Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Acceptable Change | Forums

Spider-Bot | Splinter Cell Blacklist | Companion App

Fourth Echelon Economy 101 | Splinter Cell Blacklist [NORTH AMERICA]

Out of the Shadows - Splinter Cell Blacklist Dev Panel

J. Cole Trailer - Splinter Cell Blacklist [NORTH AMERICA]

  1. #1

    Lightbulb Acceptable Change

    I have been a Splinter Cell fan since I first played it back in 2003. It has given me plenty of memories, such as making my own NVG's and Tac Suit from scratch and sneaking around the house, getting a snack, and later asking my parents if they heard me (I never got caught once ). So naturally I was disappointed when I played Conviction.

    Ever since Conviction released, I often thought of what kinds of changes were necessary to keep a series fresh and entertaining.
    SCA was my first Xbox 360 game and I loved it to death (partly because I was pretty young) though it wasn't like all the past Splinter Cell games.
    The first original xbox game I ever owned was SC:SAR and I instantly fell in love with it back in 2003 (the time I bought it). SC:PT added new elements and innovated on the original concept in many clever and progressive ways, without sacrificing any of the original gameplay; by adding multiplayer, new moves, and totally new environments to use stealth in. Chaos Theory took this to a whole new level with a redesigned engine. They gave the player more control over Sam and gave you the tools to play the way you wanted (provided you know the risks of an all out one man army assault [which usually resulted in failure]).

    Now when it comes to Double Agent, we see clearly see a divergence from the path of innovation that Splinter Cell had originally been set on. Story became more important as did Line-of-Sight stealth. Though after playing the original trilogy, I did find that I was going back to CT far more than Double Agent.

    While the changes in Double Agent were many, few of them were game-breaking or detrimental to the Stealth paradigm. In fact some of them were welcome, such as the new animations and moves.

    This brings me to the original Conviction build. I immediately thought that the game would be fun, but as another series altogether (I'll elaborate more later). The gameplay looked good, in fact very similar to Watch Dogs, but it just wasn't Splinter Cell. Luckily Ubi noticed this fatal flaw as well and went back to the drawing board.
    When the new Conviction was shown at E3 2009 I was cautiously optimistic about it. I gave it the benefit of the doubt and allowed Maxime and his team to mislead me so much that I gave in and bought the game. They didn't deliver on their promises to keep the game in line with the other Splinter Cells.

    At first I attributed this to reinvigorating the series after Double Agent which surely warranted it. But this was reinvigorating, it was recreating, something that was far from necessary.

    The fact of the matter is that the dev team didn't just make changes to SC, they removed things, far too many things. The elements that made SC tense and exciting were now gone. Action replaced Stealth, Jason Bourne replaced Sam Fisher, and Hollywood replaced Realism. These are the types of elements you would expect from a Call of Duty title, not Splinter Cell.

    When changes are made to games they should be an improvement on the last iteration, keeping the good and replacing the bad. A clear example of this is Halo. Now I know some of you don't hold Halo in the highest esteem, it does fit this model very well. Think about it for a moment; how much has Halo changed since the first game? Sure the engine was improved and gameplay was more fluid, but the core game has not changed. Halo is Halo. It doesn't try to be anything else.

    Splinter Cell is not so lucky. The teams behind Conviction and Blacklist ignore this very basic principle of improvement. Make the game easier to handle yes, but don't make the game itself easier. Much of the fun had in video games is the challenge that they present, and often time s the tactical challenges are what is most rewarding.

    But enough of my ramblings, time to get to Blacklist.

    It seems that the model I just outlined is completely applicable to Blacklist. They improve on what didn't work in Conviction and added improvements to the overall game.
    The Unfortunate thing is that they are still making the wrong game. This game would be perfect As its own series. Splinter Cell is not the place for such developments.

    Splinter Cell had change up until DA, then it took a nose dive off a cliff and entered whole new territory. Territory it was never meant to enter. Please note that I am not bashing Conviction or Blacklist, I think that they are very good games for What they sent out to accomplish, but they are not Splinter Cell games. I would rather have Ubi explicitly say that they are no longer making stealth games, just action games with some stealth in them, rather than mislead consumers into thinking that the classic gameplay is still present.

    I am the first to agree that change is necessary, but only if it is a change in the right direction. The changes I saw in Blacklist are utterly disappointing and unfortunately a deal-breaker. Michael Ironside's voice, the emphasis on action and the unrealistic premise are all evidence of this game series falling to it's death at the bottom of the cliff. I won't repeat what has been said in other threads because It would extend this post even longer than it already is.

    Sadly, I'll be hanging up the goggles until I see what I have come to expect from years of fan feedback and requests.

    To Beland and your team: please give Splinter Cell back to the people who love it and who care about stealth games
    Unless you prove me wrong in the coming months. Maybe you can pull off all you say you can

    To Everyone else, thanks for reading this long winded post
    Last edited by CELLGHOST206; 06-06-2012 at 09:32 PM.
    Xbox 360 GT: CELLGHOST206
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    +10. Great post.
    I think it is important the dev team, and everyone else understand SC fans aren't anti-change. They simply believe the changes and omitions made in Conviction (and what appears to be Blacklist) are counter to what the series originally set out to acomplish: provide a quality stealth game, grounded in realism.

    I'm happy a community manager from Ubi is now posting in these forums, and will (as requested) wait until I see more of Blacklist before I pass final judgement. But I think this is an important post.
    _____________
    "The choice between leaving a witness or a corpse isn't a choice at all"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    Senior Member BoBwUzHeRe1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Right behind you.
    Posts
    6,187
    Wait...so OP...Cell...you liked Double Agent for the 360? Because I am a huge fan of the series since the first game, I grew up with it in a way actually. I would consider myself one of the hardcore SC fans, who like the challenge of ghosting (though I ghost rarely...interrogations and stuff are too good in SC1-3) but I actually legitimately enjoyed Double Agent. It wasn't as good as CT or the others but I certainly think it was a good way to change the game up. It added daytime missions which...I felt weren't bad...like it still felt like SC...even Kinshasha IMO was a good SC mission and the corner takedowns are sadly only used in this game. SCC then abandoned all the good things in DA and kept only the bad such as regenerating health. Which wasn't even that bad in DA...but with all the rest of the features gone in SCC and presumably Blacklist....regenerating health is made worse.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    I really enjoyed DA, so it was a shame to see the backlash. I mean we had three games that were pretty **** similar, so it was a breath of fresh air. Then the original conviction design came about and I absolutely loved it. Then more backlash and it gets completely rebuilt, a REAL shame.

    Then I played the new conviction and enjoyed it as well! I am a true splinter cell fan imo, and have enjoyed literally every version for the consoles.

    Which is why my only gripe with this game comes from the characterization of Sam Fisher. He left the buisness, Grim was destined to become the new head of whatever agency came from the ashes of third, and all was laid out to take the series forward into the future. The fans didn't grow up with the game mechanics, they grew up with the character, and as far I can tell they are *****ering him beyond recognition.

    Now Sam is back because apparently his daughter isn't actually all that important, and Grim is back in even less of an important role than Conviction after TEN years of climbing her way to the top after conjuring up the ONLY way of saving the president herself from the biggest conspiracy in US history.

    IT. SIMPLY. DOESN'T. MAKE. SENSE.

    Sam Fisher is gone. Grim is a direct aide of the president and thus would logically become the new Lambert. How the logical conclussion wasn't to get a new agent I will NEVER know. If they don't sort this out SC truely will be dead to me, it will just simply kill the universe they've been building up for ten years.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by BoBwUzHeRe1138 View Post
    Wait...so OP...Cell...you liked Double Agent for the 360? Because I am a huge fan of the series since the first game, I grew up with it in a way actually. I would consider myself one of the hardcore SC fans, who like the challenge of ghosting (though I ghost rarely...interrogations and stuff are too good in SC1-3) but I actually legitimately enjoyed Double Agent. It wasn't as good as CT or the others but I certainly think it was a good way to change the game up. It added daytime missions which...I felt weren't bad...like it still felt like SC...even Kinshasha IMO was a good SC mission and the corner takedowns are sadly only used in this game. SCC then abandoned all the good things in DA and kept only the bad such as regenerating health. Which wasn't even that bad in DA...but with all the rest of the features gone in SCC and presumably Blacklist....regenerating health is made worse.
    I have both versions of Double Agent. 360 and Original Xbox. I don't enjoy them as much as the first three but I play it when I want to be in an Xbox live party. I mainly play by ghosting the level unless I feel like interrogating people. I didn't like the health regen' and I thought that the xobox story was far better than the 360 version
    Xbox 360 GT: CELLGHOST206
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    Senior Member JaRuTo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,068
    Quote Originally Posted by CELLGHOST206 View Post
    I have both versions of Double Agent. 360 and Original Xbox. I don't enjoy them as much as the first three but I play it when I want to be in an Xbox live party. I mainly play by ghosting the level unless I feel like interrogating people. I didn't like the health regen' and I thought that the xobox story was far better than the 360 version
    True man, Double Agent from original Xbox was brilliant and improved core mechanic that doesn't dumb the series. It was the last very good old gen Splinter Cell.
    Really enjoyed this version from Montreal.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •