Main aim was to make Splinter Cell Conviction easier

[Mr. Drood]

This is a bit old, but I just came across it now:
In an interview with Industry Gamers, the main developer, Max Beland stated that the biggest problem most people had with the past games of the series was that they were too hard, so making Conviction easier was an important part of the development.

Now, I know the game isn't out yet, but does anyone else just want to puke when he reads stuff like that? The only time the past Splinter Cell games were challenging was when trying to get mission ratings of 100%, finishing them was always pretty simple. Sure, there were some tricky parts, like the awesome train level in Pandora Tomorrow, but overall, I would say the series' difficulty was always just about right in the past.

So what do you think? Were the past Splinter Cell games really too hard? Or are you also sick of this trend in games towards "cinematic experiences" with no real challenge in them?

Source: http://www.industrygamers.com/news/splinter-cell-conviction-director-splinter-cell-has-been-too-hard/

 

[SturmDolch]

It's easier..? Ugh... I keep hearing bad things. I remember how awesome Chaos Theory was. Then they added the Dances with Terrorists missions in the next one. That was so boring, I got bored of the main game, too.

This one just doesn't look like SC. They seem to be focusing on shooting in all of the trailers, when I'd rather just be sneaking, snapping necks, and interrogating guys.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I thought the difficulty in Chaos Theory and Double Agent was just about right for the series... Presenting some areas that are tough but still keeping it accessible in general. I hope the new one isn't too dumbed-down; I must admit from what I've seen so far its looking good in some ways and completely dumbed down in others.

 

[Mr. Drood]

I thought the difficulty in Chaos Theory and Double Agent was just about right for the series... Presenting some areas that are tough but still keeping it accessible in general. I hope the new one isn't too dumbed-down; I must admit from what I've seen so far its looking good in some ways and completely dumbed down in others.

I agree; I really like that they're actually giving it a story this time and developing the characters a bit further, but then I see things like "mark and execute" where you mark a few enemies, and then Sam leans out of cover and shoots them automatically for you.

Oh and you can move from cover to cover with the single push of a button; Sam then also does that for you.

 

[Arachon]

Ugh... SC seems to be going down the drain... Dumbing down seems what the industry is aiming for... not that Ubisoft aren't already experts on it (look at Rainbow Six Vegas), but I was already dissapointed by the "un-rpgness" of Mass Effect 2, now Splinter Cell will become a generic 3rd person shooter? Meh.

 

[Mr. Drood]

Ugh... SC seems to be going down the drain... Dumbing down seems what the industry is aiming for... not that Ubisoft aren't already experts on it (look at Rainbow Six Vegas), but I was already dissapointed by the "un-rpgness" of Mass Effect 2, now Splinter Cell will become a generic 3rd person shooter? Meh.

Agreed, but I can always console myself with the previous four games, especially Chaos Theory, which in my opinion is pretty much flawless; excellent gameplay, atmosphere, stealth and gadgets.

 

[KitAlexHarrison]

Everyone here's played the demo of Conviction, right? Whether or not it's because it's trying to show off the "projected objective" gimmick, it tells you what you have to do at least two or three times before you ramble off to do it.

...but then I see things like "mark and execute" where you mark a few enemies, and then Sam leans out of cover and shoots them automatically for you. Oh and you can move from cover to cover with the single push of a button; Sam then also does that for you.

Wow, I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought that! It gets even worse when you notice that you could probably do a better job of it if the game let you have a go...

 

[MisterShine]

So what do you think? Were the past Splinter Cell games really too hard? Or are you also sick of this trend in games towards "cinematic experiences" with no real challenge in them?

Source: http://www.industrygamers.com/news/splinter-cell-conviction-director-splinter-cell-has-been-too-hard/

Whatever happened to difficulty settings? Normal is what is intended by the developers, easy is for people who want to enjoy the spectacle of the thing, or just want to see the story unfold, and hard and higher is for people who enjoy the challenge to their abilities.

As to your question above, other than the first game which was very tough (though this may have been just because it was my first real stealth game), the series has been just about right. And I agree that Chaos Theory was pretty much perfection for the series, though I'm happy that Ubisoft is trying to do something different and gamechanging with the series instead of just trying to recreate the same thing over and over again with a new number at the end of it. So while they score points for going in new directions, we'll see if this new direction is actually any good

Though hey, I'm already going to buy it. Some of the best times I've ever had with video games was playing the Chaos Theory co-op with my hetero-lifemate. More co-op missions? Hell yeah!

