"Speaking to OXM in our new issue, out on Friday 17th January, animation director Kristjan Zadziuk discussed the IP's future, conceding that Ubisoft Toronto has yet to perfect the Splinter Cell formula."
I have a few suggestions up my sleeve if they wanna ask me.. :)
The main thing is that it needs to return to it's stealth roots like the original and take that mark and execute crap out also.
You are so right. They ruined splinter cell. Double Agent was the most awesome one. What they needed to do was improve on the espionage and build on the trust system.. not on trying to turn you into god on the battlefield.
Chances are by being completely different is that they'll go in the exact opposite direction and think along the lines of less stealth more action would make it more appealing to the masses.
If it's still "evolving", then I fear the next game will be an FPS with all insta-kills and constant action.
You don't have to use mark and execute. The small changes are welcome. Blacklist is a good game.
I also have few suggestions:)
MMOFTP Splinter Cell incoming.
Splinter Cell: Open World Splinter Cell: Colonial Marines Final Tomclantasy: A Splinter Cell Reborn
sounds like every game series now lol... Don't forget splinter cell: call of duty
My favorite it Final Tomclantacy. Lol XD
Let it die. The newest Splinter Cell was god awful, and I hope Ubi is ashamed of it.
Agreed, wish they would make it like the first two games.
Everyone who made Chaos Theory what it was either left or died, or is tied up in their basement being forced to do the Tom Clancy seal of approval sticker on each copy.
Double agent was the last good one. After that all downhill.
I thought blacklist was really good (certainly better than conviction). Too much action for you?
i want hardcore stealth, I'm pretty filled up on the whole action thing since that's what i'm getting from mostly every other game out there. It's literally like warfare action, historical combat action, action action, then there's splinter cell changing for the sake of being more action packed like every other title action. I'ts kind of like with Halo. Both series already have the perfect style of gameplay that sets them apart and keeps them fresh and interesting from the rest of the bunch but they keep ignoring that and just go for the same old action movie stuff. When I play splinter-cell I want splinter-cell and that means hardcore stealth not random movie star pulling off some cartoon style weapon of fate mark and execute moves and walking away while something explodes behind you in the background. I want to feel the tension of nearly being seen and the fear that if it move or rush for that guy too fast I may alert him, and the satisfaction of taking out a whole room of highly armored soldiers not with mark and execute and quick park our but with careful and decisive movements. If the new Sam fisher is a predator ( I forgot what they called him ) than the older one must be some sort of Monster that not even a predator would mess with.
I wouldn't say god aweful. I just think it doesn't have identity anymore. It wasn't really Chaos theory, it wasn't really conviction...it was really a smash between the 2, but not in a good way. It plays less like a strategy game and more like a brute for game. I mean the consequences (unless ur on max difficulty) are fairly minute. I mean there were mistakes that I made that should not have been allowed...also I feel like the cover system is way too much in play here...I mean corridor shooter style. I think u need to be a little more vulnerable, using cover mostly for remaining undetected, not just to kill people easier. Also the customizing of gear is cool, but I think this is a game where too much customizing isn't a good thing. Also colors make no difference to camo. Guns I think should be limited but have more internal customizing (more suppression, less, balanced etc). I just think it's trying to hard to appeal to the general audience, to the point where ven the general get bored. It's challenging for the wrong reasons. Also coop is awesome, I wouldn't get rid of it. but I feel like your super over powered in some cases, and the only challenge is the actual limited pathways and not the enemy being smarter.
not that bad actually if u play on hardest mode with no idiot help
Elaborate how it was god awful. I thought it was fantastic.
I didn't find the game to have the overall stealth appeal that it should, (which if it's my mistake and it shouldn't ever be stealthy, shame on me.) and that some of it overall felt unfinished as hell. I'll put a video here made by a fellow named Criken. If you had played the original Splinter Cells, and went to look at this, would you really think this is a fitting successor? http://www.youtube.com/watc...
