Splinter Cell Blacklist: I'm done.

[TheCommanders]

For Splinter Cell: There is no good reason besides his death that Ironside shouldn't be the voice of Sam. End Transmission.

For Hitman: Absolution, the comparison is not fair or valid. Hitman is about large open areas with one objective and tons of ways (stealthy, precise, accidental, silent, noisy, etc) to accomplish that objective. *From what I've seen so far* (especially the gameplay trailer of chinatown) it looks like they've done just that. Yes the Saints trailer was ridiculously stupid, but fortunately that has nothing to do with the gameplay, and this looks to be the best Hitman yet.

When I made the thread I had not seen the Chinatown video. Everything I had seen up to that point looked like an attempt at a poor mans' Conviction. I accept now that these videos were not indicative of the whole.

To be fair, it's still possible it could be crap, but I'm optimistic.

 

[HellsingerAngel]

Whichever way you look at it, Conviction was significantly less stealthy than the previous installments...

In the sense that you actually have to face off against guards and there are a few actions scenes now? Yeah, I'll concede that. However...

...and regardless most people preferred the older style of gameplay.

Could I see that in numbers? I would sure hope you have some statistics to prove that with extensive customer polling of the majority, if not all, of the people that bought Conviction, else that might be an inaccurate statement. As much as I love blanket statements, this thread alone proves that it's about a 50:50 toss up. I'm sorry, but there are people who don't like the new direction, but that isn't the majority, it's probably more so, in fact, the minority if they're going with a similar style for the next game.

Most of the stealth in Conviction existed solely because the enemy AI ws so dreadful that it didn't notice you doing things that it logically should have, so you could run past them without them noticing.

And most of the stealth in past Splinter Cell games has been forced because of poor game fluidity and a total lack of transition between one play style to the next. I get where you're coming from; I'm simply saying that I don't want my stealth to be forced, I want it to be rewarding, which from the trailer it looks like it will be. Sure, I could air strike a target and then try and shoot everyone, but then I have to bog down my game play for a bit to get through the scene instead of fluidly preying on the guards like the chumps they are.

There's also a difference between bad AI, and programming the AI to be bad. One involves clipping, bumping into dead ends and not seeing me two feet in front of their face because a flag wasn't triggered. The other is having two-bit goons feel like two-bit goons which makes enemies like, say, Third Echelon agents seem more imposing. Then again, opinion.

Also, I've exagerrated nothing. The video I linked featured no stealth (Running flat-out past two guards who should have noticed you is NOT stealth, it's shit AI). I can say it's not a stealth game, because so far I've been given absolutely no reason to think that it is a stealth game on any level.

How should they have noticed Sam? Stealth doesn't always mean slinking slowly through shadows. Stealth is simply the essence of not being seen. That does mean if someone can quickly dash past you without you noticing, that is stealth. Their backs were turned to him, he made a quick move to stay out of sight and none were the wiser because of timed movement. Again, just because it's not slinking around in shadows doesn't mean it isn't stealth, and honestly, it's probably a more realistic depiction of stealth than Splinter Cell ever was.

 

[Shocksplicer]

Whichever way you look at it, Conviction was significantly less stealthy than the previous installments...

In the sense that you actually have to face off against guards and there are a few actions scenes now? Yeah, I'll concede that. However...

...and regardless most people preferred the older style of gameplay.

Could I see that in numbers? I would sure hope you have some statistics to prove that with extensive customer polling of the majority, if not all, of the people that bought Conviction, else that might be an inaccurate statement. As much as I love blanket statements, this thread alone proves that it's about a 50:50 toss up. I'm sorry, but there are people who don't like the new direction, but that isn't the majority, it's probably more so, in fact, the minority if they're going with a similar style for the next game.

Most of the stealth in Conviction existed solely because the enemy AI ws so dreadful that it didn't notice you doing things that it logically should have, so you could run past them without them noticing.

And most of the stealth in past Splinter Cell games has been forced because of poor game fluidity and a total lack of transition between one play style to the next. I get where you're coming from; I'm simply saying that I don't want my stealth to be forced, I want it to be rewarding, which from the trailer it looks like it will be. Sure, I could air strike a target and then try and shoot everyone, but then I have to bog down my game play for a bit to get through the scene instead of fluidly preying on the guards like the chumps they are.

