PDA

View Full Version : How to Alienate a Fanbase 101 courtesy of Ubisoft



EmmaJordan
05-24-2007, 08:17 AM
Well, I have seen the video and the screenshots for "Splinter Cell: Conviction" and I am completely underwhelmed.

On the plus side, the graphics look nice. However, I do not buy games for the graphics alone.

This new title - based on what I have seen to date - does not look interesting to me and quite possibly strays far beyond what a Splinter Cell Title should be.

Before the inevitable calls to "not judge the title before playing it", let me say that it is a valid point. However, there is a reason that game companies create trailers - to generate interest and excitement in their upcoming title. This video and the screenshots accompanying it did nothing to generate any excitement or interest in the game.

There are only a few titles that I absolutely have to buy on the release date and Splinter Cell has always been one of them. Unless I see something better than this, however, I am not so sure that I will be in a rush to buy it.

I have been a Splinter Cell fanatic since the first installment. I love the character and the game play. Well, with the exception of the Double Agent single player game[in my opinion, the story was ridiculous, the JBA missions were horribly tedious, the daylight missions felt entirely out of place, etc.]. While I thought that it was somewhat too one-dimensional (i.e., getting rid of the other game modes) and one-sided (the introduction of those drones and, of course, the spies lost most of their gadgets), I even liked the new multiplayer in Double Agent - until, of course, mercenaries started realizing how to use drones... those, in my opinion, were ridiculous in concept, horribly one-sided and took much of the fun out of being a spy.

Let me say that I have no problem with Ubisoft trying to innovate. One of the great things about Splinter Cell, as a series, is that it has been largely innovative and original.

However, is it really innovation if you change the core gameplay, the concept and the game mechanics so much that the game is no longer recognizable as a Splinter Cell title? In my opinion, it is no longer a "Splinter Cell" title, but a Sam Fisher spin-off.

Yes, Sam Fisher is the main character of the Splinter Cell series. However, what was always constant in the series was that Sam Fisher was a NSA agent - a splinter cell with incredible gadgets, who was involved in covert operations vital to our national security. Sam could infiltrate any location and used the night and shadows as his ally.

However, according to published reports and interviews we have to date, this is what the geniuses at Ubisoft are going to give us: (a)Sam is no longer a NSA agent; (b) Sam is no longer an undercover covert operative; (c) Sam no longer has any of his gadgets; (d) Sam is a "fugitive" from the authorities; (e) Day missions .... ugh; (f) Sam is no longer lurking in the shadows, etc.; (g) Sam evidently gets to start beating up our police officers, (h) Sam is now a more social creature...hanging out in crowds, etc.

Doesn't sound like the same game to me.

I once created a player in Madden named Sam Fisher. However, it didn't make me think that the Madden I was playing was a Splinter Cell title. So, the inclusion or use of Sam Fisher does not necessarily make this new installment of Splinter Cell a true Splinter Cell title.

You can spare me the "well, its Splinter Cell if Ubisoft says it is Splinter Cell". I know and understand that point. At the end of the day, Ubisoft could dress Sam Fisher up in a hotdog suit or as strawberry shortcake and it would not change what the name of the game on the box was.

If you look at the evolution of the game from the first installment to Chaos Theory, I don't think many on this board would have complained that the series lacked innovation or that it was "more of the same".

One of the reasons that I have bought Splinter Cell was because I liked playing as Sam Fisher, I liked hiding in shadows and using those cool gadgets.

My thought is that they can change the story and some of the game play mechanics, but please....please... make it recognizable to those fans of the series!!!!

At some point, Ubisoft can only make games if they can sell those games. To sell those games, you would think it would make sense to give the fans something that they want.

Double Agent was an absolute failure from a sales stand point (and, of course, from a review and fan approval standpoint). It doesn't take a genious to understand why. Ubisoft did not remain loyal to core concept and gameplay.

I guess this new title might not be a problem for me after all. I have a PS3 and the rumor is that Splinter Cell Conviction will be an XBox exclusive [Ubisoft - Why bother creating a fanbase on Playstation only to abandon it for a quick payment of cash from Microsoft...sorry, I digress].

Oh well, between possibly *******izing my favorite title and then possibly making it not accessible to me, Ubisoft has really gone above and beyond the call of duty to alienate a longtime fan.

Brownsnakeeyes
05-24-2007, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by EmmaJordan:
Well, I have seen the video and the screenshots for "Splinter Cell: Conviction" and I am completely underwhelmed.

On the plus side, the graphics look nice. However, I do not buy games for the graphics alone.

This new title - based on what I have seen to date - does not look interesting to me and quite possibly strays far beyond what a Splinter Cell Title should be.

