PDA

View Full Version : For the Better or Worse?



Fps_Bruce
07-15-2007, 01:26 PM
So Ubisoft has decided to change Splinter Cell in a drastic way. I for one am not at all pleased. I was one of the originals, to first pick up the controller 7 years ago and start playing Splinter Cell. Splinter Cell redefined stealth. It was all thanks to the light and dark gameplay mechanic. All of the splinter cell fans should agree with me. If Sam were to start off the first game just staying out of the line of sight of the enemy and sneaking around in broad daylight, it would have been accused of being a pretty looking Metal Gear Solid game with nice animations. Sam's personality was defined by the environment. Nothing pleased him more than to drag a bad guy into the shadows, then threaten him with a bit of dark humor, get the info and then make a wise-crack about how spineless the guard was. This was good stuff. Now that Sam is walking around using his hoodie as a hiding source and constantly being hunted by guards. How many wise-cracks do you think we are gonna be hearing? none. The series moved forward with Pandora Tomorrow and increased in popularity. And the game mechanics were still the same. Then Chaos Theory came. This was perhaps the most revolutionary game to hit the xbox. It pushed the graphics to the utter edge, it had a great storyline, fantastic new animations, but still the same hide in the shadows gameplay. Anyone who is not a Halo fanboy would say that Chaos Theory was the best game to hit the xbox. I agree. They say this because it was so perfect in every way. It was realistic, smart AI, the graphics, and Sam's character had developed. People liked this game so much, so why does Sam have to leave the shadows? If Chaos Theory did so well, doesn't that mean that we don't care if every game is about hiding in the shadows? Why does Ubisoft believe that the player wants more options to explore stealth when we were fine with the originals? Double Agent hits shelves, it was nothing less than wonderful. Ubisofts goal was to let the player have the experience to sneak around in daylight instead of the shadows. Not that I agree with Sam in broad daylight, this was still my favorite game of the series because it still gave you the OPTION to hide in the shadows. This is where Conviction strays away. Judging from what I've seen in the gameplay, all of the face buttons are replaced by new actions. Sam's new sixth sense vision, aggressive action, normal action, and interaction. You know what this means? No more Jumping or Crouching! That means there will be no more climbing elements, resulting in the taking of a gameplay element. This will make the game feel more linear and will make you walk or run everywhere you go. But I could do without the jumping, myself. I COULD. But the one that bothers me is the taking away of the crouching. This means if you see a guard coming a mile away and there is a dark corner which is perfect, you cant just crouch down, hide and wait for him to pass. If you've seen all the videos, you have probably seen Sam crouch under a table at one point. This is completed by pressing a face button, not just crouching under it. And in that same demo video, he pops out and knocks a guy out from behind. Now, when he is behind him, there is no message or sign that pops up that says he could grab him. So either, they got rid of that and the player will have to decide how close he needs to get, or they got rid of grabbing altogether. Now don't get me wrong, I am looking forward to playing Conviction, I just think that Ubisoft is shooting themselves in the foot. In conclusion, I'm not saying that they should re-do all the work and go back the hide in shadows gameplay. I'm saying that they should add the option that you are allowed to hide in shadows. I like the idea of a completely interactive environment and...well the punching is allright. But if they want to completely redefine, which I think is a completely amazing series, then they should release a new game that isn't even called Splinter Cell. They should release a new game, this way they don't have a chance of ruining the series, because we know if they stuck to light and shadow, nobody would be disappointed.

ROLNIK
07-15-2007, 01:38 PM
if the question is good or bad then why the answers are yes and no???

My answer: It's a bad thing and they should make a new game
Voted:
They should make a new game (not ruin Splinter Cell)

Knot3D
07-15-2007, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by jasiek.rolnik:
if the question is good or bad then why the answers are yes and no???

My answer: It's a bad thing and they should make a new game
Voted:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">They should make a new game (not ruin Splinter Cell) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif Same here

Fps_Bruce
07-15-2007, 01:55 PM
sorry, my bad for the yes no good bad thing. Yes is good No is bad. After all that typing, gotta be a couple errors.

MKCC14
07-15-2007, 03:01 PM
I dont know yet, when I try the new gameplay then I could decide. Even from what I seen already I cant really decide.

olendvcook
07-15-2007, 05:17 PM
they havn't taken it out completely

S.a.S-Akbari
07-15-2007, 06:08 PM
Holy text-wall moly , Damn even looking at it makes my head go dizzy.

EskimoBob32
07-15-2007, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by olendvcook:
they havn't taken it out completely
Yes they have.

stavros_27
07-15-2007, 07:54 PM
...because we know if they stuck to light and shadow, nobody would be disappointed.

Do we really know that? Or could sales figures and not bringing in new fans have resulted in Ubi changing the direction of the gameplay?

Of course the hardcore fans would like the shadows for the most part, but the hardcore fans aren't the ones that Ubi is worried about. They want to sell more and make more profit. They can't make more profit by pleasing the same small group of people who they know will support the series.

ShockWave_942
07-15-2007, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by EskimoBob32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by olendvcook:
they havn't taken it out completely
Yes they have. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No they haven't. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

StealthShottz
07-15-2007, 10:38 PM
Originally posted by stavros_27:

Of course the hardcore fans would like the shadows for the most part, but the hardcore fans aren't the ones that Ubi is worried about. They want to sell more and make more profit. They can't make more profit by pleasing the same small group of people who they know will support the series.

This is another thing that doesn't make sense to me. Why the hell do they think walking around in a crowd looks more appeasing than someone coming out of the shadows and slitting a guards throat?

Crowd mechanics WILL NOT attract a new amount of people, it looks boring! Maybe a few, but not the huge boost of customers they are looking for. Absolutely idiotic.

What people will not say: " Wow cool, he is walking in a crowd."

ROLNIK
07-15-2007, 10:42 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Ubi doesn't realize that, but they will as soon as SCC gets worse reviews than DA. hahahahahahahha I'll be lol-ing at ubi aaall day long

Fps_Bruce
07-15-2007, 10:55 PM
yeah but I don't want Sam to get lol'd at. Me being perhaps in the top 50 fans of the series, I feel ashamed at Splinter Cell getting poor reviews because everyone that knows me knows I'm a Splinter Cell fanboy. Then they'll be like "Haha, Halo 3 didn't get bad reviews!"...*******s. BTW Halo sucks both my balls.

I agree with Stealthshotts. Walking in a crowd is not going to appeal to anyone. If I want that, I'll go play hitman, but Sam is an intellegence gathering agent, not an assassin. I'm not going to completely judge it yet because Double Agent had perhaps THE best stories in any video game and they didn't conclude it. Ubisoft better not fail me there. And a couple guys were arguing about taking out the hiding in shadows completely or not. I don't know for sure, but all of the interviews I've seen on big Ubisoft guys they say they have taken it out. I would love for someone to provide solid evidence that they haven't.

simulacra
07-16-2007, 12:34 AM
So crouching underneath a table isn't hiding?
and which "hardcore fans" are ubi ignoring?
The multiplayers?, well, they've only been here since PT.
The ones that want nothing but dark spots in rooms? Seems like those get shafted the most.
Or the ones that always cared for the storylines and characters of splinter cell? Those will lose less in the new franchise

Fps_Bruce
07-16-2007, 12:50 AM
So couldn't we all agree that Ubisoft needs to add a little bit of hiding in the shadows? And no, hiding under a table is not good enough. I want free movement in the darkest of shadows, to stalk my prey, plot an action and then execute it with precision. I think we could all agree that Ubisoft should at least make the game half-and-half. Double agent had a third undercover, third shadow, third daylight. Why can't conviction have half the levels hiding in the shadows, half in the crowd? That would please everyone at least. And I don't really care that much about multiplayer. SvM was good. Till SCDA. That just sucked. Yeah, as long as they have good co-op and some sort of other multiplayer that doesn't resemble a harlequin fetus, I should be satisfied.

aniket_nayak
07-16-2007, 01:01 AM
Lights and shadows were overdone in the previous games. And shadows do not provide enough darkness anyways. I wouldn't mind if they had a few night missions where you can use complete darkness rather than mere shadows to hide yourself. But then again, it shouldn't be overdone. BTW, crowd mechanics constitutes for only about 8/15 missions in the game. Who knows what the other half has. The developers said that shadows wont provide cover, cause they can't. But darkness might.

BurningDeath.
07-16-2007, 02:30 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
And shadows do not provide enough darkness anyways.
What? We are still talking about a video game, you know, you just have to accept it's rules in order to have fun and get into it. In the former SC series, you had to accept that as long as your stealth-meter said so, you were invisible. In SCC, you will have to accept that you will be able to "hide" in a crowd. Games are not intended to be entirely realistic and it's about time you get that.

Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
The developers said that shadows wont provide cover, cause they can't. But darkness might.
No.

Georg_Maximus
07-16-2007, 02:39 AM
Originally posted by Fps_Bruce:
So couldn't we all agree that Ubisoft needs to add a little bit of hiding in the shadows?

I guess the game mechanics are all set and done by now, so even if Ubi did listen to the community, it would still be too late to bring some of the old SC back. SC is dead, and we just have to deal with it. The best they *could* do, was to release a map-editor for the genuine SC games, so that the fan community could design their own levels to share. It wouldn't be an all satisfactory solution, but at least those of us who aren't too happy about running and gunning as Mastah Fisha could continue sneaking.

aniket_nayak
07-16-2007, 02:50 AM
The stealth-meter was easily one of the most idiotic things in the whole Splinter Cell game. Even the new "tension meter" in Conviction is pretty damn idiotic. I hate it when there are meters that tell you whether you are stealthy or not.

How stupid is that, Sam fisher is in a crouching in a shadow. A shadow so damn bright the player doesn't beleave he is hidden, but since the stealth-meter says you are invisible, so you are invisible.

Seriously, I had it with your noobish arguments saying that games shouldn't be realistic. But this is unrealism taken to an extreme. Its a freaking Tom Clancy game and it needs to have some decent amount of realism in it. Hiding in a crowds is more relevant that hiding in shadows.

The whole Splinter Cell series has been hiding in shadows and grabbing spooked up guards. How can guards be so damn blind that they can see through a damn shadow. If a room has 2 flouroscent lights, you shoot out one of the lights and then crouch under it, the other light has almost no effect on you. Seriously, you dont even feel stealthy when things like that happen. It feels more like you are exploiting the games inherent weakness to enjoy this so-called shadow-stealth. Shadow stealth DOESN'T work. Get over it.

But, if they should have darkness stealth, then how about not overusing it. Making it useful only when the source of light is far away.

Georg_Maximus
07-16-2007, 03:01 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
The stealth-meter was easily one of the most idiotic things in the whole Splinter Cell game.

Then why did you play it? Nobody was putting a gun to your head, right?

KutBokito
07-16-2007, 03:05 AM
I think you all get your share in the first seven missions with the NSA. He isn't a fugitive there so he won't be in the crowd.

aniket_nayak
07-16-2007, 03:06 AM
Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:
<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 stealth-meter was easily one of the most idiotic things in the whole Splinter Cell game.

Then why did you play it? Nobody was putting a gun to your head, right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How is that YOUR problem???

Chinese_Bookey
07-16-2007, 03:21 AM
http://boingboing.net/images/gopher-look.gif

LOFL!


Anyway, eurgh! I'm totally impartial and semi-neutral until I have the game in my hands, so... "See Poll Results." \o/

Georg_Maximus
07-16-2007, 03:40 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:
<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 stealth-meter was easily one of the most idiotic things in the whole Splinter Cell game.
Then why did you play it? Nobody was putting a gun to your head, right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
How is that YOUR problem??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I just find it strange that you're so eager to diss the stealth mechanics in a stealth game, yet still play it and call yourself a fan. Let me ask you in a different way: what did you *like* about SC 1-3?

aniket_nayak
07-16-2007, 03:51 AM
Ok let me tell you what I liked and what I disliked about SC

Likes
-Gadgets
-Sneaking behind people
-Interogations/Sam's Dark Humour
-Stunts
-The noise detection by AI was pretty realisitic

Dislikes
-Shadow stealth made the stealth thing way too easy. It would be much better if they did not overuse where slightly dark patches made you completely invisible.
-Excessive use of NVG made the full game black and white
-Lack of variety regarding stealth aspect
-The possibility to quicksave and quickload anytime

EskimoBob32
07-16-2007, 04:29 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
The whole Splinter Cell series has been hiding in shadows and grabbing spooked up guards. How can guards be so damn blind that they can see through a damn shadow. If a room has 2 flouroscent lights, you shoot out one of the lights and then crouch under it, the other light has almost no effect on you. Seriously, you dont even feel stealthy when things like that happen. It feels more like you are exploiting the games inherent weakness to enjoy this so-called shadow-stealth. Shadow stealth DOESN'T work. Get over it.

I think it quite clearly does work, it got Ubisoft a hell of a lot of money and fame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I don't know where you got this idea that Ubi changed the game to make it more realistic. I have not heard anyone mention that. You, among others, are just using the realism argument to try to discredit our opinions. Guess what? Doesn't work.

To the people saying that the first seven missions are NSA missions which will not be crowd-based: Not true. The core experience of the game, they said, was eight missions where Sam is a fugitive. There are fifteen in total. It was also stated there will be some missions at the end where Sam confronts whoever the villain is. So there will be maybe 3, 4, 5 missions in the NSA. But who says they won't be crowd gameplay? I'm willing to bet that some idiot is going to say to Sam in the first mission "You were a successful spy doing it your way, but in this case it will be easier infiltrating during the day and using the crowd for cover. Try it!" and then you will be given a tutorial of sorts as to how to act inconspicuously in a crowd.

aniket_nayak, can I point out that pretty much everything you liked about SC is now also gone? Sure, you didn't like shadow play (which makes me wonder why you didn't choose another game, but oh well) but the new game is likely to contain no gadgets, no stunts that don't involve throwing someone against a wall, no interrogations and probably nothing of the sort of humour Sam displayed in CT. There may be the realistic noise detection. Is this enough for you to steal consider this the SC games you loved? Sure, you might see it as a good game but nothing you liked about SC is there.


So crouching underneath a table isn't hiding?
and which "hardcore fans" are ubi ignoring?
The multiplayers?, well, they've only been here since PT.
The ones that want nothing but dark spots in rooms? Seems like those get shafted the most.
Or the ones that always cared for the storylines and characters of splinter cell? Those will lose less in the new franchise
Multiplayer has only been here since PT? I'd say that's pretty hardcore. Do you realise PT was over 3 years ago? And you say the ones that care for the storyline and characters are the true fans. Dude, this isn't a movie, it's a game. You'd think a game franchise would be a series of games linked by common gameplay and story elements, right? GTA, for example. Each instalment is the same as the last, with new locations and improvements. I don't believe any character is in multiple games. And then we have Sam Fisher, who isn't even really a sympathetic character, and people think that they are true fans of the series for being fans of Sam?

Georg_Maximus
07-16-2007, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Ok let me tell you what I liked and what I disliked about SC

Likes
-Gadgets
-Sneaking behind people
-Interogations/Sam's Dark Humour
-Stunts
-The noise detection by AI was pretty realisitic

Dislikes
-Shadow stealth made the stealth thing way too easy. It would be much better if they did not overuse where slightly dark patches made you completely invisible.
-Excessive use of NVG made the full game black and white
-Lack of variety regarding stealth aspect
-The possibility to quicksave and quickload anytime

What we know as for now is that there'll be no gadgets and no sneaking. No sneaking means no interrogation the traditional way, and I doubt the merit of letting Sam do "stunts" within SCC gameplay or giving noise detection a very prominent place. As for social stealth, we don't know if this makes the game more challenging or realistic. It is, as you yourself has pointed out countless times before, just a different kind of stealth concept. I guess it's easy to "overuse" social stealth as well. You didn't have to use the NVG if that reduced your appreciation of the game, just as you don't have to throw printers and scanners at opponents in SCC. There won't be much stealth variation in SCC either, and the quicksave option was eventually implemented.

So there you have it - you're replacing the "flaws" in vintage SC with new flaws in SCC. So why is SCC better?

marinius
07-16-2007, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:
So there you have it - you're replacing the "flaws" in vintage SC with new flaws in SCC. So why is SCC better?

Of course it's just a matter of replacing one set of flaws, or what aniket would call lack of realism, with another. My guess though, is that you'll get the same answer, Georg, that you've gotten every time from him. He has a solid belief in the supreme "realism" of SCC and I don't think anything's gonna change his mind about that. Same thing goes for me, I'll be longing for classic SC-gameplay lest SCC should surprise me in a positive way.

StealthShottz
07-16-2007, 07:59 AM
Aniket, get real. Throwing people 20 ft across the room is not about realism there buddy. This game is still gonna have its unbelievability. Throwing cardboard boxes and knocking people out with them? Nope, not realistic. Flipping on a hoodie and all of a sudden you are invisible? Nope.

Fps_Bruce
07-16-2007, 07:53 PM
How can you guys call Splinter Cell unrealistic? Have any of you even PLAYED on expert before? You die in 1 -2 hits. If you move you get spotted, even if you're in the darkest of shadows. They hear you so much better. And I would like to hear 1 game of the stealth genre WITHOUT Tom Clancy in the name, that is more realistic. Splinter Cell is pretty damn real to me.
However, I agree with stealthshottz, throwing guys 20 feet is not gonna be realistic. I bet that it is possible to take on 20 guards at once in this game. I say possible. And don't sass the stealth meter, gamers back then weren't used to stealth games. If an uber-realistic game came out where the AI was so advanced, it could hear like a human, see like a human and all that. Gamers wouldn't have been ready for it because the stealth genre barely existed. And BTW, those who complain about shadows being too light, I changed my brightness meter down to 4 in SCCT. It makes the difference between being able to see and believing your hidden.

Fps_Bruce
07-16-2007, 07:57 PM
oh and I just may have found evidence that there will be perhaps hiding in shadow gameplay in this article:

...The single player campaign will span about 15 hour-long missions. The first half will deal with Sam's return to Third Echelon with the rest of the game focusing on the new fugitive-style gameplay...

This could be the hope we need.

psyichic
07-16-2007, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Ok let me tell you what I liked and what I disliked about SC

Likes
-Gadgets
-Sneaking behind people
-Interogations/Sam's Dark Humour
-Stunts
-The noise detection by AI was pretty realisitic

Dislikes
-Shadow stealth made the stealth thing way too easy. It would be much better if they did not overuse where slightly dark patches made you completely invisible.
-Excessive use of NVG made the full game black and white
-Lack of variety regarding stealth aspect
-The possibility to quicksave and quickload anytime

DId you like ONLY play DA? Jeez there wasn't even a quick load and save option in games 1 and 2 it was only added in 3. And in 1 it was extremely difficult to become "invisible". You seem to be bashing "Stealth" gameplay on the basis of DA. Which was arguably one of the easiest games.

MKCC14
07-16-2007, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by psyichic:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Ok let me tell you what I liked and what I disliked about SC

Likes
-Gadgets
-Sneaking behind people
-Interogations/Sam's Dark Humour
-Stunts
-The noise detection by AI was pretty realisitic

Dislikes
-Shadow stealth made the stealth thing way too easy. It would be much better if they did not overuse where slightly dark patches made you completely invisible.
-Excessive use of NVG made the full game black and white
-Lack of variety regarding stealth aspect
-The possibility to quicksave and quickload anytime

DId you like ONLY play DA? Jeez there wasn't even a quick load and save option in games 1 and 2 it was only added in 3. And in 1 it was extremely difficult to become "invisible". You seem to be bashing "Stealth" gameplay on the basis of DA. Which was arguably one of the easiest games. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
All SC games were easy once you got the hang of it. The series did start to get easier and easier after a while. The games now are easier than you think. Even in SC1, I played that through a month or two back and went straight through it without problems...maybe because it was just memory.

stavros_27
07-16-2007, 08:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Ok let me tell you what I liked and what I disliked about SC

Likes
-Gadgets
-Sneaking behind people
-Interogations/Sam's Dark Humour
-Stunts
-The noise detection by AI was pretty realisitic

Dislikes
-Shadow stealth made the stealth thing way too easy. It would be much better if they did not overuse where slightly dark patches made you completely invisible.
-Excessive use of NVG made the full game black and white
-Lack of variety regarding stealth aspect
-The possibility to quicksave and quickload anytime



DId you like ONLY play DA? Jeez there wasn't even a quick load and save option in games 1 and 2 it was only added in 3. And in 1 it was extremely difficult to become "invisible". You seem to be bashing "Stealth" gameplay on the basis of DA. Which was arguably one of the easiest games.

Well..his complaints were about how the shadow stealth made it too easy. Double Agent used the least amount of shadow stealth. Double Agent used the least amount of NVG out of all the games, and actually had more stealth variety. So I doubt that he has only played Double Agent.

StealthShottz
07-16-2007, 09:55 PM
As someone else said before me put it on expert for realism! Don't complain about it being too easy on EASY MODE! DUH! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Tell me how easy it would be in Conviction ( I am guessing ) to walk around in a crowd and act natural. All you have to do is slowly walk, I think this will be really easy even on the hardest mode.

MKCC14
07-16-2007, 10:24 PM
All SC games are easy now even on the hardest level. I played SCDA on elite with no gadgets, bullets, nothing and it was still a breeze.

StealthShottz
07-17-2007, 12:02 AM
I must agree DA was wayy to easy on hard mode, but it was a lot more realistic. In CT and before it the games were a lot harder on the hardest level of difficulty. And plus when you have played the game for years and one for almost a year, then it tends to get a lot easier.

MP in all of the titles, believe it or not, would have to be the most realistic. Not because of graphics or abilities, but because of AI. There was none, it was straight up smarter - than - computers humans.

Georg_Maximus
07-17-2007, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by marinius:
I'll be longing for classic SC-gameplay lest SCC should surprise me in a positive way.

There may perhaps be a couple of twists that the previews haven't revealed, but I'm highly doubting that they'll make room for two completely different gameplay concepts within the same game. So I think we can be pretty sure that we won't see any of those positive surprises http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

EskimoBob32
07-17-2007, 12:24 AM
As one of the moderators has stated, this game is closer to completion than any other SC title at 4 months from release or whatever we are now. I highly doubt they are about to overwhelm us with features they had previously neglected to mention.

CoastalGirl
07-17-2007, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by MKCC14:
All SC games are easy now even on the hardest level. I played SCDA on elite with no gadgets, bullets, nothing and it was still a breeze.
You are a much better player than I...

But seriously, if I was able to beat it on elite, it couldn't be that bad.

insanity76
07-17-2007, 09:39 AM
Originally posted by StealthShottz:
As someone else said before me put it on expert for realism! Don't complain about it being too easy on EASY MODE! DUH! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif



CT took me 2 days to beat on Expert. 3rd play through on Expert I got an overall 100%. It was entirely too easy.

EskimoBob32
07-17-2007, 10:59 PM
You do realise that a game being too easy shouldn't be an argument to completely butcher the gameplay... they could easily make tougher AI or less spots to hide. Anyway, this game is likely to be easy once you get the hang of it as well.

Fps_Bruce
07-19-2007, 10:46 PM
Jeez, so many different subjects in this forum. Now we're arguing on how easy it is. I think I'm an amazing splinter cell player because I can beat CT in a sitting on expert and get 100% on all levels. And don't say "Well...I'm better". I must admit that pandora tomorrow was hard. It was harder than the first game. Lots of timed missions.
If you guys can sass Splinter Cell's for being too easy on expert. I would like for someone to post a game that is hard, from similar gameplay. So don't say Halo on Legendary. And don't name an RTS. Make it something like Rainbow Six or Ghost Recon. And MGS is not harder. Name the game and state why it was so darn hard.

Fps_Bruce
07-19-2007, 10:52 PM
Oh, and I do find Splinter Cell a little easy. I don't EVER pull out a weapon, or kill, or use any gadgets, or whistle. I keep things as they are and punch or grab guys. Although I find it easy I can't think of a harder game (Single Player).

If you 'pros' want a challenge, whip out ol' Chaos Theory, change the brightness to 4 in options, put it on expert and beat the game without using nightvision, weapons, gadgets, or knife. Except you can use a the pistol to disable the laser in Bank at the end.

MKCC14
07-19-2007, 11:18 PM
SC is easy nowadays. When you first bought SC on the Xbox to me it was one of the hardest games for me to play...I never played this L&S gameplay and it required a lot of patience. SCPT was even harder, wow did that help. But by the time we got to SCCT we all mastered this form of stealth and there isnt really much of challenge to the games anymore.

Vth_F_Smith_
07-20-2007, 06:23 AM
Originally posted by Fps_Bruce:
Oh, and I do find Splinter Cell a little easy. I don't EVER pull out a weapon, or kill, or use any gadgets, or whistle. I keep things as they are and punch or grab guys. Although I find it easy I can't think of a harder game (Single Player). Try playing it on the the highest difficulty setting and without using a weapon, a gadget, the knife or any kind of close combat technique. Try to avoid every kind of contact with an NPC and just sneak / walk through the entire maps because then SC is a real challenge! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

aniket_nayak
07-20-2007, 07:07 AM
Originally Posted by Georg_Maximus:

What we know as for now is that there'll be no gadgets and no sneaking.



Wrong. Why do you think sneaking is about staying right in front of a guards sight but thinking you are invisible cause your light meter says so.


Originally Posted by Georg_Maximus:

As for social stealth, we don't know if this makes the game more challenging or realistic.



It will be challenging the first time. If they keep making games with social stealth, then it will become a no challenge as well, just like L&S.

And they aren't overusing social stealth either cause only half the game is the fugitive gameplay.


Originally Posted by Georg_Maximus:

So there you have it - you're replacing the "flaws" in vintage SC with new flaws in SCC. So why is SCC better?



How can you say the game is flawed when there is still so much time left to polish it and finish it. It makes no sense how you base your arguments on what you have seen in an early build.


Originally posted by psyichic:

DId you like ONLY play DA? Jeez there wasn't even a quick load and save option in games 1 and 2 it was only added in 3. And in 1 it was extremely difficult to become "invisible". You seem to be bashing "Stealth" gameplay on the basis of DA. Which was arguably one of the easiest games.


I have the PC version and in there you can quicksave anywhere you want. Check your facts before posting. And the easiest game was Chaos Theory, not Double Agent. Its much harder getting 100% stealth rating in Double Agent. In chaos theory 100% was a walk in the park.


Originally posted by stavros_27:

Well..his complaints were about how the shadow stealth made it too easy. Double Agent used the least amount of shadow stealth. Double Agent used the least amount of NVG out of all the games, and actually had more stealth variety. So I doubt that he has only played Double Agent.

I dunno how your arguments prove that I have played only Double Agent.


Originally posted by StealthShottz:

Tell me how easy it would be in Conviction ( I am guessing ) to walk around in a crowd and act natural. All you have to do is slowly walk, I think this will be really easy even on the hardest mode.

Keep thinking...

Fps_Bruce
07-20-2007, 06:31 PM
Name: Splinter Cell Conviction

Gameplay: Blending in with surrounding npc's and not using the shadows to hide, and not climbing stuff or performing acrobatic moves and not quietly sneaking up to unsuspecting guards.

...Well there's your problem!

SPROGGY
07-20-2007, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by Fps_Bruce:
Name: Splinter Cell Conviction

Gameplay: Blending in with surrounding npc's and not using the shadows to hide, and not climbing stuff or performing acrobatic moves and not quietly sneaking up to unsuspecting guards.

...Well there's your problem!

Why cant you sneak up on unsuspecting guards?

Fps_Bruce
07-20-2007, 10:46 PM
well...perhaps you can a little...not as much though! It was a joke. let it go.

SPROGGY
07-21-2007, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by Fps_Bruce:
let it go.

I didnt know I was hanging on..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Georg_Maximus
07-21-2007, 01:14 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Wrong. Why do you think sneaking is about staying right in front of a guards sight but thinking you are invisible cause your light meter says so.

And that's the only gameplay in vintage SC, right? They made a huge success with a game where the only thing you do is stand right infront of a NPC that doesn't detect you. Nothing more over 4 games. Jeeez, man.



How can you say the game is flawed when there is still so much time left to polish it and finish it. It makes no sense how you base your arguments on what you have seen in an early build.


It's you who claim that previous game mechanics were flawed and unrealistic - I just ask why you think this nu-stealth thing is less flawed and unrealistic.

aniket_nayak
07-21-2007, 01:24 AM
And that's the only gameplay in vintage SC, right? They made a huge success with a game where the only thing you do is stand right infront of a NPC that doesn't detect you. Nothing more over 4 games. Jeeez, man.

Yep thats right, you could shoot out lights and walk in front of guards throughout all the previous SC games and thats it. No fuss.


It's you who claim that previous game mechanics were flawed and unrealistic - I just ask why you think this nu-stealth thing is less flawed and unrealistic. Because hiding in a crowd where people barely recognise you is more sensible than hiding in dark patches.

stavros_27
07-21-2007, 01:34 AM
Originally posted by stavros_27:

Well..his complaints were about how the shadow stealth made it too easy. Double Agent used the least amount of shadow stealth. Double Agent used the least amount of NVG out of all the games, and actually had more stealth variety. So I doubt that he has only played Double Agent.



I dunno how your arguments prove that I have played only Double Agent.

Look at the bolded part. I was defending you bro.

StealthShottz
07-21-2007, 01:36 AM
People still recognize you. It would be on national television to look out for Sam fisher because he is a terrorist in the U.S.! It would be stupid to walk in a crowd where anyone who watches the news would recognize you, than to avoid all of the crowds and everyone altogether in the dark.

aniket_nayak
07-21-2007, 01:46 AM
Originally posted by stavros_27:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stavros_27:

Well..his complaints were about how the shadow stealth made it too easy. Double Agent used the least amount of shadow stealth. Double Agent used the least amount of NVG out of all the games, and actually had more stealth variety. So I doubt that he has only played Double Agent.



I dunno how your arguments prove that I have played only Double Agent.

Look at the bolded part. I was defending you bro. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry buddy, it was late at night that time and I read that part wrong. My bad. Peace...

aniket_nayak
07-21-2007, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by StealthShottz:
People still recognize you. It would be on national television to look out for Sam fisher because he is a terrorist in the U.S.! It would be stupid to walk in a crowd where anyone who watches the news would recognize you, than to avoid all of the crowds and everyone altogether in the dark.

I am not sure how it works yet because the game hasn't been released. But lets say that the crowd doesn't recognise Sam's new look.

ArrowDynamicsX
07-21-2007, 04:09 AM
Seriously, when you're out and about, do you even think about fugitives? Can you picture the face of a fugitive shown on America's Most Wanted right now? Can you picture any of the following people's faces:
1. Jorge Alberto Lopez-Orozco
2. Diego Leon Montoya Sanchez
3. Emigdio Preciado Jr.
4. Victor Manuel Gerena
5. Richard Steve Goldberg
6. James J. Bulger
7. Robert William Fisher
8. Glen Stewart Godwin
9. Alexis Flores
If you can think of the face of any of those people, you deserve a medal. That's 9 of the FBI's current 10 Most Wanted, I think we all can picture Osama, he's the person I left out. Sure, maybe one person might recognize you if they got a good look at you, but you're moving around quite a bit, and I doubt people would even more than glance at you. If you notice, people try to ignore each other in real life, unless someone is dressed or acting bizarre. So far, it seems as though this is more realistic. Whether or not it's more fun remains to be seen.

StealthShottz
07-21-2007, 04:14 AM
I can't, no, of course not. But guards sure as hell can, atleast that is what people here have said. And so, if they can in the game, why wouldn't you just use shadows and sneak by all of them? I think that if you caught a guard's attention and he recognized you as a wanted man, why wouldn't he jump on your back and call for backup? Instead he follows sam into an unknown place where no one can see them.

The AI isn't all that great from what I can see. Sam broke a laptop right in front of a guard, walked past him, and walked off. Meanwhile the guard walks over to the broken laptop and says " What happened, who did this? "

ArrowDynamicsX
07-21-2007, 04:20 AM
Very true. There are things that definitely need fixing, but I can't really think of any game with intelligent AI, not that that's a good excuse. Like I said, my opinion is it's more realistic, but the real dillema is whether or not it's as fun as light and shadow. I don't care either way, I just want a fun game. If social stealth turns out to be the best/a pile of garbage when the game is released, then I'll pick a side. But until then, I'm neutral.

StealthShottz
07-21-2007, 04:27 AM
Well, the AI on AC looks really smart. This is all from speculation, but it was based on facts.

Georg_Maximus
07-21-2007, 05:57 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
I am not sure how it works yet because the game hasn't been released.

That's right buddy - you don't know jack about this game, and yet you're so certain it will pwn previous SC, which we *do* know how worked and which we *do* was a huge success. Fact is, you have no idea how this game will compare to the others at all - none of us do. So why don't you get real about it and admit that it *may* just possibly suck bigtime, and that the gameplay changes *may* just possibly be a step in the wrong direction?

aniket_nayak
07-21-2007, 06:43 AM
Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
I am not sure how it works yet because the game hasn't been released.

That's right buddy - you don't know jack about this game, and yet you're so certain it will pwn previous SC, which we *do* know how worked and which we *do* was a huge success. Fact is, you have no idea how this game will compare to the others at all - none of us do. So why don't you get real about it and admit that it *may* just possibly suck bigtime, and that the gameplay changes *may* just possibly be a step in the wrong direction? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It may suck *** or rock bigtime. But then you are one of those people who can think only of the negative reasons. You seem to know exactly what is going on wrong about this game. Not only you, but all people like you. You haven't played the game and tried out the new system but due to some sort of psychic abilities you know this game will suck. And when the hell did I say this game is going to be the best SC game ever. "SCC looks like a good game" =/= "SCC will own the other games". Get that straight and then post back.

If you people wanted the light and shadow mechanism so bad, why don't you play the previous games. You want a new L&S game because you want the previous Splinter cell games remade with better graphics and different missions. Seriously dude, lights and shadows are the past. If they continue using the same concept it will show any innovation on their side. And innovation is not equal to adding gadgets or new moves or anything like that.

You people shouldn't be whining for SCC to return to its roots. Actually you should be asking Ubisoft to release some sort of Expansion pack to Chaos Theory and play that and allow the series to take the course its taking. Its not like you will be forced to buy Conviction.

And to all those people saying they should add crowd system to L&S...well, in all my life, I'm yet to see a crowd of people roaming around in absolute darkness where they can't see whats moving 2 ft in front of them. So...its not going to happen.

wallz0r
07-21-2007, 07:11 AM
And to all those people saying they should add crowd system to L&S...well, in all my life, I'm yet to see a crowd of people roaming around in absolute darkness where they can't see whats moving 2 ft in front of them. So...its not going to happen.

Do you think before posting? IMO L&S could work combined with the crowd mechanic.You can use crowds to infiltrate a building for example and L&S to sneak without getting caught.And if you are caught you can use H2H combat to escape.

Meh... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

aniket_nayak
07-21-2007, 07:20 AM
Ummm...You make sense. You enter a building like a normal person roam around. There you have to stay hidden amongst the people so that guards do not recognise you. Then you have to enter high security areas where the lightin will be poor as usual and the guards there will be blind. And then every mission in the game should be about entering buildings as a crowd and then stealing information located in some darkness.

wallz0r
07-21-2007, 07:35 AM
Why not? Hell,you use a hoody to make yourself invisible from the same "blind" guards.

aniket_nayak
07-21-2007, 07:46 AM
Does hoody make you invisible...well lets see you say the same thing so boldly when the game comes out.

wallz0r
07-21-2007, 08:33 AM
Well,I'll just have to wait until it's released then.

StealthShottz
07-21-2007, 01:26 PM
It really could be implemented well, if they knew what they were doing. They could easily make it like this:

You infiltrate an FBI base or whatever, you use the shadows ( you could cut a switch out or something ) you could use shadows and sneak through the corridors, complete your objective. Then after you escape the facility, use the crowds outside, to escape the area. Simple, would have been great this way.

If any of you have played Essentials, then you would know there is a shadow stealth mission in the Conviction time period. Although that game was pretty mediocre, it represents how shadow stealth could be used in Conviction. You simply use L&S techniques to reach your objective, and you escape. Simple...

When there are no shadows to use, you use the crowds to gain invisibility. It should be a feature and not the core gameplay.

Fps_Bruce
07-21-2007, 01:53 PM
It would have to be a 2 parter level because the crowd sneaking mechanics and the hand to hand take up all the face buttons. This means, there are no more buttons to crouch or jump. Which are rather essential in splinter cell. So if they did have a 2 part level, it would be a good move and could make it perhaps the best SC.

StealthShottz
07-21-2007, 07:54 PM
That's what I mean, if they add to the game instead of take away or substitute, then it would be awesome.

aniket_nayak
07-22-2007, 01:09 AM
If crowd stealth has to be used only during entry and exit, then there will be hardly any of it in the game. How much time would you be spending in that. Then the whole point of creating a new gameplay mechanic would be a waste. I'd say, if they are putting in any form of shadow stealth, it should be as less as possible. We had enough of shadow stealth, its time for something new.

BTW, even if the game had around 33% of crowd stealth and the rest of shadow stealth, we'd see people like you whining about that part. So you argument of adding crowd stealth just doesn't work.

StealthShottz
07-22-2007, 01:16 AM
I see what you mean. But what if it was 50-50? What if you use shadow stealt to get into and to exit a place? It could be totally random. Say you infiltrate an fbi party or ball, whatever you want to call it. There would be places where there would be a lot of crowds and places without them. In places where there are crowds then obviously there would be lighting, and so shadow stealth would be out of the picture. You cross the room and continue your mission however it plays out. Then when the party is over you have to blend in with the crowd and walk out the front door while everyone else is. This is how I would love to have a crowd feature in. But being that there is only 180/900 mins ( not even 1/4 of the gameplay ) supposedly in L&S stealth gameplay, I don't think it is enough for me, or a lot of others.

Georg_Maximus
07-23-2007, 01:58 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
You haven't played the game and tried out the new system but due to some sort of psychic abilities you know this game will suck.

Please show me where I've claimed that the SCC will suck. I've said that it's unfortunate that they've left the L&S gameplay - that's an opinion about the past. You, on the other hand, say that crowd stealth will be a lot more realistic - that's an opinion about the future. So who's in possession of psychic abilities?


And when the hell did I say this game is going to be the best SC game ever. "SCC looks like a good game" =/= "SCC will own the other games". Get that straight and then post back.

It's hard to interpret otherwise your claim that all you ever did in SC 1-4 was standing infront of NPC that didn't detect you, while SCC is supposed be sooo realistic.


Seriously dude, lights and shadows are the past. If they continue using the same concept it will show any innovation on their side. And innovation is not equal to adding gadgets or new moves or anything like that.


You're basically saying that innovation just for the heck of it is better than keeping with an acclaimed tradition. Well I don't agree. Ubi prove themselves innovative by making AC, so they could easily remain cutting-edge and still produce a SC that contunied the LS-based gameplay, but evolving it by including silhouette, reflection and cast-shadow detection, which would indeed have required a seriosuly upgraded engine.

And BTW: making an AC/MGS/Hitman rip-off is *not* innovation.


And to all those people saying they should add crowd system to L&S...well, in all my life, I'm yet to see a crowd of people roaming around in absolute darkness where they can't see whats moving 2 ft in front of them. So...its not going to happen.

So you haven't been to a night club http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Anyways: I believe people suggest you can have crowd stealth in some locations and LS stealth in other locations. But I guess your psychic vision gives you better insight into this than other people's exhange of ideas.

BurningDeath.
07-23-2007, 05:01 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
If crowd stealth has to be used only during entry and exit, then there will be hardly any of it in the game. How much time would you be spending in that. Then the whole point of creating a new gameplay mechanic would be a waste. I'd say, if they are putting in any form of shadow stealth, it should be as less as possible. We had enough of shadow stealth, its time for something new.

BTW, even if the game had around 33% of crowd stealth and the rest of shadow stealth, we'd see people like you whining about that part. So you argument of adding crowd stealth just doesn't work.
Damn...now you seem to have some serious skills in fortune telling. You know what the game and the forums would be like if certain things happened...sheesh...

aniket_nayak
07-23-2007, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:

Please show me where I've claimed that the SCC will suck. I've said that it's unfortunate that they've left the L&S gameplay - that's an opinion about the past. You, on the other hand, say that crowd stealth will be a lot more realistic - that's an opinion about the future. So who's in possession of psychic abilities?



Numerous times. You are like one of those people who are dead sure this new system is gonna suck. Tell me, why does it have to be the old system. You can always replay the other games if you wanted L&S so bad. You dont even want to try out the new gameplay.



Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:

It's hard to interpret otherwise your claim that all you ever did in SC 1-4 was standing infront of NPC that didn't detect you, while SCC is supposed be sooo realistic.



I am not really sure how realistic this new game is gonna turn out to be. Its all up to the developer. But the concept of hiding in crowds definitely seems to be more believable than being invisibly in shadows and dark patches.



Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:

You're basically saying that innovation just for the heck of it is better than keeping with an acclaimed tradition. Well I don't agree. Ubi prove themselves innovative by making AC, so they could easily remain cutting-edge and still produce a SC that contunied the LS-based gameplay, but evolving it by including silhouette, reflection and cast-shadow detection, which would indeed have required a seriosuly upgraded engine.

And BTW: making an AC/MGS/Hitman rip-off is *not* innovation.



Innovation just for the heck of it? Seriously dude, they already have FOUR games potraying lights and shadows. There is now a NEED for innovation. You might not agree, but most people think otherwise.



Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:

So you haven't been to a night club Anyways: I believe people suggest you can have crowd stealth in some locations and LS stealth in other locations. But I guess your psychic vision gives you better insight into this than other people's exhange of ideas.



I already explained why having crowd stealth as a minor feature wont work. I dont need to repeat myself.



Originally posted by BurningDeath:

Damn...now you seem to have some serious skills in fortune telling. You know what the game and the forums would be like if certain things happened...sheesh...



It comes from experiece. See how you people couldn't accept the changes in Double Agent although you were given your share of L&S missions. Don't try that stupid argument again.

sCM_redruM
07-23-2007, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Hiding in a crowds is more relevant that hiding in shadows.

The whole Splinter Cell series has been hiding in shadows and grabbing spooked up guards. How can guards be so damn blind that they can see through a damn shadow. If a room has 2 flouroscent lights, you shoot out one of the lights and then crouch under it, the other light has almost no effect on you. Seriously, you dont even feel stealthy when things like that happen. It feels more like you are exploiting the games inherent weakness to enjoy this so-called shadow-stealth. Shadow stealth DOESN'T work. Get over it.

But, if they should have darkness stealth, then how about not overusing it. Making it useful only when the source of light is far away.

I completely agree...Nobody wants change to occur, yet we're talking about gameplay from 5 years ago...How many more night missions does Sam need to do in order for you people to get tired??

You guys don't see the underlining message in that...They can achieve the night missions again, that isn't a problem for them, they mastered how to do that...

But taking the game in a new direction with just as much creativity is what needs to be done...I do not want to play "prettier night missions" anymore, because those days are over...

Everyone criticizes sports games for coming out with the same game, every year, with not much added to them...You guys are asking for the same, and expecting everyone to just gawk over the graphics and ignore the repetition factor...

These are the same guys who brought you all that revolutionary gameplay, and you abandon them the second they do something different from what you're expecting...

Just because you don't want change and have no creative juices in your body, doesn't mean everyone in the world is as boring and dull as you...Let the creative people do their thing, just sit back, wait for more videos to come, more details, info about the mutliplayer, then decide...

Stop jumping on the whole, "if it's not light and shadow, it's gonna suck" bandwagon...Because you aren't giving the people at Ubi the benefit of the doubt and you should, because they are very creative people...Let them do their thing...

BurningDeath.
07-23-2007, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Originally posted by BurningDeath:

Damn...now you seem to have some serious skills in fortune telling. You know what the game and the forums would be like if certain things happened...sheesh...



It comes from experiece. See how you people couldn't accept the changes in Double Agent although you were given your share of L&S missions. Don't try that stupid argument again.[/QUOTE]
Well...you know..."we" have made a different experience: We had Ubisoft telling us that they would change things in SCDA and we all would like them and be pleased. And what was it like? A big letdown, after all.


redruM: You obviously didn't understand "our" point. Try again: We are not only asking for new missions, but we expected Ubi to push the L&S idea forward with "Next-Gen technology" and make a brilliant new game based on what we already know and like.
Not completely screw everything in favour of Tekken 8.

osborne10
07-23-2007, 01:09 PM
about a earlier post guards do recognize you.thats why you sneak around them,create diversions,and when when they notice you ,you lead them to a place where no one sees you knock him out.and i agree with every thing aniket_nayak has said so far.about realism an etc...

sCM_redruM
07-23-2007, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by BurningDeath.:
redruM: You obviously didn't understand "our" point. Try again: We are not only asking for new missions, but we expected Ubi to push the L&S idea forward with "Next-Gen technology" and make a brilliant new game based on what we already know and like.
Not completely screw everything in favour of Tekken 8.

And missions like the Shanghai one were just good looking L&S missions, nothing new, nothing innovative...

You can only hide behind some box, watching a guard walk in the same pattern so many times before you get bored...

"Yeah, bring back L&S missions, not like we haven't 40+ of those already.." Anything else little lady??

Just because you have no creativity, doesn't mean other people in world are as boring as you...Making the L&S type of gameplay is last-gen...They didn't have the processing power to do what they are trying to do now...

Everyone and I mean, EVERYONE asked for Sam to walk around in civilian clothing, in a crowded area, ever since the first Splinter Cell dropped...

Now, they are actually doing that, and people are upset?? You people are hopeless, go back to your Sci-Fi FPS and play with the nerdery...

wallz0r
07-23-2007, 03:03 PM
EVERYONE asked for Sam to walk around in civilian clothing, in a crowded area

Really? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by wallz0r:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">EVERYONE asked for Sam to walk around in civilian clothing, in a crowded area

Really? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually...NO

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Numerous times.

Oh, you really cornered me now - I guess you can prove anything with references like that, buddy.


You are like one of those people who are dead sure this new system is gonna suck. Tell me, why does it have to be the old system. You can always replay the other games if you wanted L&S so bad. You dont even want to try out the new gameplay.

No, I don't think the new system will suck - in AC. And since SC is basically a cut n'paste job, I'm sure it won't suck there either. But it sucks that they've changed a widely acclaimed and popular gameplay for something that ruins the entire concept of SC.


I am not really sure how realistic this new game is gonna turn out to be. Its all up to the developer.

As would a LS-based gameplay.


But the concept of hiding in crowds definitely seems to be more believable than being invisibly in shadows and dark patches.

All games tweak the limits of believability for the sake of making it entertaining - that's why they're called "games". A game is about fun, not realism. Some think blasting demons in hell is fun, others think planning your moves in dark shadows is fun. Why do you have a problem with that?


Innovation just for the heck of it? Seriously dude, they already have FOUR games potraying lights and shadows. There is now a NEED for innovation. You might not agree, but most people think otherwise.

Is it a NEED for change just because all your imaginary friends think so? There was prior to the announcement of SCC never ever anyone at all whatsoever who said SC NEEDED to leave the LS gameplay. FOUR games have had successful LS-based gameplay, why not FIVE? We were all fine with LS-based gameplay until Ubi announced this nu-stealth thing, and then guys like you suddently thought LS gameplay was the daftest thing in the world. If it was sooo last season after four games, why not after three, or two, or one? Why the heck did you bother to play through SC 1-4 at all since you obviously wanted some Hitman-thing instead all along? And why spend so much energy on insisting that this unrequested change in gameplay was necessary, when you have a bunch of other games out there based on the same thing, but none whatsoever based on LS?

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:

No, I don't think the new system will suck - in AC. And since SC is basically a cut n'paste job, I'm sure it won't suck there either. But it sucks that they've changed a widely acclaimed and popular gameplay for something that ruins the entire concept of SC.



I hope you can prove your claim that SC is just a mere cut/paste. Can you climb buildings in SC. Can you pickup any object of the environment in AC. Can you run up a wall, swing from bars, jump from buildings in SC. Dude, stop your crappy argument about the games using the same engine.


As would a LS-based gameplay.


LS-based gameplay if realisticly implemented would be very very very restrictive because there is hardly any place in real life where darkness can actually provide any cover. If we had realistic lighting effect then that would mean that hiding behind shadows cast by objects would be useless.


All games tweak the limits of believability for the sake of making it entertaining - that's why they're called "games". A game is about fun, not realism. Some think blasting demons in hell is fun, others think planning your moves in dark shadows is fun. Why do you have a problem with that?

SC games has tweaked this concept to such an extent that you have to fool yourself into believing that you are playing stealthily where as you are actually standing right in front of him. Aaaah! So much stealth in that.


Is it a NEED for change just because all your imaginary friends think so? There was prior to the announcement of SCC never ever anyone at all whatsoever who said SC NEEDED to leave the LS gameplay. FOUR games have had successful LS-based gameplay, why not FIVE? We were all fine with LS-based gameplay until Ubi announced this nu-stealth thing, and then guys like you suddently thought LS gameplay was the daftest thing in the world. If it was sooo last season after four games, why not after three, or two, or one? Why the heck did you bother to play through SC 1-4 at all since you obviously wanted some Hitman-thing instead all along?

You really think people who want change are imaginary. You are just part of a narrow-minded group. The devs didn't have a fifth L&S game becuase they didn't feel a need for it. They don't have to satisfy only YOU and a couple of your friends here.

And we didn't think L&S was the daftest thing ever only when the devs announced the new stealth. I always thought that it was ridiculously unbelievable. A game that has such realistic sound detection has such ******ed visual detection. I find staying out of line-of-sight much more believable and stealthy rather than staying in front of someone in a dark patch.


And why spend so much energy on insisting that this unrequested change in gameplay was necessary, when you have a bunch of other games out there based on the same thing, but none whatsoever based on LS?

There aren't too many games with this concept. This game is not like AC or Hitman. Its just the theories amongst the anti-convictionists which are nothing but bull.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 03:10 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
[QUOTE]
I hope you can prove your claim that SC is just a mere cut/paste. Can you climb buildings in SC. Can you pickup any object of the environment in AC. Can you run up a wall, swing from bars, jump from buildings in SC. Dude, stop your crappy argument about the games using the same engine.

Of course there are differences, but those differences are mere tweaks of the same idea. We've been here before, we don't need to go through it again. Two games with crowd-based stealth gameplay being developed under the same roof at the same time. No budget manager would allow two teams to work independently of eachother only to come up with the same concept.


LS-based gameplay if realisticly implemented would be very very very restrictive because there is hardly any place in real life where darkness can actually provide any cover. If we had realistic lighting effect then that would mean that hiding behind shadows cast by objects would be useless.

And I'm getting deja vu here - please understand that next gen *enhances* the the dev's possibilities. It's not like they're suddently limited by the increased possibilities of realism. If you'd run the SC1 code to fit the next gen system, the guards wouldn't all of a sudden just detect you. The devs do as they please - if they want LS to work on next gen consoles, then it'll work.

SC games has tweaked this concept to such an extent that you have to fool yourself into believing that you are playing stealthily where as you are actually standing right in front of him. Aaaah! So much stealth in that.

They haven't "tweaked" the concept to any extremes. If SCC *had* been LS-based, we wouldn't have had this discussion, because there were *never any need for it* and nobody ever requested it. They could have made 20 installments of SC based on LS, and we would never ever at all hear you guys whine about the need for SC to change, because we would all have been quite satisfied with the concept as it was. And people who indeed got tired of it would simply stop playing it and find other games to play. It's *only* because they decided to make that change that you guys suddently see the need for it. That need was never there in the first place, and we wouldn't have seen it either if they'd just kept with a successful tradition.


You really think people who want change are imaginary.

Yeah, but please prove me wrong by giving a link to anyone who requested such a change prior to SCC. I know that some people believe this change is necessary *now*, but c'mon: you obviously would have said that regardless of what direction that change would take.


You are just part of a narrow-minded group. The devs didn't have a fifth L&S game becuase they didn't feel a need for it.

Oooh, getting psychic again, are we? Do you have some special power that detects people's inner needs? Is that the same power that makes you think Sam's special hostile detection vision-thingy is realistic and not just utterly ridiculous?


And we didn't think L&S was the daftest thing ever only when the devs announced the new stealth. I always thought that it was ridiculously unbelievable.

But just not ridiculous enough to stop you from playing it, right? And still you'd rather have intelligent and realistic stuff like special vision skills, guards that wait to be knocked down and a magic hoodie that makes you invisible?

This game is not like AC or Hitman. Its just the theories amongst the anti-convictionists which are nothing but bull.
And this you know for sure because....?

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 04:50 AM
Of course there are differences, but those differences are mere tweaks of the same idea. We've been here before, we don't need to go through it again. Two games with crowd-based stealth gameplay being developed under the same roof at the same time. No budget manager would allow two teams to work independently of eachother only to come up with the same concept.

AC's crowd stealth is nowhere close to that of SCs. In AC you carry around blades and bows and no one cares a ****. You climb buildings, jump from buildings and stuff and no one is bothered. Bottomline, AC is not a stealth game. Its just got crowd mechanics but not too much stealth in it. SC on the other hand looks more promising.


And I'm getting deja vu here - please understand that next gen *enhances* the the dev's possibilities. It's not like they're suddently limited by the increased possibilities of realism. If you'd run the SC1 code to fit the next gen system, the guards wouldn't all of a sudden just detect you. The devs do as they please - if they want LS to work on next gen consoles, then it'll work.

Dude, if you can't understand my point about realistic lighting, I am not gonna waste my time with you. I couldn't care less if you are incapable to comprehend what I mean.


They haven't "tweaked" the concept to any extremes. If SCC *had* been LS-based, we wouldn't have had this discussion, because there were *never any need for it* and nobody ever requested it. They could have made 20 installments of SC based on LS, and we would never ever at all hear you guys whine about the need for SC to change, because we would all have been quite satisfied with the concept as it was. And people who indeed got tired of it would simply stop playing it and find other games to play. It's *only* because they decided to make that change that you guys suddently see the need for it. That need was never there in the first place, and we wouldn't have seen it either if they'd just kept with a successful tradition.

What a load of bull!!! If they had 20 L&S installments I seriously doubt any of us would still be interested in the series. And yes, they have tweaked the L&S concept to a completely unbelievable extreme. Maybe you suffer from poor vision in the night so you might think its realistic, but its not. No one with a normal vision is blind enough to not see through a mere shadow.


Yeah, but please prove me wrong by giving a link to anyone who requested such a change prior to SCC. I know that some people believe this change is necessary *now*, but c'mon: you obviously would have said that regardless of what direction that change would take.

Go to GS/user reviews, people have complained about DA because gameplay hasn't changed much. Even the GT video review there is a part where the reviewer says it.


Oooh, getting psychic again, are we? Do you have some special power that detects people's inner needs? Is that the same power that makes you think Sam's special hostile detection vision-thingy is realistic and not just utterly ridiculous?

Yes, I know. Because the developers themselves stated that they needed to change things as they had done as much as they could with L&S. Just because you are ignorant, doesn't mean others are psychic.


But just not ridiculous enough to stop you from playing it, right? And still you'd rather have intelligent and realistic stuff like special vision skills, guards that wait to be knocked down and a magic hoodie that makes you invisible?

The Hero vision isn't something too unrealistic. Its like, you can see guards behind walls and stuff, because Sam would have seen a guard previously go there. Although the gamer wouldn't have remembered that, Sam being more experience would. Its not like you would magically see guards everywhere.


And this you know for sure because....?

Oh I am really sure about that, dont worry. There are a lot of BS theories posted by anti-convictionists which I now find really amusing. Keep em coming though, I could always use a good laugh.

simulacra
07-24-2007, 05:16 AM
Last time I checked AC wasn't about stealth, only special crowds (monks dressed in white for instance) will let you blend into them if you're on their good side, in AC they're using crowd dynamics for gameplay, it might be that the crowd helps you by pointing the guards in the wrong direction, or standing in your way if they dislike you.

The gameplay differences are pretty large since it's not about you being very much hidden, but more not interacting with the crowd (or special AI entities in the crowd).
In SC you use crowds to disappear, they work like a mass that obstructs the line of sight, and they work like a diversion but you dont seem to interact with them on any deeper scale.

Of course it's possible that AC and SCC share the same engine, UBI has licensed the UE3 engine but the same basic engine isn't equal to being the same game apart from the artwork, the whole discussion of SCC being a "port" of AC is
not really correct.

And also, the hood doesn't make you invisible, neither is it controllable, sam will turn up the hood if he feels the need, stand face to face with a guard and you WILL be recognized, as seen in the movies hood or no hood...


Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:

And people who indeed got tired of it would simply stop playing it and find other games to play.

Interesting, so it's ok for the ppl who dislike L&S to buzz off, but not ppl who don't?
It might be your view that SC is about nothing more but a figure in black clothes hiding in a dark patch but it's not us pro-scc, neither is it the developers.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 05:29 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
AC's crowd stealth is nowhere close to that of SCs. In AC you carry around blades and bows and no one cares a ****. You climb buildings, jump from buildings and stuff and no one is bothered. Bottomline, AC is not a stealth game. Its just got crowd mechanics but not too much stealth in it. SC on the other hand looks more promising.

And that's some of the tweaks I'm talking about, buddy. It's perhaps more crowd stealth in SC and more action in AC, but concepts are basically the same. Why don't you use some of your special psychic skills to just accept that?

Dude, if you can't understand my point about realistic lighting, I am not gonna waste my time with you. I couldn't care less if you are incapable to comprehend what I mean.

Oh yes, I do understand that you cannot accept that this is a *game*, and the devs make the rules they want. Is it so freaking hard to understand that if standing undetected in the shadows with an NPC 2 ft. away is what makes the gameplay entertaining, then the devs will put it in, regardless of what you think you know about realism?

What a load of bull!!! If they had 20 L&S installments I seriously doubt any of us would still be interested in the series.

Summoning the flying spaghetti monster to tell us the future again, are we? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


And yes, they have tweaked the L&S concept to a completely unbelievable extreme. Maybe you suffer from poor vision in the night so you might think its realistic, but its not. No one with a normal vision is blind enough to not see through a mere shadow.

You're absolutely right - I personally just turn on my special psychic hostile detection hero vision when I'm out at night.

Go to GS/user reviews, people have complained about DA because gameplay hasn't changed much.
With 400+ reviews I'm not going to waste my time searching for those that supports *your* argument. Among those I *have* read, not *one* wanted to throw the LS out the window and replace it with anything in particular, like social stealth. As I've said countless times before: LS-based gameplay still has a lot of developing potential - change doesn't necessarily mean an entirely new concept.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by simulacra:
Interesting, so it's ok for the ppl who dislike L&S to buzz off, but not ppl who don't?
I was only contemplating the remote possibility of people not wanting to play a game they found boring. But then that's just me.

BurningDeath.
07-24-2007, 05:39 AM
Originally posted by sCM_redruM:
Everyone and I mean, EVERYONE asked for Sam to walk around in civilian clothing, in a crowded area, ever since the first Splinter Cell dropped...
bwahahahahahahah...hilarious http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 05:48 AM
And that's some of the tweaks I'm talking about, buddy. It's perhaps more crowd stealth in SC and more action in AC, but concepts are basically the same. Why don't you use some of your special psychic skills to just accept that?

Concepts are same? Are you absolutely crazy? Just because both of them have crowd doesn't mean that they interact the same way with them. You obviously have no idea of what you are talking about but making up BS points for arguments sake.


Oh yes, I do understand that you cannot accept that this is a *game*, and the devs make the rules they want. Is it so freaking hard to understand that if standing undetected in the shadows with an NPC 2 ft. away is what makes the gameplay entertaining, then the devs will put it in, regardless of what you think you know about realism?

Actually, it will be more fun if they took out L&S or made its usage very very limited. Because, L&S stealth is not really stealth. It doesn't work in real life and even in a video game it just looks like you are sneaking around blind guards. Nope, it doesn't feel stealthy. Don't start of with that "its a video game" bull**** again.


Summoning the flying spaghetti monster to tell us the future again, are we?

Like I said, just because you do not know something, doesn't mean others are psychic. You might still like the game after 20 installments of L&S, but then majority of the gamers wont. Ubisoft knows that and thats why they are changing the game. They are not bound to satisfy a small group of people who call themselves "hardcore" fans. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


You're absolutely right - I personally just turn on my special psychic hostile detection hero vision when I'm out at night.

You obviously are too dumb to perceive what the game developers are doing with this soldier vision thingy.


With 400+ reviews I'm not going to waste my time searching for those that supports *your* argument. Among those I *have* read, not *one* wanted to throw the LS out the window and replace it with anything in particular, like social stealth. As I've said countless times before: LS-based gameplay still has a lot of developing potential - change doesn't necessarily mean an entirely new concept.