There's also a difference between bad AI, and programming the AI to be bad. One involves clipping, bumping into dead ends and not seeing me two feet in front of their face because a flag wasn't triggered. The other is having two-bit goons feel like two-bit goons which makes enemies like, say, Third Echelon agents seem more imposing. Then again, opinion.

Also, I've exagerrated nothing. The video I linked featured no stealth (Running flat-out past two guards who should have noticed you is NOT stealth, it's shit AI). I can say it's not a stealth game, because so far I've been given absolutely no reason to think that it is a stealth game on any level.

How should they have noticed Sam? Stealth doesn't always mean slinking slowly through shadows. Stealth is simply the essence of not being seen. That does mean if someone can quickly dash past you without you noticing, that is stealth. Their backs were turned to him, he made a quick move to stay out of sight and none were the wiser because of timed movement. Again, just because it's not slinking around in shadows doesn't mean it isn't stealth, and honestly, it's probably a more realistic depiction of stealth than Splinter Cell ever was.

Firstly, have you looked at the other responses? There have been almost 100 posts so far and you are roughly the third who has claimed to prefer the new direction. Almost all of the responses have been in favour of the old style. Just because they are going with the new direction doesnt mean the fans want it that way. Look at Dead Space 3: they're going in a new direction and the practically the ENTIRE fanbase is against it. They're still doing it aren't they?

Second, just because the opponents are intentionally stupid doesnt make it good. It removes all challenge when I'm trying to sneak past enemies who were never going to notice me anyway.

Third, how would they have noticed him? Well, he loudly ran through a puddle five meters away from them. I honestly don't see how they couldnt have noticed him.

 

[Don Savik]

Are there any franchises that are staying true to their original games anymore? Tomb Raider, Splinter Cell, Hitman, Dead Space, Diablo.......

Come on devs, I know ONE of you wants to make a good sequel.

 

[Pist0l 07]

I know I'm jumping in kind of mid-conversation here, but I like to express my thoughts on this since I'm sort of in the same camp as the OP.

I think it looks great! I've played every single Splinter Cell game and I think this looks really neat. I'm loving all the gadgets being back in full force again with the breaching charges, facial recognition on the snake-cam and the shock darts. Most of all, however, I'm glad they kept in the Conviction style of game play. Having a gun and actually being able to use it is nice as opposed to insta-losing when seen, whether that's the actual mechanic or being riddled with bullets the second I'm spotted.

I can appreciate wanting better gun control then some off the older games and I'll agree there really shouldn't be an insta-fail for being spotted but I do think that for, I guess I'll go with the term 'hard-stealth' game, using a gun should be a last resort and engaging multiple hostiles should be quite difficult. Running in and clearing a room of 3 guys with a pistol should be no easy feat and I'd say the game should actively discourage it through its mechanics and support character dialogue.

Now, I understand there's some hate around the whole "run and gun" portion, but I'm wondering where it's coming from. Did we play the same Conviction or was it just me who had all the stealth parts in mine? Maybe it was a snafu with all the disks and only the Collector's Edition has the stealth bits and everyone else got copies of Modern Warfare or something. Pretty sure, though, that I went through the majority of that game playing stealth with bits of action interspersed to keep things on-edge and different. It was highly aggressive stealth game play where I hunted down every single man, woman and child that was in my way, but at the end of the day I slunk through the shadows to make sure no one saw a thing.

That's the thing, I don't really consider a pile a bodies, albeit ones with surprised looks of their faces, stealthy. I see stealth, or 'hard-stealth', as getting in and out without anyone ever knowing something was amiss. If your goal is to infiltrate an enemy base and grab some intel, and you do it by killing all of their men then it was a pointless exercise, they know someone was there and they'll probably suspect the intel is compromised making it junk. But get in, copy the intel, and leave undetected; they won't know the intel is compromised until its to late.

The main thing I take away from this, however, is the overall attitude: I'm in control. The older Splinter Cell games made me feel like a rat trying to scurry away from light as a rent-a-cop came around the corner. The newer iterations make me feel like I'm the predator and all the guards are inexperienced oafs that pale in comparison. I control the situation, flying across window ledges after pulling a man from a window to his demise below and then shooting the man who came to check what the screaming was about from the next window over. I don't need to hide bodies because everyone I come across meets their untimely demise with a gruesome take down or the whisper quiet shot of a suppressed pistol. The sense of fear I can feel radiate off the guards is palpable as I'm the ghost in the shadows, letting them know just enough to make them fear me but never know where I'll be next. While crawling through vents and clinging to pipes for hours on end may seem riveting to you, being able to not only defend myself from assailants but also being able to prey upon them is more so what I visualize when I think of an operator like Sam.

Our opinions may differ but I think you've purposefully exaggerated your point to make an argument. I'm not saying you have to like the changes but you can't say this isn't a stealth game, it's just a different stealth game with options to not have to be stealthy when you so choose to or mess up. As another poster put it, I'd rather not instantly lose for not playing the game its way, I'd rather just transition from one type of game play to another.

There's my issue; I agree, its a different type of stealth game, I'd call it 'batman stealth', and while that type of gameplay isn't bad, Splinter Cell has always been a game more abut 'hard stealth', about ghosting levels rather then killing guards as quickly as possible. I liked the slow methodical gameplay of old and while I didn't mind the occasional action scene, (Georgian presidential palace anyone?), I felt they were to prevalent in Conviction. If this was a new IP, or some sort of rebooting of splinter cell, i.e. new main character, Sam maybe appearing as the new Lambert, in-story justification for the change in operator tactics, etc., then I wouldn't mind the switch over to the this 'batman stealth' style of gameplay.

 

[BoogityBoogityMan]

just the thing to cure the woes of AAA gaming industry, another generic manshoot.

man, cant get me enough of those cutscenes and kill anamations.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

On the subject of Absolution, have you even seen gameplay footage? It plays exactly like Blood Money. And do you prefer the omniscient satellite that shows where everyone is at any moment?

I've seen every bit of Absolution footage available and it's made me less and less excited and more and more concerned about the game. It reminds me more of SC: Conviction/Alpha Protocol gameplay and seems to have very little in common with Blood Money. Series of linear corridors != open map to navigate and explore, appraising and taking out key enemies to slip in undetected. Murdering everyone with an "improved arsenal" != silent assassin. 47 != generic spec-ops ninja.

I have to concede your point about the satellite view. As much as I dislike the new Instinct powers approach, the map was an odd fixture. In my mind, it worked like those times in 24, where Jack Bauer gets realtime, satellite infra-red video feed of everyone in a building on his PDA or whatever, but yeah, the map and seeing through walls shit are very similar. But the line painting on the ground? Really? In a linear game the player still needs a magic line leading out? How much hand-holding/nose-leading do we need? Pushing a button to "blend in", the same bollocks from AssCreed. *sigh* It's a child's game, an interactive cinematic *thing*.

OT: I liked Conviction because I thought of it as Sam not caring about hiding bodies or being non-lethal because REVENGE. But the point of a stealth game is stealth gameplay. The greatest moments of stealth games is ghosting through each level. In, out, didn't even know I was there. But assaulting a compound in the middle of the day? While killing everyone you come across? AND AIRSTRIKES?!

Conviction was good, but a step in the wrong direction for the series. Blacklist I think is taking another step further in the same wrong direction.

I might get Hitman when it drops to < £10 in the future, I'm certainly not paying full, or even half price for it. I won't get the SC game now or later.

 

[Mr Companion]

Better yet most of what we have seen of Hitman Absolution is like a wannabe Conviction.

Have you watched the Chinatown gameplay video? Honestly, that filled me with hope. You were still given an open environment with a plethora of ways to kill your target. Just like we're used to from Hitman. Even the accidents make their return.

Blacklist though... I stopped caring when I saw and heard that non-Sam Fisher character.

Yeah that's what I meant by 'most of what we have seen' because that recent one was a genuinely cool demonstration and finally showed that subterfuge based gameplay exclusive to Hitman games we all wanted. However, overall the game presented to us with their promotional material appears to be more often a more linear and scripted affair than I personally would like. Im not writing it off yet, this sharp U turn in their design philosophy since their first demonstration is very reassuring, but ill wait until reviews tell us what presentation was most indicative of the final release.

If I had to place bets I would say it'll be a mixture of equal parts cover based stealthing/shooting and classic Hitman hurriedly inserted late in development given the negative reaction from the fanbase. I guess you could call me a cynic.

 

[Mr Companion]

I guess the reason people find the new SC games so dumb is because proper stealth in principle is passing through somewhere without people noticing at all. Ideally without even leaving evidence of your infiltration such as dead bodies, but most importantly without being seen heard or raising an alarm. Modern stealth games dispose of subtlety by encouraging a high bodycount and furthermore being detected is no longer discouraged. Wouldn't being detected result in reinforcements arriving en masse to sort you out? Apparently not. Wouldn't it provide intel with a better approximation of your movements and objectives? Also no. Wouldn't being shot probably kill your arse? Also no. Why can I stand in a doorway and wait until all the guards in the room try to walk through it and I just press B to automatically murder each of them in turn? Because the AI sucks.

 

[Shocksplicer]

If I had to place bets I would say it'll be a mixture of equal parts cover based stealthing/shooting and classic Hitman hurriedly inserted late in development given the negative reaction from the fanbase. I guess you could call me a cynic.

To be fair, there hasn't been nearly enough time since the negative reaction for them to make that Chinatown level, so there has to have been at least SOME of the original Hitman in there before the backlash.

 

[BoogityBoogityMan]

I guess the reason people rind the new SC games so dumb is because proper stealth in principle is passing through somewhere without people noticing at all. Ideally without even leaving evidence of your infiltration such as dead bodies, but most importantly without being seen heard or raising an alarm. Modern stealth games dispose of subtlety by encouraging a high bodycount and furthermore being detected is no longer discouraged. Wouldn't being detected result in reinforcements arriving en masse to sort you out? Apparently not. Wouldn't it provide intel with a better approximation of your movements and objectives? Also no. Wouldn't being shot probably kill your arse? Also no. Why can I stand in a doorway and wait until all the guards in the room try to walk through it and I just press B to automatically murder each of them in turn? Because the AI sucks.

and dudebros are prone to ragequitting if they can't kill everything.

 

[Mr Companion]

and dudebros are prone to ragequitting if they can't kill everything.

True, sociologists/psychiatrists/wankers call this 'instant gratification' where you want to satisfy your brain constantly rather than taking time to feel properly fulfilled. I would say this is fine but it kinda isn't, its like junk food or trash television your mind wont get the feeling of accomplishment it needs and won't experience any real challenge. Something that takes time, skill or intelligence to win makes for a better game whereas its easy to appeal to masses of stupid people for massive profit so most modern investors follow that rout.

I have met a pure COD fan for example and he just wont play anything else. Its totally fine to play COD so long as eventually you'll try a variety of things. But a guy who calls Dark Souls or Metro 2033 gay because whole minuets go by without gratifying easy as s**t violence needs to try the big boy pool eventually. Think im being harsh? This guy hates Battlefield 3 because he missed a sniper shot at a mile because he didn't aim up to compensate for drop, Battlefield 3 is actually too intellectual for this guy I kid thee not.

 

[Ryotknife]

I guess the reason people rind the new SC games so dumb is because proper stealth in principle is passing through somewhere without people noticing at all. Ideally without even leaving evidence of your infiltration such as dead bodies, but most importantly without being seen heard or raising an alarm. Modern stealth games dispose of subtlety by encouraging a high bodycount and furthermore being detected is no longer discouraged. Wouldn't being detected result in reinforcements arriving en masse to sort you out? Apparently not. Wouldn't it provide intel with a better approximation of your movements and objectives? Also no. Wouldn't being shot probably kill your arse? Also no. Why can I stand in a doorway and wait until all the guards in the room try to walk through it and I just press B to automatically murder each of them in turn? Because the AI sucks.

and dudebros are prone to ragequitting if they can't kill everything.

I wont lie, i dont like stealth games where i have to sneak past everyone. I dont like leaving threats behind me, it gives me anxiety. I dont mind doing it occasionally like the thieves guild quests in elder scrolls, but doing it constantly will wear out my nerves.

that and if things do go tits up, i prefer to be able to fall back into positions that i have (hopefully) already scouted for such an occasion. I dont mind finding a high perch and watching enemies for a few minutes trying to find a way to eliminate them without alerting the others. in fact i loved how the gameplay was done in Deus Ex. In the DLC i didnt kill a single enemy, but took them out in hand to hand combat.

in Conviction on the realism setting (there are only three settings, easy, normal, and realism), hosing down a group of enemies is actually pretty difficult because 2 shots and you are dead (and it takes like 30 seconds to regen). Often it requires finding a good position and setting up an ambush before engaging.