 

[TPiddy]

The idea behind mark and execute is not to make it 'easier' but to give the game a more cinematic feel, because there's no way the user would be able to move that fast. They've already explained this.

Also, it kind of ruins the cinematic feel and pacing of the game if you fuck up and have to fight waves and waves of guards.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Ooh, "making it easy"?

Those are words gamers do not want to hear.

 

[Mr. Drood]

The idea behind mark and execute is not to make it 'easier' but to give the game a more cinematic feel, because there's no way the user would be able to move that fast. They've already explained this.

Also, it kind of ruins the cinematic feel and pacing of the game if you fuck up and have to fight waves and waves of guards.

Well I'm so sorry if my bad aiming ever offended the developers so much they felt the game had to do it for me in future. And even if the "idea isn't to make it easier," that is certainly the effect it will have. As to "cinematic feel," its all well and good to make games "cinematic" if that means good atmosphere, storytelling and pacing, but there is such a thing as taking it too far, wouldn't you agree?

And I don't think messing up and having to fight waves of guards ever ruined any cinematic feel, if anything, it enhanced it! It made you extremely careful, and moments where you had to move from cover to cover were extremely intense because if you were seen and had to fight, you knew you were in for a really tough fire fight that may well have resulted in your death.

In Conviction, it doesn't seem like not being seen will be very hard, and even if you are, the developers have made it abundantly clear that now Sam can also take on hordes of enemies in a face to face shootout. Where is the challenge, where the suspense?

 

[lacktheknack]

GRAAAAPAFHJWKJQHJKLAJKLA-

Half - no, ALL of the fun in the games was finding impossible ways to circumnavigate the guards, using the quicksave key. Come on, guys! I'm not buying this one.

 

[TPiddy]

The idea behind mark and execute is not to make it 'easier' but to give the game a more cinematic feel, because there's no way the user would be able to move that fast. They've already explained this.

Also, it kind of ruins the cinematic feel and pacing of the game if you fuck up and have to fight waves and waves of guards.

Well I'm so sorry if my bad aiming ever offended the developers so much they felt the game had to do it for me in future. And even if the "idea isn't to make it easier," that is certainly the effect it will have. As to "cinematic feel," its all well and good to make games "cinematic" if that means good atmosphere, storytelling and pacing, but there is such a thing as taking it too far, wouldn't you agree?

And I don't think messing up and having to fight waves of guards ever ruined any cinematic feel, if anything, it enhanced it! It made you extremely careful, and moments where you had to move from cover to cover were extremely intense because if you were seen and had to fight, you knew you were in for a really tough fire fight that may well have resulted in your death.

In Conviction, it doesn't seem like not being seen will be very hard, and even if you are, the developers have made it abundantly clear that now Sam can also take on hordes of enemies in a face to face shootout. Where is the challenge, where the suspense?

I don't play splinter cell to tip-toe through the tulips... I play it to revel in Sam Fisher's badassery. This allows me to revel in even more badassery as Fisher feels like the ultimate predator.

 

[Crayzor]

I hate this whole dumbing down of games. I understand that the companies need to attract more players and the easiest way to do that is to make it more accessible but it is really annoying for gamers who enjoy a challenge.

Having said that, I do love the Splinter Cell: Conviction demo.

 

[Avatar Roku]

The idea behind mark and execute is not to make it 'easier' but to give the game a more cinematic feel, because there's no way the user would be able to move that fast. They've already explained this.

Also, it kind of ruins the cinematic feel and pacing of the game if you fuck up and have to fight waves and waves of guards.

Well I'm so sorry if my bad aiming ever offended the developers so much they felt the game had to do it for me in future. And even if the "idea isn't to make it easier," that is certainly the effect it will have. As to "cinematic feel," its all well and good to make games "cinematic" if that means good atmosphere, storytelling and pacing, but there is such a thing as taking it too far, wouldn't you agree?

And I don't think messing up and having to fight waves of guards ever ruined any cinematic feel, if anything, it enhanced it! It made you extremely careful, and moments where you had to move from cover to cover were extremely intense because if you were seen and had to fight, you knew you were in for a really tough fire fight that may well have resulted in your death.

In Conviction, it doesn't seem like not being seen will be very hard, and even if you are, the developers have made it abundantly clear that now Sam can also take on hordes of enemies in a face to face shootout. Where is the challenge, where the suspense?

That's the way I see it too, but it doesn't stop the game from being delightfully fun (or at least, the demo). It may not have any of the stuff that made the previous games great (except Michael Ironside. Gotta love that voice), and I may be offended by how it seems that the NSA became cartoonishly evil as soon as Sam left them (they were always depicted as morally ambiguous, but now they're just saturday morning cartoon villains), but I still can't help but find the game fun (I think I used up all my Fanboy Rage on Double Agent, which is also fun once you stop looking at it in the traditional Splinter Cell sense). I just have to be very careful not to go into it with my "sneaky" mindset.

That said, I'm told that the Co-Op is more of a proper Splinter Cell experience, so I'm game.

 

[Mr. Drood]

I don't play splinter cell to tip-toe through the tulips... I play it to revel in Sam Fisher's badassery. This allows me to revel in even more badassery as Fisher feels like the ultimate predator.

I think the key phrase here is "Sam Fisher's badassery." In the past games, you played as Sam Fisher, who was obviously a bad ass, but you had almost ocmplete control over what he did, which made you the actual source of the badassery. This also meant that you actually had to plan and earn your badassery, which made it stand out more. In Conviction, if Sam does everything for you, shooting bad guys, diving to cover stylishly, then it is only "Sam Fisher's badassery", and the player is reduced to an observer, lest he ruin how cool Sam looks. Finally, it also seems like the game will pretty much be pre-programmed to showcase Sam's badassery, which means it won't actually be anything special anymore, making it just a normal part of the game rather than actual "badassery."

You don't play to "tip-toe through the tulips," thats a cool and perfectly fine playstyle. But you could already play like that in Chaos Theory, where your gun had shotgun and sniper attachments, and you could throw frag and flash grenades. The awesome part was that directly confronting the baddies was just as hard, if not harder, than sneaking around the enemies. You had to make tactical choices as to when and how to use these gadgets, use cover well, and having good reflexes obviously helped. In Conviction, the devs seem to have taken this approach:
"You don't want to sneak around.... like a sissy?! Well, worry not, because you can just effortlessly shoot your way through hordes of enemies because of "Sam's badassery."

 

[Chrmike]

I think by easier, they probably were talking about the way the guards search and how they can see you. I own and have played every splinter cell and I know I've had experiences (especially in Pandora Tomorrow) where I should have been basically invisible and the guards spotted me.

 

[Mr. Drood]

That's the way I see it too, but it doesn't stop the game from being delightfully fun (or at least, the demo). It may not have any of the stuff that made the previous games great (except Michael Ironside. Gotta love that voice), and I may be offended by how it seems that the NSA became cartoonishly evil as soon as Sam left them (they were always depicted as morally ambiguous, but now they're just saturday morning cartoon villains), but I still can't help but find the game fun (I think I used up all my Fanboy Rage on Double Agent, which is also fun once you stop looking at it in the traditional Splinter Cell sense). I just have to be very careful not to go into it with my "sneaky" mindset.

That said, I'm told that the Co-Op is more of a proper Splinter Cell experience, so I'm game.

Oh I thought Double Agent was an excellent game! It didn't achieve the same level of perfection that Chaos Theory did, but if the series is to take a new direction, than I would always choose that of Double Agent over the one Conviction seems to have taken.

I have no doubt that the game will be fun. After all, Assassins Creed was fun, although it posed absolutely no challenge whatsoever. But, like with Assassin's Creed, Conviction seems to have taken the path of:
"Oh, you messed up the stealth. Well don't worry, cos you can eliminate all the guards with the push of a button anyway!"

Which I'm afraid just takes away from the extreme suspense and thrill that was always the mark of Splinter Cell games in the past.

 

[loremazd]

I don't see anything -wrong- with conviction. They didn't remove any of sam fisher's original moves. They simply added some. Just play it like you used to.