Before the inevitable calls to "not judge the title before playing it", let me say that it is a valid point. However, there is a reason that game companies create trailers - to generate interest and excitement in their upcoming title. This video and the screenshots accompanying it did nothing to generate any excitement or interest in the game.

There are only a few titles that I absolutely have to buy on the release date and Splinter Cell has always been one of them. Unless I see something better than this, however, I am not so sure that I will be in a rush to buy it.

I have been a Splinter Cell fanatic since the first installment. I love the character and the game play. Well, with the exception of the Double Agent single player game[in my opinion, the story was ridiculous, the JBA missions were horribly tedious, the daylight missions felt entirely out of place, etc.]. While I thought that it was somewhat too one-dimensional (i.e., getting rid of the other game modes) and one-sided (the introduction of those drones and, of course, the spies lost most of their gadgets), I even liked the new multiplayer in Double Agent - until, of course, mercenaries started realizing how to use drones... those, in my opinion, were ridiculous in concept, horribly one-sided and took much of the fun out of being a spy.

Let me say that I have no problem with Ubisoft trying to innovate. One of the great things about Splinter Cell, as a series, is that it has been largely innovative and original.

However, is it really innovation if you change the core gameplay, the concept and the game mechanics so much that the game is no longer recognizable as a Splinter Cell title? In my opinion, it is no longer a "Splinter Cell" title, but a Sam Fisher spin-off.

Yes, Sam Fisher is the main character of the Splinter Cell series. However, what was always constant in the series was that Sam Fisher was a NSA agent - a splinter cell with incredible gadgets, who was involved in covert operations vital to our national security. Sam could infiltrate any location and used the night and shadows as his ally.

However, according to published reports and interviews we have to date, this is what the geniuses at Ubisoft are going to give us: (a)Sam is no longer a NSA agent; (b) Sam is no longer an undercover covert operative; (c) Sam no longer has any of his gadgets; (d) Sam is a "fugitive" from the authorities; (e) Day missions .... ugh; (f) Sam is no longer lurking in the shadows, etc.; (g) Sam evidently gets to start beating up our police officers, (h) Sam is now a more social creature...hanging out in crowds, etc.

Doesn't sound like the same game to me.

I once created a player in Madden named Sam Fisher. However, it didn't make me think that the Madden I was playing was a Splinter Cell title. So, the inclusion or use of Sam Fisher does not necessarily make this new installment of Splinter Cell a true Splinter Cell title.

You can spare me the "well, its Splinter Cell if Ubisoft says it is Splinter Cell". I know and understand that point. At the end of the day, Ubisoft could dress Sam Fisher up in a hotdog suit or as strawberry shortcake and it would not change what the name of the game on the box was.

If you look at the evolution of the game from the first installment to Chaos Theory, I don't think many on this board would have complained that the series lacked innovation or that it was "more of the same".

One of the reasons that I have bought Splinter Cell was because I liked playing as Sam Fisher, I liked hiding in shadows and using those cool gadgets.

My thought is that they can change the story and some of the game play mechanics, but please....please... make it recognizable to those fans of the series!!!!

At some point, Ubisoft can only make games if they can sell those games. To sell those games, you would think it would make sense to give the fans something that they want.

Double Agent was an absolute failure from a sales stand point (and, of course, from a review and fan approval standpoint). It doesn't take a genious to understand why. Ubisoft did not remain loyal to core concept and gameplay.

I guess this new title might not be a problem for me after all. I have a PS3 and the rumor is that Splinter Cell Conviction will be an XBox exclusive [Ubisoft - Why bother creating a fanbase on Playstation only to abandon it for a quick payment of cash from Microsoft...sorry, I digress].

Oh well, between possibly *******izing my favorite title and then possibly making it not accessible to me, Ubisoft has really gone above and beyond the call of duty to alienate a longtime fan. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Povidone_Stomp
05-24-2007, 09:09 AM
Nice post. Some great points. May have run on just a bit long, though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

Just kidding. I agree with much of what you say. The question I wonder about is this: if we had a choice to see the series put to bed forever or continue with Conviction which would you prefer.

I honestly think I'd rather it continue, even if its gone all wacky as it apparently has now. First, it'll probably be fun but in a much different way than we remember (or prefer, of course); second, that the series continues suggests the possiblity of an eventual return to the formula/gameplay that made the series great to begin with.

I do, however, fully grant you the right to be disappointed and frustrated as any long time loyal fan has the right to be http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

EmmaJordan
05-24-2007, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Povidone_Stomp:
Nice post. Some great points. May have run on just a bit long, though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

Just kidding. I agree with much of what you say. The question I wonder about is this: if we had a choice to see the series put to bed forever or continue with Conviction which would you prefer.