I get how you feel about the direction that the Splinter Cell series has taken but that's a pretty weak reason to discredit Blacklist as "god awful". I've finished the game on a ghost run on perfectionist difficulty and I can tell you that the stealth is much stronger here then it ever was in Conviction. Oh and thats a pretty funny video btw. But it doesn't help your point at all cause they're just screwing around and having fun.
Eh, I can't praise it at all for being something above a game like Conviction, which probably should've never happened or been a spinoff that wasn't marketed as a full on installment. Hell, would've been better if they'd removed the single player and had the Co-Op segments put off to the side as a sidegame in the franchise. I can and will discredit Blacklist as god awful simply because of the problems it has and the problems I have with it. If they wanted to make a big blockbuster action oriented game as the finale to the franchise then sure why not, but seriously? More? No thank you. This isn't what splinter cell is or should be in my opinion.
I agree with you 100% Shnooze. If you ever played the first 3 splinter cell games, going to Convictions and Blacklist just feels wrong. The gameplay is arcady in a sense that you're just jumping and sliding from place to place. The environments only encourage avoiding enemies and slipping past them rather than encouraging COMPLETE STEALTH, reading emails to get codes, interrogating the enemies you can apprehend, hacking doors, using gadgets to disable electronics, distract people, and avoid detection. The old spinter cells encouraged a bit more exploration in each level due to a satisfying amount of side objectives. This is going to sound like im nitpicking, but, in the old splinter cells you could walk at a VERY SLOW TIP TOE KIND OF PACE, and in the new ones, you cant slip by people at all...WHERE'S THE INTENSE AND ENGAGING STEALTH MOMENTS!? The old ones just offered so much more into what it is to be a spy in the shadows, retrieving intel,taking out a target, or planting a bug...and did I mention the new voice actor is generic as it gets? Please, just keep Ironside.
The last one was horriable... How did Fisher become younger from the last one? The ending sucked I enjoyed the first two, I hope they don't let it die just maybe go a different route and maybe give him a successor? S/N http://www.youtube.com/chan...
yeah that bugged me, too. He got way younger, but they still played it off like he was older, cuz his twenty-something year old daughter was still in the game...i thought that was the most awkward thing ever. You get on the phone to call your daughter and you sound YOUNGER THAN SHE DOES. WTF. And the motion capture wasnt even that impressive, so they should just go back to Ironside, seriously. They definitely need to back track 9 years and go, "Hmmm, this game DID get amazing reviews and make Splinter Cell a must have game, why dont we try and build off of its formula?" BINGO!....BRAVO! Was that so hard???
what would of been cool is if they did conviction and have maybe sam team up with some sort of group and he could of trained them to go in and take out the antagonist of conviction with him. It could have all sorts of choices and more varied missions and character development kind of like mass effect but with sam fisher as the commander. The person or student you favored the most could be brought along with you in the next game as the lead or something becoming the new SC keeping ironside as Sam fisher maybe the new leader of echelon still and as a sort of supporting lead in this one. IDK What i would of done.
All I know is that Conviction and Blacklist were dope as hell. Keep it coming oh and make the upgrades worth my time not pointless, but definitely keep the upgrade system.
Your like theo nly one who liked those games. Im guessing your the type who likes mindless action movies where your not supposed to think too much.
Guess I don't follow the crowd. I like what I like and yup I played all the other SP games as well. Guess you're the kind of gamer that cant see any game evolve from what it used to be. I'm not down for playing the same crap over and over, whats the point. You like the old ones then play those. and for the record, my favorite movies are not even action movies or comedies.
Some of my least favorite movies or even the ones which I will never see have won tons of oscars and golden globes. Most of my favorites are the ones that dont win the big awards.
