As I've said in another thread the developers original vision should remain intact and not be influenced by too much pressure from people who haven't given it a chance.

I want social stealth, black market gadgets, spy tradecraft, Bourne fighting, daylight missions, a good quality storyline relevent to the events of DA and Essentials and anything less will be a complete failure

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleOSplint:
anything less will be a complete failure

That would be less than openminded

you really are something, of course its a failure, how else would you describe wasting months if not years of development and god knows how much money on a game thats going to get changed?

Perhaps in your eyes thats a huge success?

They're obviously making changes for the better.

Of course they are, this is Montreal after all, they are one of the most respected developers in the world, they know what they are doing.

quote:

I want social stealth, black market gadgets, spy tradecraft, Bourne fighting, daylight missions, a good quality storyline relevent to the events of DA and Essentials and anything less will be a complete failure

Go play the Bourne game. The whole SC environment has been discarded with the absense of Third Echelon, Lambert, Sarah, the suit, the goggles. So yeah.

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleOSplint:
As I've said in another thread the developers original vision should remain intact and not be influenced by too much pressure from people who haven't given it a chance.

I want social stealth, black market gadgets, spy tradecraft, Bourne fighting, daylight missions, a good quality storyline relevent to the events of DA and Essentials and anything less will be a complete failure

It seems people who liked the new gameplay have turned from Ubi fanboyism into plain selfishness. Ubi is apparently listening to the forums, something which I thought was well beyond, and taking into account what many people appear to be saying, and now instead of the "Trust in Ubi, this game looks great" comments that you usually give it has turned into "A game we have truly seen nothing of is bad, Ubi is doomed to fail".

Seriously, we don't know what the changes are and how much effect they are having, but if you ever liked the Splinter Cell games at all I cannot see how making the game more similar to the others (either slightly or majorly) can disappoint you.

Better safe than sorry.

so UBI waste months trying to do something new when the stuck in thier ways fans throw thier dummies out the pram. pathetic if thats the case

quote:

Originally posted by MeloniesHomeboy:
Of course they are, this is Montreal after all, they are one of the most respected developers in the world, they know what they are doing.

I hope for the sake of those that trust in Ubisoft that your'e right, Johnny boy, but many people were really disappointed with Double Agent because of its significant changes. This drastic departure into social stealth could kill the series.

DA=Ubi Shanghai SCC= Montreal thanks bye. XD

quote:

Originally posted by MeloniesHomeboy:
Of course they are, this is Montreal after all, they are one of the most respected developers in the world, they know what they are doing.

This is debateable. Some things they pull off great and others are abysmal.

quote:

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:

quote:

Originally posted by MeloniesHomeboy:
Of course they are, this is Montreal after all, they are one of the most respected developers in the world, they know what they are doing.

This is debateable. Some things they pull off great and others are abysmal.

Didn't they do LetDown?

Oh, 10,000th post in this forum!!!

They did, and by the time they saved Rainbow Six, it still wasn't as tactical as the original, with a single three-man team, instead of two, like with Socom.
By the time they had saved Ghost Recon, it became more about high-tech soldiers than special force field tactics. But what do I know?

RSE did LD, it was a port from the console version. They did do Raven Shield and while some people liked it, I didn't (and I didn't buy it either).

quote:

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
RSE did LD, it was a port from the console version. They did do Raven Shield and while some people liked it, I didn't (and I didn't buy it either).

You didn't like Raven Shield?

I suppose it isn't for everyone, but there is no denying the game has quality.

quote:

Originally posted by MeloniesHomeboy:
Of course they are, this is Montreal after all, they are one of the most respected developers in the world, they know what they are doing.

I'm so sick of that excuse.

Beh... at the end of the day, it's still just a video game.

The fact that the OP says he'll be personally upset in his hypothetical situation, tells more about him than any possible direction of the splinter cell franchise game development. You want a game version of Bourne with the SC name tagged on it that badly ? Gee

Whatever happens, games will come and go.... fans will come and go too.

quote:

Originally posted by scworld:

quote:

I want social stealth, black market gadgets, spy tradecraft, Bourne fighting, daylight missions, a good quality storyline relevent to the events of DA and Essentials and anything less will be a complete failure

Go play the Bourne game. The whole SC environment has been discarded with the absense of Third Echelon, Lambert, Sarah, the suit, the goggles. So yeah.

wow when i think about what you've just said...yeah it's like the SC series got rid of their main symbols...and while i'm still optimistic about SCC there's no doubt that this series had to be called 'Sam Fisher' and not 'Splinter Cell' because this series is mostly about the man Fisher and not about the latter...

True. If it's called "Sam Fisher", I think that's a good compromis. Might even buy it then. But dont touch the Splinter Cell name and turn it into the Bourne-universe. ktnxbai