Im not going to lie, even though I own the older SC games, ive plugged maybe 2 hours combined into the other 3. the control scheme and the UI was just terrible (for the PC). In fact i think i quit halfway through the tutorial in double agent before the controls disgusted me. Im sure they have an amazing story and whatnot, but i can not get over the controls. This is coming from someone who has played games with pretty convoluted controls like X3 terran conflict.

 

[AceTrilby]

Blacklist looks like at least a playable game. Sure, its not the same as the old Splinter Cells, and Michael Ironside not playing Sam is sad. But still, if the game plays well and is fun, I'll play it, tradition or no.

As for Hitman: Absolution, are people still saying it's just going to be Splinter Cell Conviction but with a bald guy? Because I'm pretty sure that Chinatown gameplay footage happened and showed that it was very familiar Hitman territory. Also, the Run For Your Life trailer has pretty much been confirmed as a level like Death Of A Showman from Blood Money. That is to say, a linear level at the beginning of the game to set the tone.

 

[AdamRhodes]

snip

That "Run For Your Life" trailer? Is that what you're talking about? That was just a demo to show off the new features. Here:


Yeah, that demo level was totally non-representative of the Hitman franchise. Just like the Blacklist demo was non-representative of the Splinter Cell franchise. Hopefully the actual game will have more ghosting. And they change it from Fisher to a new agent. Or maybe only the first level you play as Sam and then for the rest of the game you play that guy that he's saving in the trailer? Oh man, I hope that's what it is. Maybe that way they can bring back Ironside for a minor role.

Edit:

As for Hitman: Absolution, are people still saying it's just going to be Splinter Cell Conviction but with a bald guy? Because I'm pretty sure that Chinatown gameplay footage happened and showed that it was very familiar Hitman territory. Also, the Run For Your Life trailer has pretty much been confirmed as a level like Death Of A Showman from Blood Money. That is to say, a linear level at the beginning of the game to set the tone.

Semi-ninja'd

 

[Technocrat]

A big part of Sam Fisher is just how old he is, sometimes being a little out of touch with things - like his conversation with Grimsdottir about how they both spent the summer of 1991 (high school, versus lying in a ditch halfway to Baghdad)

I wouldn't mind that much if they had a different agent/agents as protagonists of the game, with Fisher assuming the command role, as long as Ironside was doing it. They'd be like the Shadownet agents that have been around since Pandora tomorrow!

 

[Pyramid Head]

Okay, what the fuck? Splicing Splinter Cell with Mercenaries on top of Future Soldier? What happened Ubisoft, you used to be better than that! The Tom Clancy game stable has really gone to hell.

 

[LGC Pominator]

I am honestly disappointed by this whole thing, I really REALLY loved Ironsides voice, it really wouldn't be to hard to "Lambert" him, allowing the new voice actor (who is probably very good on his own merits) to take the helm (link related)
http://www.change.org/petitions/ubisoft-give-us-a-new-protagonist-for-splinter-cell-blacklist

I think that this could seriously hurt ubisoft, they have a smaller, tighter and more loyal fanbase than other big publishing houses, and by spitting in our face like this, they really aren't doing themselves any favours, especially with the bullshit excuse of it not fitting with the mocap actor.

Personally I thought Sam should have been put in an administrative role pretty much as soon as the credits rolled on conviction, I was like "fine, okay his story is done, he has reconnected with his daughter, rescued his friend, saved the president and revealed the big conspiracy, it is time for the old guy to relax and put the fate of the so called free world in the hand of someone new who can take his ideology forward" but no, they went this route. What then worries me is how much more are they going to mess with the canon afterwards? I mean if they were so intent on keeping Fisher as the main character, how long could they keep this up? dude was born in 1957... I can't capitalise numbers but 1957 goddamnit, time for some new blood!

And I would love to have Sams voice in the main characters earpiece explaining everything the main character has to do like it is simple childs play.