Does anyone else miss the gameplay of Classic Tom Clancy Games?

Recommended Videos

The Enquirer

New member
Apr 10, 2013
1,007
0
0
JUMBO PALACE said:
Even though I have enjoyed all the Splinter Cell games (except Double Agent I found that game really weak) I do know what you mean. Those types of tactical, punishing shooter experiences are few and far between now. I really wish Siege had a singleplayer component because I would be all over that. Unfortunately I don't have anyone to play online with me so it's just not worth it.
Well siege was originally "Rainbow Six Patriots" and it looked like it was going to have a really neat single play section. Not totally the old games but a bit of a bridge between the more recent Vegas series and the classics. Darn shame the game fell through because from what was said, the villains of the game weren't necessarily going to have a bad goal, just the methods were poorly chosen. Which, when it was leaked, was a nice change of pace from "they hate 'Murcia and are gonna blow us up!"
 

Conner42

Senior Member
Jul 29, 2009
262
0
21
Sort of, I guess?

I seemed to have had a lot more patience when I was younger. Maybe they're not a part of the classics, but I remember the two GRAW games being pretty good.

Ghost Recon 2 is...decent, I guess? As far as Singleplayer goes, it did force you to be more careful. At the same time, most of the games in area are trial and error. I think most games have a trial and error thing to an extent, but it really downplays on the tactical aspect and planning.

I actually just recently finished Chaos Theory, which I thought was pretty decent, as far as I can remember. I don't mind that the newer games are getting more action oriented, but it'd be better if they gave more options instead of just shooting. I didn't like Black List that much because, unlike Conviction, it gave you options to be more stealthy instead of having to clear the room with more bullets. The problem here is that there isn't much of a way to get out of a situation when you're surrounded by guys and your caught. The game doesn't have a good hand to hand, close quarters combat system. And, for the sake of stealth, that's really important. If I miss time it when try to take down a guy, I should be able to have a good way to take him down before he alerts everybody.

Oh, yeah, there's also the multiplayer aspect. The classic Tom Clancy games seem famous for the multiplayer aspect, but, after growing up and with much thought...any of the ones that isn't co-op is overrated as hell. It got better with each game, I guess. You can't really fault the developers for making the controls tighter in each game...but I also kind of have to wonder why they could be so clunky in the first place(this is referring to my experience with the Xbox games though). I guess a big part of why I didn't find them to be good is because I started playing the games well past their prime. It's also kind of a testament to why multiplayer shouldn't be the main component to the game because it will always eventually die down. You better hope to have enough money to buy the games during the pique, otherwise, you might miss out.

So, do I miss them? Ummmm, I guess so? I think I miss the fact that I had patience and could get immersed in games like these more than I miss the actual games. I honestly think R6 Vegas, GRAW, and Chaos Theory was the best it had to offer. Everything before that was building up to that and everything after is having to compete with Call of Duty. I thought the most recent Ghost Recon game was a god damned boring mess. I haven't played Rainbow Six Siege yet, but, hearing that it seems to be a multiplayer only game, I guess I never will.

I guess the least you can say about it back then is that they provided an alternative. Even when Halo began to be popular, there wasn't a noticeable push towards making it more similar to Halo. So, I guess I can miss that about it too.