| JUMP TO: | Splinter Cell ConViction | SC Legacy [Console] | SC Legacy [PC] | Off-Topic | Hints/Tips | Technical Help |
| JUMP TO: | Splinter Cell ConViction | SC Legacy [Console] | SC Legacy [PC] | Off-Topic | Hints/Tips | Technical Help |
|
Go
 |
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
I understand your point with the L&S, but I still don't agree with that entirely, and here's why: In my opinion, and a number of others as well, we have not had 5 L&S games, we have only had 2, Splinter Cell 1, and Splinter Cell Chaos Theory. (Both of those were done by Montreal I might add.) So to me, I am still waiting for the 3rd installment of this franchise. What I have liked in this franchise, is that they have improved tremendously from the first, to the second installment, and I have expected the same level of improvement with the 3rd. However, based off of what footage was released over a year ago, it feels much more like one of the go-between games that (I think it is Shanghai) has released. Frankly, it does not appear to me that they are taking us to "the next level of stealth gameplay", it is more of a downgrade in my opinion. The other thing is this, Sam is not a superhero, he is an old stealth operative, when 250 pounds of muscle come running at him, I don't care how talented he is, they will not go flying through the air like a ragdoll. Ok, so climbing hand over hand on pipes is unrealistic, I understand that, so find a way to make it realistic, or give Sam a grappling hook, and now the pipes can go back inside the wall where they belong. But don't try to tell me that what they are doing now is realistic, because it's not. The franchise needs a few items to make it sell, those are: Good Graphics - A staple of all montreal SC's Good Story Line - Necessary for all games now More Realism - Phase out pipes, use better methods, or design better levels that don't require unrealistic monkeymen who are 50 years old to infiltrate the enemy base. More intense Gameplay - More snap decisions that force a player to choose between people living and dying, friends being killed or surviving, buildings being blown up, missiles being launched, etc... Ok, so it's not a complete list, but c'mon, we all know that pipe climbing, and vent crawling is not real, (yeah you might climb a pipe every now and then) So what is real? That is the question montreal needs to be asking about their game. If we get better footage, and the game is way more refined, there is a chance I will go ahead and reserve it, but right now, I am just fed up with certain decisions that Ubi is making, for example: Vegas 2, you can throw C4, and blow it up. If you did that in real life, your squad would probably beat you to death, and take away your detonator. You would never be allowed to use explosives, because it is too dangerous. Now here is the million dollar question: Why did Ubisoft continue that from Vegas 1, into vegas 2? The fans on the forums cried out about how stupid that was over, and over, what purpose does it serve? What fan base does throwing C4 appeal to? There is no explanation given, just a "deal with it". I have played vegas 1 almost every day between 4 to 10 hours, and I have never run into anyone over the age of 14 that approves of the C4 throwing, so my question is, where in the world, and who in the world is giving them feedback that says, "keep the C4 throwing in the game, it's better that way"? I don't know, I am gonna pick up vegas 2 later tonight, and that will help me determine just how much they listen, and how much they just follow their original plans. Maybe it will help me decide what to do about Splinter Cell Conviction. Either way, I am frustrated by the choices they make with trivial things like throwing C4. Did they ever stop to think that in the majority of all matches played on Vegas 1, the hosts restrict all the explosives because the ruin the game? but which explosive is almost never restricted? Breaching charges, why is that? Because they are placed, and used fairly realistically. If C4 was done right, it wouldn't be restricted all the time. If everyone was only able to carry 1 grenade, then grenades would not be restricted quite as often, but what did Ubi do? They increased the number of grenades you can carry. It doesn't make any sense, it's like they never actually played the game like their fans did. It's kinda the same thing with Splinter Cell. If they play the game as much as we do, instead of hiring other people to do all their playing, then we might have better quality products. *****Your life will pass in a very short time, are you prepared to meet your Creator?***** |
||||
|
I see your point about L/S gameplay, but look at it like this, I like the direction conviction is going, but. I don't want to lose all the features of past games. You cannot always keep to the same pitch black levels all the time and change of pace is always nice. If you go back and review the fundamentals in the game such as Chaos Theory and AI reaction to dark it is very poor compared todays standards, (back in 2005 the AI wasn't bad). If you evolve the AI to how many have suggested it to be changed to such as, shadow and silhoutte recognition, you walk into hot water. Although in theory it sounds great, in practice you can see gamers hiding behind boxes their shadows cast by a light source, and complaining in big numbers how was I spotted? The gamer would have to use more of an improvisational gameplay decision then say in Conviction to bypass guards, and then you run into complaints from being forced to move to quick etc...
