinion on what-if's (car alarms, ect. ect.)

quote:

Originally posted by benjaminlim36:
it's alr 2008. im predicting a new trailer of some sorts this month!

If they are really releasing ConViction in this years second fiscal quarter, lik they said after the latest delay, they better. If not, it's safe to say another announcement of delayal (is that even a word) will come.

quote:

Originally posted by benjaminlim36:
i would like to comment on both sides to this issue after reading all 7 pages worth of opinions.

You have more patience (and possibly time) than most, nice commitment.

quote:

in defence of conviction, im really surprised why is everyone saying there is NO L&S? folks, it's not as though every location is brightly lit. there are dark corners, alleys, rooms, rooftops, pipelines in cities. sam has gone to so many of them around the world and what makes washington dc any different? the only thing that sets conviction apart from its predecessors is the ADDITION of new environment settings. i do believe what the team is trying to do is try to make their new concept known but it is highly possible there old L&S elements will still be in place, or else it won't be called a city or town. washington dc would be the surface of the sun. im pretty sure sam would not be so ignorant to walk in the day all the time. there has got to be instances when he has to operate at night. maybe without his goggles but with his experience in the military, they could probably make his vision at night slightly better than the ai, who would most prob be armed with the flashlight.

Now see, that's your first mistake. We are basing what we say on what has been seen in videos and what has been said by developers. You are basing what you say on what logically should happen, ie they should add to the gameplay rather than replace it, but with statements such as "shadows no longer give Sam protection" it is pretty much guaranteed that they have replaced, unless you are optimistic about the rumoured changes from OXM. Yes, logically there would be dark spots in a city, logically Sam wouldn't be stupid enough to do everything in the day time, but just look at the videos and interviews and you'll realise that doesn't bother the devs.

quote:

also pls do not use hitman as an example of stealth, because it is highly unrealistic ( though i love blood money ). even with the various disguises, 47's face still remains the same. the barcode is still on the back of his head. u could walk past the guard in ur suit and a min later in a guard's uniform and the suspicion meter will only raise by a bit in the green zone! the jackal ( bruce willis ) is a more realistic example of a professional assassin.

I think in Hitman they have placed gameplay and fun above realism. Sure, he could wear a wig or something, but then he wouldn't be instantly recognisable (to the player) as Agent 47. You have to suspend your disbelief a little. As for The Jackal, well I have never actually met a professional assassin but it does strike me as a little over the top.

quote:

now to go to the old fanboys' camp, i agree that the direction ubisoft is taking is with a 'make more money' target in mind. i understand the fact that the usual style of play which has been replaced is making u all feel very uncomfortable. i just hope that everyone can think on a positive side until we get more information to clear our doubts.

it's alr 2008. im predicting a new trailer of some sorts this month! oh how can we forget endwar! one heck of a game!

A new trailer will save or kill this game for me. Either everything I suspect will be confirmed, in which case I will not buy the game as it is not my type of game, or it will be different from how I first perceived it, in which case I will wait for a demo of some sort before I buy, or it will have gone back to L&S due to fan complaints (not likely) and I will buy.