I honestly think I'd rather it continue, even if its gone all wacky as it apparently has now. First, it'll probably be fun but in a much different way than we remember (or prefer, of course); second, that the series continues suggests the possiblity of an eventual return to the formula/gameplay that made the series great to begin with.

I do, however, fully grant you the right to be disappointed and frustrated as any long time loyal fan has the right to be http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Thanks!

If Ubisoft decides to return to the "old formula" later on, that would be a good thing. However, I am not sure that I want to pay $60 for this next installment (a) because I want to accomodate the developers' desire to be "artistic" or (b) on blind faith that Ubisoft will eventually figure out that it pays to actually listen to its fanbase.

I am concerned that, if this title performs as poorly as or worse than Double Agent did, the executives at Ubisoft will decide to cancel the entire series altogether because it has "run its course" and is no longer profitable.

You present a really interesting question, though. Is it better to put up with the Conviction game play in hopes of eventually getting back to the core type of game play that was successful (and well-loved) or is it better that the series end?

I don't know. Based on what I see so far, I am not sure that the two aren't the same. Really. In my opinion, this is not Splinter Cell so from that point of view, the series has ended (or, at least, been suspended).

MKCC14
05-24-2007, 02:57 PM
If people still play the game and there are still fans all over the world, they wont cancel anything. It doesnt look like its happening anytime soon either.

ShadownetPT
05-24-2007, 04:45 PM
Valid points, however I would like to add the fact that Ubi has indeed taken its first step to killing Splinter Cell for good.

And here is how....

Right now, Conviction will appeal to a much larger fan base of people who want the fighting and the beating up cops ect. Simultaneously, they will have alienated all the core fan base who lived the original concept. As the core fan base dissapears and the new players show how fickle they are after the first month or so of release and purchase other games that advertise themselves as shoot em up fighting games and not "daytime stealth"..."splinter cell" and I use that term VERY loosely, will have lost both the core guys and the new ones.

Just look at popular bands that did the same thing....Metallica for instance, alienated their core fan base and tried to bring in a whole new generation by changing the core of the music that they played and look at them now. Neither the old nor the new give a rats a** about them....the same will happen here folks..it hurts to say it....but it will.

ArrowDynamicsX
05-27-2007, 04:50 PM
I don't think we've learned enough yet. Normally I'd agree with you on this, but so far Shanghai has been the ones screwing the Splinter Cell series, so if it follows the way the series has been going, this one will be superb. I have my reservations about it, but since it's not Shanghai making it, I'm much more open to it.

Black-S
05-27-2007, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by EmmaJordan:
Well, I have seen the video and the screenshots for "Splinter Cell: Conviction" and I am completely underwhelmed.

On the plus side, the graphics look nice. However, I do not buy games for the graphics alone.

This new title - based on what I have seen to date - does not look interesting to me and quite possibly strays far beyond what a Splinter Cell Title should be.

Before the inevitable calls to "not judge the title before playing it", let me say that it is a valid point. However, there is a reason that game companies create trailers - to generate interest and excitement in their upcoming title. This video and the screenshots accompanying it did nothing to generate any excitement or interest in the game.

There are only a few titles that I absolutely have to buy on the release date and Splinter Cell has always been one of them. Unless I see something better than this, however, I am not so sure that I will be in a rush to buy it.

I have been a Splinter Cell fanatic since the first installment. I love the character and the game play. Well, with the exception of the Double Agent single player game[in my opinion, the story was ridiculous, the JBA missions were horribly tedious, the daylight missions felt entirely out of place, etc.]. While I thought that it was somewhat too one-dimensional (i.e., getting rid of the other game modes) and one-sided (the introduction of those drones and, of course, the spies lost most of their gadgets), I even liked the new multiplayer in Double Agent - until, of course, mercenaries started realizing how to use drones... those, in my opinion, were ridiculous in concept, horribly one-sided and took much of the fun out of being a spy.

Let me say that I have no problem with Ubisoft trying to innovate. One of the great things about Splinter Cell, as a series, is that it has been largely innovative and original.

However, is it really innovation if you change the core gameplay, the concept and the game mechanics so much that the game is no longer recognizable as a Splinter Cell title? In my opinion, it is no longer a "Splinter Cell" title, but a Sam Fisher spin-off.

Yes, Sam Fisher is the main character of the Splinter Cell series. However, what was always constant in the series was that Sam Fisher was a NSA agent - a splinter cell with incredible gadgets, who was involved in covert operations vital to our national security. Sam could infiltrate any location and used the night and shadows as his ally.