@ MilkMan >.> wouldn't liking mindless action be following the crowd ? Hmm idk maybe once i get done with my college classes i'll try and make some sort of indie version of the past splinter cells or just keep playing the older versions with people on PC. The way Games evolve is weird. It's usually a gradual jumo upward like with Halo adding in things like vehicle jacking and what not and so on. Now a days evolution in gaming is more about graphics and speed. It may just be how I've seen games i've loved as a kid change now a days taking and using elements that I've seen in games I cant even remember the name of. IDK it just feels weird I mean really in terms of overall in terms of difficulty and thrill, the older ones are better in terms of fluidity and speed and action the newer ones are more for you. It's more of an identity crisis than an evolution. It's known for and loved for this but its giving us this and saying " Yea we still have that old stealth action" but were still getting the bearest of bones of it while we get more of the other stuff. Best thing I can compare it too is like if every stealth lover had a favorite restaurant and it did some renovation that changed the chef's and everything on the menu even though it only needed the visual change. Now they have a clash of the old and new because there not making things how they used to and while the new changes are kind of good their kind of hurting all of the old time fans. Like it or not the new ones are completely different and move towards more action than the stealth its known for. So all the older fans that don't like it have to either bear with it or move along. Guess I'd best be hitting the old dusty trail.
@MilkMan Im curious, did you play the earlier SC games, or just the new ones?
Played them all and loved them all for what they were at the time. Original SP captivated me in a way that I still remember. Part 3 Chaos Theory was one of the best experiences I had with a stealth game. (Yes I played part 2 as well but I was mostly same as part 1) Double Agent was amazing, loved it from head to toe and I loved what they were going for in this game. Conviction of course its a winner with the insta deaths and a Sam Fisher on the edge. Working with whatever he had on hand and introducing many new concepts. The game favored action but I was more for stealth approach wherever possible. and now Black List and I fell in love all over again. Upgrade systems, your choice of how you play, pick your missions, wonderful game. Ubisoft is correct to say the series is evolving. Look at all the games each and everyone of them has added more to the stealth mix. Imaging playing the same game for 10 years. Cant wait to see what they muster next. I haven't been disappointed yet.
I hope that by "completely different" they mean going back to what splinter cell was once all about. 100% stealth
I really liked double agent just had the issue that... there was no way to deal with being seen not really-I get sometimes that should be game over like in some missions for blacklist. But he's meant to be these amazing agent and he has no backup plan at all?? No... blacklist was a good game, anyone saying otherwise is probably just holiding onto the past abit too much here after all the older splinter cells have the most obtuse control schemes all clunky etc around. They did some stuff better however blacklist is in no wah a bad game.
I agree, I played Blacklist and it's not a bad game but... Here's some problems, one is the mark and execute system. One person is not capable of killing 4 enemies in a room, spread every direction, in less than 5 seconds. In the original trilogy, you really had to think, separate groups of enemies from each other and take them down one by one while remaining in the dark. In Conviction and Blacklist, you can just knock down one enemy and be able to mark everyone else and trigger the kills. The second problem is the direction Blacklist is taking players. Now you get awarded for wearing full body armor and going the assault approach. How can a franchise focused on stealth now give that option? Unlike Metal Gear Solid, Splinter Cell is supposed to be realistic and if they wanted someone to go assault, they could just send the Rainbow 6 or Ghost Recon teams. Fun fact, they exist in the same universe and I think Sam Fisher should only be limited to going stealth. The 3rd problem isn't really much of a problem, but Splinter Cell needs a better alarm system. You can't be caught in one area of the camp and then have people from a different area not know you're there. In Chaos Theory, you had 3 alarms and for every alarm, enemies in the map would start wearing heavy armor and assault rifles. Ubisoft needs to focus only on stealth in the next game. It required more strategy to not pull your trigger in the original games and instead use distraction as your main weapon. Now...those games were done right.
1.So where's the rule book that says that a highly trained agent with years upon years of experience shouldn't be able to easily dispatch a group of enemies. You know, when it's basically his job to do so. 2.Player choice is something that should be allowed. And you shouldn't feel depowered or vulnerable if you get caught because you're a highly trained agent, if every character goes through the game telling me how good I am then obviously I should feel like that even if I get caught. And splinter cell is a series about a stealth agent who thinks it's smart to where glowing green goggles in pitch black environments while climbing pimps which are all capable of holding the weight of a fully grown adult male, not really realistic 3.The series shouldn't be limited, and it actually is realistic that every part of the map isn't immediately alerted when you get caught. Especially even you get caught by just one person and kill them near instantly. That's an outdated A.I. mechanic. I'm one of the people who want to see not only this franchise but all franchises evolve after a certain point, especially if they're on a different generation of hardware.
@CrossingEden 1. Not in less than 5 seconds when the enemies are spread apart all over the room. Nobody is that precise to know where everyone is walking in their blind spots and in which direction. ...At close range it's possible but Sam Fisher does it at a distance that's impossible without missing at least once. 4 perfect headshots, in every corner of the room. You don't do the work, the game does the work for you with the recent Splinter Cell games which breaks challenge. 2. Nobody is arguing against player choice. It's the fact that they give you the accessories to go through a mission with no stealth. You even said it yourself, "And splinter cell is a series about a stealth agent" so I don't know what you're talking about. lol If I wanted to play a game with action, I wouldn't play Splinter Cell because it has always been about stealth. "And you shouldn't feel depowered or vulnerable" That's why they give you a secondary weapon since the first game, no? lol 3. "and it actually is realistic that every part of the map isn't immediately alerted" Walkie talkies...if one area becomes cautious then a call from a walkie talkie alerts every other person with one. Police officers do this with precincts against dangerous targets and police chases. Truth...
"While climbing pimps" lol anyway amusing typo's aside, I agree on the mark and execute, they need to remove it and remove the rediculous-i've been detected so my melee wont work unless it's a mark and execute one-why? because the guy is going to just push me away... seriously.... highly trained covert doesn't exist officially agent-vs random thug 5 and he can win... wtf? Plyer choice I agree with, this should be up to the player, even with the body armour it's alot harder/impractical to go in guns blazing and certain areas of levels plus some missions in their entirety make stealth mandatory. I know what you mean about alarms though :p MGS still has one of the best alarm systems in stealth games to date even after all these years.
@extermin8or lol "climbing pimps" I didn't notice that in his post. If they want to implement mark and execute, they need to do it right. How about limit it to 2 enemies or make it so they have to be in front of you, in the area of a cone? I dislike games that hold your hand and in the Splinter Cell trilogy, patience and timing was key, one mistake would mean your death. Blacklist is a fun game, no doubt and I do like the cover mechanic but it's easy. With the generative health and heavy aim assist, it became aimed at casuals. You're right about wearing heavy armor, it still won't let you go completely guns blazing but it's out of character for a franchise about covert infiltration and espionage. That's like if Jason Bourne went into buildings dual wielding revolvers instead of being careful of what he's getting himself into. MGS, a great example of a good alarm system. You know when you see that exclamation mark, shit was gonna go down. lol
Ubisoft will continue to push Splinter Cell away from its stealth roots in favor of more over the top Hollywood action
That's funny because Blacklist had more stealth than Conviction
I liked splinter cell before it evolved into a bastardised version of Assassins Creed.
How about just making it like Chaos Theory again?
I was thinking about this last week. Ubisoft's Tom Clancy games are slowly becoming the same.
Basically honestly the only differences i see between division and splinter cell now is that there's a bunch of ppl sick, its open world and has asynchronous mp and you dont wear just all black. Chats about it IMO.
and arent acrobatic? and tooled up for heavy direct contact?
When they say evolve, I hope that means bringing back Michael Ironside.
Chaos Theory was great. Why not go back to the best game in the series and learn from there instead of trying to be a modern action game.
In other words "we have no idea what to do with this franchise"
Gamers complain about a game not changing, but complain when it does?
I'm surprised Sam didn't retire yet. Isn't he pushing sixty?
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.