PDA

View Full Version : ConViction...really good?



kevin8998
08-01-2007, 10:39 PM
i just wanted to say that i am very excited about the new game and i dont know why you guys "hate" it so much? it looks great to me and montreal is doing it and i thought they were better. Dont you guys like CT then y dont you trust montreal? and i think you guys should have faith in them and the new direction they are doing. give it a chance. if you dont want to give this new film a chance then you are not a REAL splinter cell fan.

it really disgusts me how all you guys talk bad about ubisoft when if it werent for them then you would never have ever played a splinter cell game at all.

SO JUST GIVE THE GAME A CHANCE!!!!!!

Hiddai
08-02-2007, 01:03 AM
dude, there are hundreds of threads like this here...

wallz0r
08-02-2007, 02:02 AM
give this new film a chance

huh? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

CoastalGirl
08-02-2007, 09:10 AM
I have a serious question. Seriously.

Why does everyone keep going on and on about Montreal? "Trust them, they did a good job before, blah, blah, blah..." They're not making another CT. If they were, I could see how past results might be relevant. But, they're not, so, they're not.

I'm not saying that, as a game, it's going to be bad. It'll probably be fine. But, as a Splinter Cell...

aniket_nayak
08-02-2007, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by kevin8998:
i just wanted to say that i am very excited about the new game and i dont know why you guys "hate" it so much? it looks great to me and montreal is doing it and i thought they were better. Dont you guys like CT then y dont you trust montreal? and i think you guys should have faith in them and the new direction they are doing. give it a chance. if you dont want to give this new film a chance then you are not a REAL splinter cell fan.

it really disgusts me how all you guys talk bad about ubisoft when if it werent for them then you would never have ever played a splinter cell game at all.

SO JUST GIVE THE GAME A CHANCE!!!!!!

Dude, don't you know Ubisoft has no authority to decide what a "Splinter Cell" game is. I mean, all they did was come up with brilliant ideas and concepts and spent countless hours developing that game. Its the fans who have spend a few dollars to purchase the game the rightful judge of whether a game is Splinter cell or not.

CoastalGirl
08-02-2007, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Its the fans who have spend a few dollars to purchase the game the rightful judge of whether a game is Splinter cell or not.

A) "A few dollars" is a joke. All told, between the games, guides, and books, I've spent close to $400 supporting the franchise.

B) Ubi established what was a Splinter Cell game. It was L&S stealth. Period. There was not a single mission, even the "daylight" ones in the next-gen DA, that didn't have at least a little bit of L&S. They're only changing it now because they're lazy and greedy.

kevin8998
08-02-2007, 12:14 PM
dude maybe they are changing it because the last light and shadow splinter cell game sucked and didnt sell very well...so obviously they need a change

CoastalGirl
08-02-2007, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by kevin8998:
dude maybe they are changing it because the last light and shadow splinter cell game sucked and didnt sell very well...so obviously they need a change
If you're referring to the next-gen DA, the L&S was not the problem...

ox Se7eN xo
08-02-2007, 01:41 PM
i too am looking forward to Conviction, but you gotta understand, kevin that the people who hate it, hate it cos it aint like a typical Splinter Cell game

no Light and Shadows, no goggles, no gadgets and equipment from the NSA

its what most people believe in when it comes to Sam Fisher and to not have it means it's not a real Splinter Cell game

i partially agree with this, but i love Sam Fisher, not what he does or how he does it and the game mechanics Ubi Soft have going on look amazing

still, i will miss those little green dots

RedemptionX
08-02-2007, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Its the fans who have spend a few dollars to purchase the game the rightful judge of whether a game is Splinter cell or not.

A) "A few dollars" is a joke. All told, between the games, guides, and books, I've spent close to $400 supporting the franchise.

B) Ubi established what was a Splinter Cell game. It was L&S stealth. Period. There was not a single mission, even the "daylight" ones in the next-gen DA, that didn't have at least a little bit of L&S. They're only changing it now because they're lazy and greedy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I usually don't go directly after specific individuals when i comment on these boards...but did you just call them lazy??

You have GOT to be kidding me, lazy is doing the same concept over and over again, with general improvements in a game that is becoming increasingly repetitive. Now if you want to go ahead and make the argument of "if it aint broke, don't fix it" then fine by me. But to reboot a franchise, to start over again by scratch, to add depth to a character instead of just doing the same thing they've been doing for the last 4 games, does not tell me that they're being "lazy".

Not to mention the sources which inform us of their progress and the game progress, in which i quote -


Ubisoft Montreal took eight months alone to make the gameplay as lifelike as possible by making almost every object usable. Part of the reason for this was to abandon prescribed movements in interactions. Instead, Sam will be able to pick up an object from any angle and stance in realistic motions. Objects are also simulated with realistic physics and will interact with other objects in the environment (for example, a chair thrown over a desk will hit the objects on the desk, knocking them over). (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancy's_Splinter_Cell:_Conviction
+ http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/788/788655p1.html)

Laziness is NOT an attribute that can be used for Ubisoft Montreal, especially after spending months alone trying to make every object usable in a game, not to mention their the ones who made the splinter cell formula in the first place.

You want to be pissed because they're taking a new direction, fine. You want to excuse the motive as greed, fine. But they have done nothing which would signify to me that they're being lazy. Lazy would be sticking to the same played out formula they've been doing for 7 years. THAT'S lazy.

kevin8998
08-02-2007, 02:53 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

CoastalGirl
08-02-2007, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by RedemptionX:
I usually don't go directly after specific individuals when i comment on these boards...but did you just call them lazy??

That I did. Why? Because it's painfully obvious the only reason they're going in this "new direction" with Splinter Cell is because of Assassin's Creed.
And as far as the L&S goes, they would have had to work to put it in. I know **** about engines and whatnot, but I don't think they can just cut and paste from one to another...

SPROGGY
08-02-2007, 05:04 PM
Obvious to you perhaps. But to the rest of us its clear that SCC and AC arent the same game. Im pretty sure AC and SCC dont even use the same engine. So to say that they just copied AC and put the SC name on it is ridiculous. Similarities in games dont make them carbon copies of each other.

ROLNIK
08-02-2007, 05:23 PM
I'm not saying that, as a game, it's going to be bad. It'll probably be fine. But, as a Splinter Cell...
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
...it won't.
Some people here still don't get it

CoastalGirl
08-02-2007, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by deepego3:
So to say that they just copied AC and put the SC name on it is ridiculous. Similarities in games dont make them carbon copies of each other.
I don't recall saying that...

aniket_nayak
08-03-2007, 01:46 AM
The whole "SC ripped off AC" is sort of a theory made up by Anti-SCC guys to fill up their void when it comes to posting good arguments. But unfortunately for them, its just bull****.

BurningDeath.
08-03-2007, 03:35 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
The whole "SC ripped off AC" is sort of a theory made up by Anti-SCC guys to fill up their void when it comes to posting good arguments. But unfortunately for them, its just bull****.
Yeah...it's bull**** for sure!
Let's just give it a quick thought: There were two choices for Ubi when they decided to have a crowd-system for stealth in SCC. They could either build up an entirely new one or simply take the one they already had from AC, modify it and save money and time.
Seems quite obvious that they built a new one from scratch doesn't it?

btw. I don't recall anyone in here saying that they were the same game, we always said that the similarities were too obvious, that the core is the very same - and that doesn't have anything to do with the engine they used! D'you get that? Gameplay-wise, it can turn out to be totally different, but the core-concept (crowds and such) is still the same, and that's pretty cheap if you ask me.

SPROGGY
08-03-2007, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

I don't recall saying that...

No, but you did say:


Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
Because it's painfully obvious the only reason they're going in this "new direction" with Splinter Cell is because of Assassin's Creed.

Which, to me anyways, seemed to imply what i said previously.

SPROGGY
08-03-2007, 06:17 AM
Originally posted by BurningDeath.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
The whole "SC ripped off AC" is sort of a theory made up by Anti-SCC guys to fill up their void when it comes to posting good arguments. But unfortunately for them, its just bull****.
Yeah...it's bull**** for sure!
Let's just give it a quick thought: There were two choices for Ubi when they decided to have a crowd-system for stealth in SCC. They could either build up an entirely new one or simply take the one they already had from AC, modify it and save money and time.
Seems quite obvious that they built a new one from scratch doesn't it?

btw. I don't recall anyone in here saying that they were the same game, we always said that the similarities were too obvious, that the core is the very same - and that doesn't have anything to do with the engine they used! D'you get that? Gameplay-wise, it can turn out to be totally different, but the core-concept (crowds and such) is still the same, and that's pretty cheap if you ask me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


So then every other stealth game on the market besides SC is cheap? They share the same core concept right?

BurningDeath.
08-03-2007, 07:02 AM
Originally posted by deepego3:
So then every other stealth game on the market besides SC is cheap? They share the same core concept right?
I don't think so.
Stealth is not a concept, it's a genre, for me.
I think of the concept as what the very basic idea of the gameplay is like - not the genre as a whole. For instance, the concept of MGS is the LOS-gameplay, of previous SC's it's L&S and Conviction's will be the crowd - simplified indeed.

aniket_nayak
08-03-2007, 07:06 AM
And for your information, AC is not a stealth game. SC and AC dont even fall in the same genre. Screw core concepts being the same.

SPROGGY
08-03-2007, 07:26 AM
Originally posted by BurningDeath.:

Stealth is not a concept, it's a genre, for me .

For YOU being the key phrase here.




Originally posted by BurningDeath.:
Conviction's will be the crowd - simplified indeed.