However, according to published reports and interviews we have to date, this is what the geniuses at Ubisoft are going to give us: (a)Sam is no longer a NSA agent; (b) Sam is no longer an undercover covert operative; (c) Sam no longer has any of his gadgets; (d) Sam is a "fugitive" from the authorities; (e) Day missions .... ugh; (f) Sam is no longer lurking in the shadows, etc.; (g) Sam evidently gets to start beating up our police officers, (h) Sam is now a more social creature...hanging out in crowds, etc.

Doesn't sound like the same game to me.

I once created a player in Madden named Sam Fisher. However, it didn't make me think that the Madden I was playing was a Splinter Cell title. So, the inclusion or use of Sam Fisher does not necessarily make this new installment of Splinter Cell a true Splinter Cell title.

You can spare me the "well, its Splinter Cell if Ubisoft says it is Splinter Cell". I know and understand that point. At the end of the day, Ubisoft could dress Sam Fisher up in a hotdog suit or as strawberry shortcake and it would not change what the name of the game on the box was.

If you look at the evolution of the game from the first installment to Chaos Theory, I don't think many on this board would have complained that the series lacked innovation or that it was "more of the same".

One of the reasons that I have bought Splinter Cell was because I liked playing as Sam Fisher, I liked hiding in shadows and using those cool gadgets.

My thought is that they can change the story and some of the game play mechanics, but please....please... make it recognizable to those fans of the series!!!!

At some point, Ubisoft can only make games if they can sell those games. To sell those games, you would think it would make sense to give the fans something that they want.

Double Agent was an absolute failure from a sales stand point (and, of course, from a review and fan approval standpoint). It doesn't take a genious to understand why. Ubisoft did not remain loyal to core concept and gameplay.

I guess this new title might not be a problem for me after all. I have a PS3 and the rumor is that Splinter Cell Conviction will be an XBox exclusive [Ubisoft - Why bother creating a fanbase on Playstation only to abandon it for a quick payment of cash from Microsoft...sorry, I digress].

Oh well, between possibly *******izing my favorite title and then possibly making it not accessible to me, Ubisoft has really gone above and beyond the call of duty to alienate a longtime fan.

Great post EmmaJordan. Although I agree with you on a lot that you said about Double Agent i am going to disagree with you on other things. IMO Conviction is taking the story as a continuation. Also Double Agent did recieve alot of good reviews on XBox360 however the PC version did not recieve good reviews for the simple fact that there were so many bugs and at times it was unplayable. In addition, the PC version was a direct port from the XBox and it felt too much like a console. However at times especially the mine assembling and that email decryption (the thing with all the binary code) got very tedious as you pointed out. Besides that I thought it was a good game (once I figured out it was my sound card that kept restarting my computer.)

From Splinter Cell to Chaos Theory the game didnt lack innovation, however I think that after saving the world 4 times, and the power struggles going on in Third Echelon something did have to give and I am glad that Conviction was going to be the result.


However, according to published reports and interviews we have to date, this is what the geniuses at Ubisoft are going to give us: (a)Sam is no longer a NSA agent; (b) Sam is no longer an undercover covert operative; (c) Sam no longer has any of his gadgets; (d) Sam is a "fugitive" from the authorities; (e) Day missions .... ugh; (f) Sam is no longer lurking in the shadows, etc.; (g) Sam evidently gets to start beating up our police officers, (h) Sam is now a more social creature...hanging out in crowds, etc.

This is true but they have also provided a back story and given an answer for all of those: (a) is correct for the simple fact of what happenend during DA, (b) Sam is still an undercover covert operative its just that he is working alone and of course the officials would deem him as being a "fugitive", (c) Sam is going to be provided with additional gadgets which have been provided off the black market and probably from loyal friends of Sam's (d) covered in b. (e-f) Day missions are correct, however Sam must use other forms of stealth and diversion to accomplish his goals (blending in with the crowd, making a scene)and we still do not know if there will be any night missions. (g) Sam doesnt necessarily has to beat up Police Officers, it was just the gameplay video were showing the physics and close combat that Sam COULD use.

As stated in the interviews Conviction is based on a more innovative and instinct judgement basis, whereas previously, you relied on gadgets, shadows and the timings of your movement. In Conviction you are still going to have to time your movements, you still are going to have to stay stealthy, and you are still going to have to use gadgets to help create diversions and accomplish your tasks its just that they have taken the core gameplay and gave it a twist. IMO I look forward to the new challenge but I know its going to be a new experience from what people are used to so I just ask to have a little bit of an open mind to the new change, but still post your concerns as it gives those who think its going to be successful something to counter. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif