The Trouble with Sam Fisher. An Objective Look at the Controversy. | Forums

[Daedalus_89]

We don't have his voice anymore, and he looks like he's discovered the fountain of youth.

But we should still be able to enjoy some of the other classic Fisher staples.
One thing that springs to mind is his sense of humour. It's understandable that we didn't see much (if any) of it during Conviction. He was pissed off and you can even attribute the gameplay change to his rage. It was also lacking in Double Agent, but the news of his daughter's supposed death was still fresh in his mind.
Now that he knows his daughter is healthy and happy, we should start to see a return to roots. He SHOULD be more methodical and stealthy, not just because we hardcore gamers prefer it. But because that's who SAM is.
He isn't a killing machine, and to make him so is a betrayal to everything Sam Fisher has ever stood for. It's a character assassination.

I wrote Zack Cooper, and in it, I said the following...

"...The thing is, this new gamestyle isn't suiting to Sam's personality. He's always been methodical and especially conscientious about taking another life. Remember that moment in one of the Legacy games, where Sam takes the time from his mission to save two crashed pilots? Or how about in Chaos Theory, where he removes the handcuffs from the tortured and dead prisoner that he was supposed to rescue during the Lighthouse mission? And you always had the option of going through all the missions without taking an enemy's life..."

Sam has a respect for life. Racking up a body count like some Sly Stallone carbon-copy just isn't his way.

Yes, he's gone through a lot, personally in the last couple games. Like grieving his daughter and then; just as he may be on the verge of acceptance, Grim throws him back into it.
Killing Lambert must have done a number on him as well.
These kinds of things would shatter a person's soul; but as I mentioned before, his daughter is alive.
He has a chance to find redemption and maybe even some happiness.
So why take that from him?
Hasn't he fought enough?

The general consensus appears to be, "Let Sam take a step back," and "his war is over."
I've read other posts on this forum suggesting that he become a Lambert 2.0 and make room for an entirely new protagonist.
Obviously they want to bring the next generation into the series. That makes sense from a business perspective. They aren't interested in making a game that isn't profitable, and they want to ensure that the series has a future. I get that, and I think the great majority of other hardcore SC fans all understand, once we look at it objectively.
But I really believe that the best way to not only appease the old hands; but also to pave the way for new sequels, is to let Sam either retire or take a mentor role for the new SC agent. It doesn't make sense for the head of a government agency to be in the field anyways.
This also gives an opportunity to justify the new style of gameplay. This new agent is obviously more bloodthirsty and reckless than his predecessor. Perhaps that could be a constant point of contention between Sam and the new guy.

All I'm saying is, we need to take Sam Fisher into account.
Is he the type to bash through a door with an AK and mow everyone down, after calling an airstrike on a technical?

Maybe that's a younger; less experienced Sam, back in his rookie days. But this isn't a prequel, so I find it hard to justify the change.

[GuZZ33]

He isn't a killing machine.

Depends how you play the game, in all the splinter cell games i have played i have used sam fisher on more than one occasion as a well honed killing machine.

[sameer_monier]

Depends how you play the game, in all the splinter cell games i have played i have used sam fisher on more than one occasion as a well honed killing machine.

Agree there, I did so too, that's why I didn't mind how Sam acted in SCC.

In SAR I killed alot of terrorists, in PT I killed terrorists too, and I shot Talia right there in the face when Lambert told me to kill her, my first run for CT I didn't go for 100% I adapted to the situation, when detected, I dealt with it in the way I saw fit, and first time I didn't save the pilots, the mission comes first for me, in DA I shot Lambert to save my mission, I framed Enrica without a 2nd thought to make my cover stronger, I made Sam the way he is now :P

[Daedalus_89]

Depends how you play the game, in all the splinter cell games i have played i have used sam fisher on more than one occasion as a well honed killing machine.

Fair enough.
I guess my point is; the option should be there for Sam to be the "noble warrior" that we've seen in the past, rather than leaving hundreds of bodies in his wake like Conviction.

[sameer_monier]

Fair enough.
I guess my point is; the option should be there for Sam to be the "noble warrior" that we've seen in the past, rather than leaving hundreds of bodies in his wake like Conviction.

Sneak past your enemies, and spare those who you interrogate, Blacklist enables that

[mistahkmak]

he is old though he doesn't want to be in the field anymore, he was retired before the first game

[Daedalus_89]

he is old though he doesn't want to be in the field anymore, he was retired before the first game

You're right, and I acknowledged that in the original post.