How is using an ever changing and moving cover system simplified? Being able to just shoot out a light and create cover whenever you want is simple. Creating an environment where adaptability and quick thinking are essential is anything but simplified.

BurningDeath.
08-03-2007, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
And for your information, AC is not a stealth game. SC and AC dont even fall in the same genre.
That doesn't really matter. The point still stands that they share mechanics, same genre or not. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Originally posted by deepego3:
For YOU being the key phrase here.
Well, I can't speak for you, can I? You can define stealth whatever you want, for me, it's a genre and not the mechanic. At least all the magazines, reviewers, etc. I know of agree with me about stealth (or stealth-action) being a genre - but still it can be different to you, if you get it or not.
Would you be happier if I just said "I'm right you're wrong thats it"? Meh...I don't quite understand that - I'm just expressing my opinion and still getting flamed for that... -.-

Originally posted by deepego3:
How is using an ever changing and moving cover system simplified? Being able to just shoot out a light and create cover whenever you want is simple. Creating an environment where adaptability and quick thinking are essential is anything but simplified.
You totally misunderstood me there. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif I wanted to say that I simplified the concepts of the games to shorten my post - you can't really say that MGS is all about LOS-gameplay just as you can't say Conviction will be all about crowds (hopefully, we have barely seen anything else yet, but still).

SPROGGY
08-03-2007, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by BurningDeath.:

Well, I can't speak for you, can I? You can define stealth whatever you want, for me, it's a genre and not the mechanic. At least all the magazines, reviewers, etc. I know of agree with me about stealth (or stealth-action) being a genre - but still it can be different to you, if you get it or not.
Would you be happier if I just said "I'm right you're wrong thats it"? Meh...I don't quite understand that - I'm just expressing my opinion and still getting flamed for that... -.-

Who flamed you? All I did was point out that your opinion isnt necessarily shared by everyone. There is a bit of over sensitivity around here lately....




Originally posted by BurningDeath.:

You totally misunderstood me there. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif I wanted to say that I simplified the concepts of the games to shorten my post - you can't really say that MGS is all about LOS-gameplay just as you can't say Conviction will be all about crowds (hopefully, we have barely seen anything else yet, but still).

Fair enough.

CoastalGirl
08-03-2007, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by deepego3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
I don't recall saying that...

No, but you did say:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
Because it's painfully obvious the only reason they're going in this "new direction" with Splinter Cell is because of Assassin's Creed.

Which, to me anyways, seemed to imply what i said previously.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I can't help your misinterpretations. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SPROGGY
08-03-2007, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

I can't help your misinterpretations. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sure you can, by being more specific. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

CoastalGirl
08-03-2007, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by deepego3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
I can't help your misinterpretations. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sure you can, by being more specific. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Okay, specifically, it's my opinion that the reason they decided to go with the crowd system for SCC is because they'd done so much work on it for AC, they needed to stick it in another game to cover the costs of development. Since SC is an established series, which has (had) a loyal fanbase of nearly guaranteed buyers, it was the obvious choice.

What I would have liked for Ubi to have done is get off their butts and go all out with the L&S. I want to be wowed by innovation, and I know the technology is there to do it. Cast shadow recognition, smarter AI, a much harder "Hard" difficultly, etc. could make for an amazing L&S game.

Oh, and as far as them spending a million hours making every object interactive...yawn. Seriously. I play video games to do things I can't do in real life, and I can pick up and throw stuff; I don't need to do it in a game. Now, don't get me wrong, it's an okay idea, and certainly isn't, IMO, a detriment, but there's no wow factor in that feature for me.

aniket_nayak
08-03-2007, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by BurningDeath.:

That doesn't really matter. The point still stands that they share mechanics, same genre or not.

Actually the point turns out to be completely void. Since they are of different genre, they will implement the crowd mechanic in different ways. I seriously doubt how much of social stealth AC will have since assassinations involve chasing victims in front of public and killing them.


Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

Cast shadow recognition, smarter AI, a much harder "Hard" difficultly, etc. could make for an amazing L&S game.


Yeah, I agree with you there. They could have improved L&S. Because the L&S gameplay in the previous games were a joke. And about the cast shadow recognition thing, if there were multiple light sources, there should be multiple shadows as well. And only places which are REALLY dark should be able to mask your presence. Instead of just having smarter AI, we should have less blind AI.

Anyways, it wont be there in Conviction, but I like the idea about quick thinking and decision making when it comes to stealth and the usage of crowd to stay unnoticed rather than shadows. Trust me, hiding in crowd is much more effective than hiding in shadows.

SPROGGY
08-03-2007, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deepego3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CoastalGirl:
I can't help your misinterpretations. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sure you can, by being more specific. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Okay, specifically, it's my opinion that the reason they decided to go with the crowd system for SCC is because they'd done so much work on it for AC, they needed to stick it in another game to cover the costs of development. Since SC is an established series, which has (had) a loyal fanbase of nearly guaranteed buyers, it was the obvious choice.

What I would have liked for Ubi to have done is get off their butts and go all out with the L&S. I want to be wowed by innovation, and I know the technology is there to do it. Cast shadow recognition, smarter AI, a much harder "Hard" difficultly, etc. could make for an amazing L&S game.

Oh, and as far as them spending a million hours making every object interactive...yawn. Seriously. I play video games to do things I can't do in real life, and I can pick up and throw stuff; I don't need to do it in a game. Now, don't get me wrong, it's an okay idea, and certainly isn't, IMO, a detriment, but there's no wow factor in that feature for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Youve made your point. Of course I disagree.....but then you already knew that didnt you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Brownsnakeeyes
08-03-2007, 03:22 PM
I think alot of people seem to forget that this is a video game, not a movie ( Bourne Identity ). The hole argument is the gameplay plain and simple. The matter of it being a stealth game or a game staring Sam Fisher has no meaning what so ever. Obviously there's other stealth games out there that have different core gameplays. I'm not going to sit here explaining them. As for Sam. Sam is a Splinter Cell. A Splinter Cell is not Sam Fisher. Anyone playing coop would know this.

This leads to what a Splinter Cell is defined. So in fact this is not a Splinter Cell game. It's a game staring Sam Fisher. They mine as well call it CONVICTION staring Sam Fisher. This is no more than a side story about Sam.


As for the new gameplay who knows if it's any good. The general public hasn't even played it yet. UBI should've just started a new franchise with this gameplay and left Splinter Cell alone. I for one will rent Conviction before I ever even think of buying it.

I also see the gameplay being limited alot. I'm thinking the gameplay is going to be straight and narrow. Sure the maps are probably going to be a good size but that doesn't mean nothing. Until I've played it it's still in question. Maybe UBI can deliver a demo by christmas. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

EskimoBob32
08-03-2007, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by S7N:
i too am looking forward to Conviction, but you gotta understand, kevin that the people who hate it, hate it cos it aint like a typical Splinter Cell game

no Light and Shadows, no goggles, no gadgets and equipment from the NSA

its what most people believe in when it comes to Sam Fisher and to not have it means it's not a real Splinter Cell game

i partially agree with this, but i love Sam Fisher, not what he does or how he does it and the game mechanics Ubi Soft have going on look amazing

still, i will miss those little green dots
My respect for you just went waaaaaay up. You don't completely agree with us, but you at least have the respect (and intelligence) to try to understand it.

@kevin, you have to see that this game was originally a niche. It means that it wasn't designed to sell trillions of copy, it was meant to bring a good gameplay experience to those who had the patience to play SC. Now they are going for a bigger market, and it may be that they are not happy with the sales they have achieved, and you might forgive them for this. But some of us don't, because we feel that they have left the original SC fans out in the cold.

kevin8998
08-04-2007, 01:12 AM
ya i understand but its just about respect for ubi

pietjevlip
08-04-2007, 03:30 AM
No offense intended, but why are people so upset about "this not being a Splinter Cell"

I mean, think of it: you are the EP of a series, and you say you've got a drastic change... you make a trailer of less then two minutes, and you need to decide what to put in it... same goes for showcasing a pre-alpha: you won't show anything we already know for the series, because then we wouldn't get any info... When you say: "We're gonna put in a more active, Improvisation based type of gameplay" then you're gonna show that, not the kind of things we already know... alright, maybe they overdone it in this one trailer...

Please no flaming, just give me a good argument...

romeo_longsword
08-04-2007, 03:43 AM
I too support the new direction of SC, taking stealth in a different level such as blending in to the crowd as in "undetected", "unnoticeable", rather than just being "unseen" like most of the stealth games have out there, including SC 1, 2, 3 and 4.

I think it's a more matured way to represent stealth, and it's a rather clever development to keep the project exciting.

EskimoBob32
08-04-2007, 05:46 AM
Originally posted by pietjevlip:
No offense intended, but why are people so upset about "this not being a Splinter Cell"

I mean, think of it: you are the EP of a series, and you say you've got a drastic change... you make a trailer of less then two minutes, and you need to decide what to put in it... same goes for showcasing a pre-alpha: you won't show anything we already know for the series, because then we wouldn't get any info... When you say: "We're gonna put in a more active, Improvisation based type of gameplay" then you're gonna show that, not the kind of things we already know... alright, maybe they overdone it in this one trailer...

Please no flaming, just give me a good argument...
That is true, Ubi isn't going to showcase the same features we've seen before. BUT, if it were actually similar, they wouldn't say in interviews that "shadows will no longer offer you protection" or "you will now be proactive rather than reactive". They have actually admitted that the game is a drastic change.