Secondly your point about physics, while true, the trailers we have seen are from a pre-alpha build:
The game is far from finished, the features aren't there, it is mearly used as a concept to show what things could be like, and gave examples of hand to hand combat and ideas for improvised distractions. The propane tank which has gathered controversy, the developers themselves have said it seemed out of place in the demo and will probably change, because for them in a sand box game it looked too convienient, and it wouldn't be too fun. So they do realise what is wrong with it. We all have our opinion if it's an upgrade or a downgrade, my thoughts are if we did another clone of Chaos Theoiyr new maps and little updates to shadow recognition and AI it simply wouldn't be enough push forward. Stealth comes in all kind of forms and although I like the diretion the game is taking, I need to see more of this game and stealth and improvisational elements to see if this game can rival and surpass Chaos Theory, if it does to me it will be that step forward. They said many things Sam Fisher does are impossible IRL, many of his animations are created by hand not by motion capture. Some of the gadgetry doesn't even exist either such as caseless rounds for the Pistol, which when fired will leave no trace of cartridge shells. Likewise the addon's for his primary weapon, but this is what makes up the game somewhat. I don't agree with locking his age at 42, but if they kept going they would have to end it, it would just be silly to play such an old man doing the moves that he does. I didn't think the pipe climbing was bad at all, I saw it more as improvisational to get past guards, a lot of times you could of jumped ver the railings and held on till the guard passed, or you could climb the pipe and have tactics choices of choke or snap neck. I don't think the game would work with total realism, but I think it should be somewhat realistic, i.e locations settings, world events believable characters and objectives. I think your complaint about Rainbow Six is two fold, the original games had issues too, many would run up to a door and actual shoot it to open it then run through it, then spam nades at a choke point. Pull out the heart beat sensor and they could see if anyone was near in the mini-map which was almost questionable cheating. Many complained about Vegas 1 being TPS but the original game many vets would switch from FPWV to TPS to see around corners, and outside windows angles you cannot see from the FPWV. Unlike those games Vegas was more consistent, even though not totally liked, but the gameplay was similar. Secondly why do ubisoft allow you to throw C4? It's a gameplay decision that fits in within the overall theme. Hardcore games like the previous 'real' ones just don't make as much cash as they would like. Source Like I said on the previous page since 5 years ago the market has changed, Rogue Spear (2001) outsold Raven Shield (2003) there is more data then that they collect from within the industry to see if such games are viable. The thing is I don't see this mentality just applying to FPS games but all their hardcore games. When the budget sizes have increased you need to hit a wider audience, people may not like that, but you need to understand why it is done. I thought you knew me but it seems you never did I tried to find you in the castle where you hid. I took the pictures that you ruined from my wall. No one remembered me I was right after all. |
||||
|
 |
That technology has existed for some time, it's just not much use at short range. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrojet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoffTmg9bxU An interesting technology, but one that was never fully developed due to the low velocity at short range.   Official Whisky taster and Herald to the Mighty Alderbranch. www.Maximum-Gamers.com Administrator "The clues are out there.....S.N.A.F.U." www.SettlersMaps.com .... www.Maximum-Network.maximum-gamers.com www.Maximum-Arcade.maximum-gamers.com |
|||
|
There isn't a FN Five Seven hand pistol that I know of that fires caseless rounds, that gadgetry doesn't exist as far as I know for that weapon. As for caseless round they have been around for decades, I've seen them in the G11 by HK http://www.hkpro.com/g11.htm defunct now and the hand pistol http://www.hkpro.com/g11pdw.htm but this isn't the five seven.
 It's the same for night vision goggles, there are some with trifocals, the lower two are night vision the top is IR, it's close to Sam Fishers but no electrical mode. Some of the weapons like Ring Airfoil are real and do exist though the 203 addon, our police where testing them some time back they're used for riot control.I thought you knew me but it seems you never did I tried to find you in the castle where you hid. I took the pictures that you ruined from my wall. No one remembered me I was right after all. |
||||
|
I think it's a safe bet there's been some office politics happening in Montreal, that's the reason for the delay. Just read between the lines in this quote from the dev blog:
 |
||||
|
 |
id like to see the ring airfoils knock a guy out instantly if you hit him in the head, but anywhere else on the body should stun him. not like in sc1 though, he wouldn't just stand there and wobble, maybe knock him down to one knee or something, just enough to give you time to grab him.
-Phil |
|||
|
I realize this, that's why I allow for some things in games that are not realistic. The AI issue is one that I have been trying to come up with a solution to for some time now, and so far, my best solution to it is that the game should evolve more towards the shadownet side, or at least have a spin off franchise that focuses purely on shadownet and it's co-op possibilities. I believe that they should incorporate more technology into the game in one respect, and that is this, disabling the electronics to buildings on a large scale, and giving yourself pitch blackness to work in, that eliminates almost all visibility, and instead of hacking laptops for an e-mail, you take the hard drive, or the computer itself. Of course when hacking into a mainframe it is a different issue, but most places that hold super computers also have back up generators wired to the computer itself. So yeah, each idea has problems, but I think there is far more on the table than what is being thrown at us. While I do like some of the direction of Conviction, it feels as though they are avoiding the next step deeper into the dark, and replacing it with a daytime counterpart. I don't mind what they are doing, if it is a small portion of what they are doing. But it does not appear to be so, it seems like it will be similar to double agent's swap between stealth, and running around doing menial, annoying little tasks in daylight.
I know, and I don't expect the final build to be full of bodies flying through the air, but why would you release footage that damages peoples opinion of the game like that? I don't get it. Yeah the fans demand footage, but give them something that doesn't show aspects of gameplay that will potentially harm your fanbase.
I never minded it that much, except when it was way over the top unrealistic, like having ledges in really strange places, or having a pipe running around the side of a cliff. I enjoy the pipes, as long as they are where they belong in a reasonable fashion. For example: on the last level of Splinter Cell 1, Presidential Palace, the beginning of the level, while very fun, was so unrealistic it was ridiculous, all the little ledges placed perfectly all the way around the cliff. They have gotten better about that stuff since then, but they still do it, just a little more subtle now. Right along with the unrealism of the pipes is another issue, sliding on a rope with your bare hands, or gloved hands is impossible, the only thing sliding would be the skin off your hands! --- Well, I have now played Vegas 2, and I have to admit that I am impressed by what they have done with it. It has it's quirks, but so far, it appears to be a much better game than vegas 1. I think the work they have done on it is excellent really, and I think over all, they were listening more than it appeared that they were. Some might disagree, but I still haven't had much time with the game, only a few hours. This has influenced me a little more towards the possibility of conviction being ok, but I'm not all the way there, and my hopes for it are not very high. Hopefully, they will spend a lot of time listening, and incorporate the new style of gameplay as a minimal feature that is necessary sometimes, and not as a staple of all Splinter Cell's from now on. I am a lover of realism in a game, but not to an extent that it no longer becomes fun. But I will say this, I have yet to play a game that is so realistic, that it is not fun. *****Your life will pass in a very short time, are you prepared to meet your Creator?***** |
||||
|
Splinter Cell Moderator |
Because if you don't, people get upset and complain that they are being ignored. You can't have it both ways, quick development and great quality. When the game is being developed you can either look at what the devs say is admittedly an prealpha build and see what the beginnings are...or wait for a better version. This just proves dev companies can't win either way they go. I am on this forum everyday and I hear at least 1,000 times everything I visit, "Ubi should at least give us something, then complain when Ubi puts something out that it's not perfect....even when they admit it's prealpha. If you want quality, that's fine but at least give them a chance to create it. -- Jackie Fiest Proud Ironside n00b   Often imitated! Never duplicated. ♀ |
|||
|
 |
The release date at that time was only like 4 months after that was shown. So it was a farce to have it at pre-alpha stage. They severly underestimated the time which they would need.
Then you get stuff like this. Tweaking the Havok variables probably takes 3 minutes, and they have that ultra-leet adaptive animation-thing, so I think it was damage which wasn't necessary in the first place. The rest looked 'ok' from a pro-SCC point-of-view. The cake is a lie! |
|||
|
I can't believe they haven't already added the ability to use enemy weapons. I mean especially when Sam doesn't have his gear. The Congo level (xbox DA) Sam starts off with no weapons but the enemies have guns. I know Emile tells Sam not to kill anybody but he should take an enemy weapon the first chance he gets just in case.
|
||||
|
I have always thought of AI innovation, but it requires compromises to be made to make it balanced with the suggestions people made with shadow recognition. The problem with previous iterations where the levels where built linear, and specifically for the L/S mechanic to work correctly, to push forward you would have to give different routes and create non-linear levels for a chance to make it work, because a single path and shadow recognition will lead to more complaints of "how was I spotted" then actual fun.
The reason is just to show off some footage and create some interest in the title. In 2000 before Halo 1 was released Bungie showed off Halo at E3 that year, the game had bad Frame Rate and many other glitches, hardcore gamers and nay sayers automatically jumped on the bandwagon and cried that it was a buggy game. While those who understood development knew it would be fixed in the final build. A good example which in my honest opinion is worse then Conviction is the game called Legendary again it shows off what the game is trying for, it has really bad frame rate it is a pre-alpha build, yet the video has sparked huge interest in the game. If you can look past the frame rate you can see what could be an interesting game.
I disagree, anyone with knowledge of a pre-alpha would know it isn't feature complete first and foremost. It's a little bit more complex then tweaking for 3 minutes, especially if you're using more then one simulation engine, which they said they where using two, their own and havock. Unleashed an upcoming star wars title uses three simulation engines, getting all those simulation engines to work with each other was a big challenge, and was no way a 3 minute job. And if they where to fix the physics in the game, the next complaint would be the propane tank, if not that something else, just so they can complain, for the sake of complaining. Even if the trailer said "this is a pre-alpha, you may see bugs, glitches odd physics, this is because this is an alpha, it isn't feature complete, but this is what we have so far" you still would of complained. If people didn't see the work in progress bottom right and didn't understand what that meant then they would have a hard time with the bigger message. I don't think the trailer hurt them, it hurt more of the gamers who aren't very open minded to new things, as some present the game can't be a splinter cell one if certain things aren't in the game. Where as those who wernt interested in Splinter Cell, and those bored with the same old with a new coat of paint are now interested more then before.
This sounds good, but. Where is the challenge in going in pitch black darkness? How will the AI challenge you? Will they be using flash lights or night vision goggles? This has been the problem with previous iterations, shoot out all the lights and you yourself can't see without night Vision, yet guards are still patroling the area fine in the dark. So I guess how will the AI adapt to the new situation to make it fun and challenging to play? As things like the suggested shadow recognition doesn't work in darkness without a light source.
Thats good to hear, I may check it out if thats the case, I played the first on the PC, but was put off with many things, such as the terrorist hunt mode where AI would spawn right behind you in a room you just cleared out, and so on, if things have improved I may look into the title myself.
I would say it depends on your level of realism, game such as Armed Assault are very realistic, likewise its cousin VBS1 which is a simulation game used to train soliders in real life about battlefield tactics, that is the extreme level of realism. I thought you knew me but it seems you never did I tried to find you in the castle where you hid. I took the pictures that you ruined from my wall. No one remembered me I was right after all. |
||||
|
Yeah, vegas 2 is definitely worth the rental price if you're not sure about buying it. The T-hunts are much more fun, and the glitches in the game have been reduced to a minimal amount.
Sure there are a few walls you can shoot through without being seen, but you can't very well camp them without being shot from like 5 directions other than the one that can't see you. They reduced frag power, and worked on the guns, made my favorite gun from vegas 1 even better, A+ for Ubi on that one. --------- In all honesty, I think the game devs are relying too heavily on everyone to recognize what pre-alpha really means. I think they could win on this issue, if they would release game footage in stages, and make it abundantly clear what each stage is, and what it means, every time. Just do 3 or 4 videos in succession, that catch each stage of production, start with the pre-alpha, and call it 1 of 3, or 1 of 4, that way the fans have something to look forward to, and don't release the pre-alpha, and wait over a year to release the second video. If you released a 5 to 10 minute dev video once a quarter, I think the fan complaints would be cut down to a much smaller number than they are now. We are moving into a new marketing era where fans want to see the full, and final product before they buy it. Why? Because technology is moving so fast, that if you are not perfectly informed before you buy, then you end up with a piece of junk 9 times out of 10. I think the devs are stuck in an old model where people will be satisfied to just, "wait and see". Well, I have news, I stopped waiting and seeing, after I bought a few bad apples. I want my apples cut open so I can inspect them from now on. If I am not mistaken, the majority of the fan base for games are beginning to shift to online communities, as things like MLG are becoming more and more popular, the transition into this new style of advertising has to take place at some point, otherwise the franchises that ignore it will lose sufficiently because of it. *****Your life will pass in a very short time, are you prepared to meet your Creator?***** |
||||
|
|
|
@Dixie, I am a game producer, team of 20 people. I know what pre-alpha means. I'm fairly certain only Havok deals with the throwing, since it's basic Newtonian physics. Of course it's not feature-complete, but I'd make some parts feature-complete or at least as close to feature-complete as possible, especially when those parts are in an official trailer.
The cake is a lie! |
|||
|
Havok deals with moving objects in the game world, it can do way more then that. But if you have two simulation engines that must speak to each other they must be able to communicate seamlessly, and this is where this becomes time consuming and complex. Simply put it is not a 3 minute job. Star Wars: Unleashed explained this very well in an interview. They have three simulation engines, and even with two that would be difficult what they do. Maybe watch the interview here.
As for having some feature complete, that is a "contradiction" to pre-alpha. At that stage in development it is simpy testing the water, anything in the game is subject to change be it characters, looks, combat, animation and level design, so how can you have something feature complete? The developers themselves admitted that many of the level design elements, such as the propane tank where not what they liked, that could be feature complete as far as the idea goes, just not the execution, to show this in a pre-alpha demo cannot be done. Also many of the ideas will be tested by focus groups at this stage in development to get feedback ideas on gamplay mechanics from the world wide community. To again have something feature complete would remove such opportunity, to test and ask for suggestions to tweak and improve the game or gameplay mechanics. What would be better would be to delay showing anyone anything at all, till it is in later stages of development, but then I'm sure there would be even bigger complaints about how there has been no news what so ever and no feedback couldn't be given, so either way they can't win.
This is the problem though, when you inform gamers that, what you're showing is work in progress, that should be understood it isn't finished. If you look at a half finished painting, which the artist says this is half done and will be finished in the near future, can you really give an overall criticism at how the painting will be? When he could start fresh, or do something totally unexpected. You can only take what you see at face value and comment on what there is so far either like or dislike, to come up and get upset at assumptions like many do is silly. You can't really judge it until it is done, which is why i don't understand why many get upset at pre-alpah even when you explain what pre-alpha means. All they could show is work in progress material from now to end, but if that cannot be understood, to me the best thing to do as a developer, is work on the project till you get to a point where all the gameplay/multiplayer elements are finalised. Then you can give those details out, but still show no footage. When the game is up to a level where it is in polishing stages, such as optimisation, for frame rate, and minor issues, the game will be feature complete. They can show you everything you want to see. On a pre-alpha they could only tell you things they would "like" to be aiming for, which usually changes from that point of development to the end. You will have a huge ruckus of people complaining why x feature was taken out and y feature put in, to me they shouldn't of announced the game at all, or shown any footage until it was late in development. But like I say above the con's with that is you can't give specific feedback on what you can't see, only those in focus groups can. Resident Evil 5 is no different, probably even worse. The game was annonced 2005, they showed 1 trailer, little in-game gameplay elements, then 2 years later release an extended one, there has been no details what so ever about, how the game will be properly, and gamers can only assume what it will be like. But to me Capcom seems to have the right Idea don't tell any info just tease gamers to make some noise so to speak, and then tell the information later on when it is optimised and feature complete. I thought you knew me but it seems you never did I tried to find you in the castle where you hid. I took the pictures that you ruined from my wall. No one remembered me I was right after all. |
||||
|
I kind of agree with you, and my opinion is that they should either do consistent updates like I mentioned, or only text updates and screenshot updates as you mentioned.
The problem as you mentioned about a painter and criticizing an unfinished work is correct, but a painter is not going to bring out a blank canvas, paint a brown blob in the center and say "look, it is going to be an amazing tree with birds and flowers, and clouds!" They will show you a pre-finished version of what it will actually look like, maybe a basic sketch, but when the painting is done, it may look quite different from the sketch, but that is because thee sketch was basic, the paint is advanced. But if the painter shows you what the product looks like at 4 or 5 different stages, you will see the final picture coming together. Again, I think part of the problem with the whole issue is that the marketing ideals are changing, whereas you and I might be satisfied with just waiting till the product comes out, the majority is shifting to where they have to see the whole finished product before they buy it. It won't be too long before video games cost about 100 bucks, and when that time hits, I guarantee you I won't pay for the product until I can see what it will look like before I buy it. I think that point is where a lot of gamers are at right now. Ten years ago, the expensive games were 30 bucks. Now all games are almost double that, and the game devs are still pushing the same marketing techniques at us. Something has to give, and I guarantee you it will not be the gamers, if they don't start seeing what they want, they will look for a new dev who will give them what they want. *****Your life will pass in a very short time, are you prepared to meet your Creator?***** |
||||
|
Why does SC have to be realistic? Who gives a **** whether its real that a 50 years old climbs pipes or not? (except you of course) |
||||
|