"...But I really believe that the best way to not only appease the old hands; but also to pave the way for new sequels, is to let Sam either retire or take a mentor role for the new SC agent. It doesn't make sense for the head of a government agency to be in the field anyways..."

I think Sam's story needs to be concluded. Let the reins be passed on to a new character.
He's pretty much the same age as Michael Ironside. I don't see why they would retire one and not the other. Obviously they were afraid at the reaction we would have over a Splinter Cell game sans Fisher; but as we've indicated, we'd rather have Sam take a place in the background, than this new everyman Fisher we're seeing now.

[mistahkmak]

You're right, and I acknowledged that in the original post.

"...But I really believe that the best way to not only appease the old hands; but also to pave the way for new sequels, is to let Sam either retire or take a mentor role for the new SC agent. It doesn't make sense for the head of a government agency to be in the field anyways..."

I think Sam's story needs to be concluded. Let the reins be passed on to a new character.
He's pretty much the same age as Michael Ironside. I don't see why they would retire one and not the other. Obviously they were afraid at the reaction we would have over a Splinter Cell game sans Fisher; but as we've indicated, we'd rather have Sam take a place in the background, than this new everyman Fisher we're seeing now.

thats what i have been thinking since i beat conviction

[BoBwUzHeRe1138]

I've never played the Ghost Recon series or Rainbow Six....

Has it always been the same characters in the team? (Well aside from Future Soldier, obviously). Is Splinter Cell the only Tom Clancy series whose protagonist has been kept the same in every game released?

[DeafAtheist]

When people quote that Sam isn't a killing machine and use examples like rescuing the pilots in one of the Legacy games or untying the tortured corpse of the man he was supposed to rescue in Chaos Theory those situations don't compare to enemies. Sam does what he needs to do. The pilots were allies he felt obligated to try to save. They risked their lives to do a job so Sam felt obligated to risk his own life to save them. Even then that entire sequence in that game was optional. The player could have CHOSEN to NOT save the pilots if he or she decided not to. It was an optional opportunity. As for the tortured corpse Sam obviously felt sympathy for an innocent man having been killed that way. But none of these examples show that Sam has ever or should be expected to ever show leniency to enemies trying to kill him. Even in Conviction Sam expressed concern in the beginning of Conviction about engaging hostiles in a city populated with innocent people. Then went on to leave a trail of bodies of enemies in his wake. Killing every single enemy in EVERY single Splinter Cell game has ALWAYS been an option. Player's choice. The problem I had with Conviction even though I enjoyed it was that it LACKED the choice to be non-lethal if the player chose not to be. The choice to be lethal or not has always been a part of the series until Conviction.

But saying Sam values human life and wouldn't be a killing machine is just not accurate. Sam is a Special Forces soldier not only that he is the best Operative Third Echelon had. He managed to single-handedly dispatch SEVERAL Splinter Cell agents under Tom Reed's command in Conviction. He is the obvious choice to be a field commander for 4th Echelon. He's a career soldier and career soldiers always feel a sense of duty. Despite the horrors witnessed in Iraq in Afghanistan today many soldiers feel obligated to go back for another tour because they feel their allies need them. They don't feel right sitting at home watching a ball game when their brothers in arms are out there sacrificing their lives. Sam is no different. Now that is daughter is safe he can go back to his career. A career Special Forces soldier does not have the luxury of having a sense or morality while in the field. In a life or death situation you react with your training and you kill if necessary, and you kill indiscriminately. And THAT is what Ubisoft is trying to bring to the franchise. They're trying to give players a more realistic experience as a Special Forces operative and give players the ability to be more flexible with Sam's abilities. Sam should be able to handle himself in a gunfight and not face certain death because he felt a need to discharge his weapon in enemy territory.

I also have to say I disagree with people saying they want to see Sam become the next Lambert and ride a desk or retire him and bring in a new wet-behind-the-ears Agent for us to play as. No thanks.

For me "Splinter Cell" and "Sam Fisher" are synonymous. They are mutually inclusive. To take away one would kill the other. While I was fine with Archer and Kestrel in Conviction they were also a side story. The coop was not the main campaign. Sam Fisher is a career soldier and career soldiers die with their boots on. There is no greater honor than to give your life to the service of your country. Riding a desk or sitting at home bouncing grandchildren on his knee is NOT at all how I picture Sam going out. That's too "Hollywood" for me. I like that Ubisoft is less concerned with chronology today and instead shaping up Sam to be a timeless icon like James Bond. To me THAT is a fitting future for Sam.