Thats your problem. I couldn't care less if you aren't convinced. If you dont want to read the reviews, it isn't my problem. But remember this, just because you and some friends of yours are light & shadow fanboys, this wont change the developers from ditching you guys. Go on with your posts, maybe someday you might post something intelligent.

marinius
07-24-2007, 05:59 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Thats your problem. I couldn't care less if you aren't convinced. If you dont want to read the reviews, it isn't my problem. But remember this, just because you and some friends of yours are light & shadow fanboys, this wont change the developers from ditching you guys. Go on with your posts, maybe someday you might post something intelligent.

And maybe we can expect the same from you at some point aniket. You say you don't care about convincing Georg_Maximus, then why this powerful need to repeat yourself over and over again? You claim to be amused by the posts of the "anti-convictionists", yet you have to keep calling Georg_Maximus names. He's dumb, all his opinions are BS etc. This hardly makes for intelligent posting buddy.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 06:16 AM
If I said anything wrong, then I apologize. But seriously, I dont think I said those without a reason. And yes, I do find some posts in this thread funny. But I do not like him calling me a psychic because I know something he probably doesn't.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 06:22 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
You obviously have no idea of what you are talking about

Well I'm not in possession of your psychic skills, O clearsighted one. I'm just having an opininon based on what we've seen so far.

Actually, it will be more fun if they took out L&S or made its usage very very limited.

*If*?? Hello, Earth calling here!


Because, L&S stealth is not really stealth.

I really didn't think it was possible, but you've really topped yourself here. Not only have you endured four games of what seems to have been an utter bore to you, but you've just managed to label what have been widely regarded as the series that defined stealth gaming as "not really stealth". Congrats, mate! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

You might still like the game after 20 installments of L&S, but then majority of the gamers wont.
Talking with the flying spaghetti monster again? Oh, wait - maybe you *are* the flying spaghetti monster incarnated! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

You obviously are too dumb to perceive what the game developers are doing with this soldier vision thingy.

Well, it takes one to know one....

Thats your problem. I couldn't care less if you aren't convinced. If you dont want to read the reviews, it isn't my problem.

So your imaginary friends turned out to be just that: imaginary.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 06:25 AM
Originally posted by marinius:
You claim to be amused by the posts of the "anti-convictionists", yet you have to keep calling Georg_Maximus names.

Yeah, interesting point: he seems to be amused by what he regards as unintelligent. No wonder he's a pro-convictionist http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 06:32 AM
Well I'm not in possession of your psychic skills, O clearsighted one. I'm just having an opininon based on what we've seen so far.

You have an opinion on what you have seen so far, and on what you haven't as well.


*If*?? Hello, Earth calling here!

Like I said, keep posting, maybe someday you will post something intelligent.


I really didn't think it was possible, but you've really topped yourself here. Not only have you endured four games of what seems to have been an utter bore to you, but you've just managed to label what have been widely regarded as the series that defined stealth gaming as "not really stealth". Congrats, mate!

Funny post dude, you really think standing 2 ft in front of someone is stealthy. It was fun, but didn't feel stealthy. And SC did not define stealth. Stealth has been used in games way before SC.


Talking with the flying spaghetti monster again? Oh, wait - maybe you *are* the flying spaghetti monster incarnated! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Thats why I like your posts. Although they make no sense at all, they are somewhat humerous.


So your imaginary friends turned out to be just that: imaginary.

Imaginary to you probably, but like I said earlier, I dont have to enlighten people on something they are not capable of comprehending. Its like teaching a donkey how to speak fluent english.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 06:33 AM
Originally posted by Georg_Maximus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by marinius:
You claim to be amused by the posts of the "anti-convictionists", yet you have to keep calling Georg_Maximus names.

Yeah, interesting point: he seems to be amused by what he regards as unintelligent. No wonder he's a pro-convictionist http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, because intelligence is appreciated and loads of BS which are produced by anti-convictionists are laughed at.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
If I said anything wrong, then I apologize. But seriously, I dont think I said those without a reason. And yes, I do find some posts in this thread funny. But I do not like him calling me a psychic because I know something he probably doesn't.

Well I'm asking you for references for what you claim to be true, which you can never give. And even when you *do* point me towards some source of information and I cannot find anything there that support your argument, you claim that it's my problem. So what options are left, either that you're just making things up, or that you have some supernatural vision. If you did make up eg. that stuff about people requesting social stealth prior to SCC, then just admit it and everything will be fine. But don't expect me to accept that info without questioning it. And if you do have some dev insider that tells you stuff he shouldn't, then why do you argue about stuff you know you cannot support with references. Sorry man, but in that case you're asking for it.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 06:42 AM
Thats where you are wrong dude. You obviously type before you think. I didn't say about people asking for social stealth. I talked about people wanting some sort of change. Some sort of variety. I already gave references to GS. If you were patient enough to read through them, many of them were happy about the daylight missions. While some people were complaining about the gameplay not changing.

And if SC didn't change, I would just rent the game and finish it in a day. I dont really want to spend 60 bucks on a SCCT expansion pack. If you look on GS forums, ign forums and some random forums here and there, you will see that majority (not all) of them are happy with the new direction is taking. But this is the only community with an alarming level of garbage.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 06:54 AM
I hope this proves you are in the minority...

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5271091065/m/9...65/showpollresults/Y (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5271091065/m/9061084165/showpollresults/Y)

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 06:58 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Thats where you are wrong dude. You obviously type before you think. I didn't say about people asking for social stealth.

And I just guessed that you were clearvisioned enough to understand after a number of posts from me that it was leaving the LS-based gameplay I have an issue with, not changes per se, which I have advocated all along. Does cast shadow, reflection and silhouette detection for instance ring any bells?


If you were patient enough to read through them, many of them were happy about the daylight missions. While some people were complaining about the gameplay not changing.

Yeah, people tend to say a lot of conflicting and mutually excluding things. So what we're left with is the question why Ubi decided to leave the LS-based gameplay and completely replace it with social stealth. You think it's a great idea - I do not. We'll just have to see, but I for one am not putting up SCC on my wish-list for Xmas.


But this is the only community with an alarming level of garbage.
This is also the only community dedicated to the SC series, and where hard core fans are most likely to give an opinion about it. It should be possible to have an opinion that what people see doesn't look too good without being called names.

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
I hope this proves you are in the minority...

74 guaranteed buyers - a true blockbuster! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 09:16 AM
And I just guessed that you were clearvisioned enough to understand after a number of posts from me that it was leaving the LS-based gameplay I have an issue with, not changes per se, which I have advocated all along. Does cast shadow, reflection and silhouette detection for instance ring any bells?

I hope by reflection you mean light reflecting of walls and illuminating areas, so that the so called dark shadows wont be dark anymore. Then you wont be able to hide in them and back to the regular whining.


Yeah, people tend to say a lot of conflicting and mutually excluding things. So what we're left with is the question why Ubi decided to leave the LS-based gameplay and completely replace it with social stealth. You think it's a great idea - I do not. We'll just have to see, but I for one am not putting up SCC on my wish-list for Xmas.

So go ahead and do not buy it.


This is also the only community dedicated to the SC series, and where hard core fans are most likely to give an opinion about it. It should be possible to have an opinion that what people see doesn't look too good without being called names.

Your opinions would be much more respected if they were not in every f***ing thread. And about the hardcore fan part, I have 2 words - self-proclaimed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


74 guaranteed buyers - a true blockbuster!

You obviously do not know the law of proportion. Get back to 4th grade.

marinius
07-24-2007, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Your opinions would be much more respected if they were not in every f***ing thread.

And yours aren't? It's strange, you seem to have crafted for yourself this one set of rules that applies to "pro-convictioners" and this entirely different set of rules applying to "anti-convictioners", whereby you're allowed to post in every thread the same tedious opinionating about "realism" and the need for change. You're routinely grading other people's opinions based on how you seem to feel about that particular person and you feel no need at all to back up your own statements with facts. For instance, earlier in this thread you wrote:

"I already explained why having crowd stealth as a minor feature wont work. I dont need to repeat myself."

You explained this and so it should be considered a fact that crowd stealth wouldn't work as a minor feature (whatever that entails) in the game? I think not. This, sir, is nothing but your personal opinion which is just as valid as any other opinion, but you certainly haven't explained anything so that a discussion about it needs to end.

In conclusion, your opinions, and that's all they are, would be more respected if they were in fewer threads, if they could somehow be backed up by something besides conjecture stated as fact and if they could be presented without having to resort to name-calling and ridicule.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 09:56 AM
Yeah, but most thread started by us start off in hope of having some REAL disscussion before the anti-convictionists come and pollute it with their whining. The only reason they use to back up their "opinion" is " http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif they are taking away light and shadow http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif I liked it so much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif"

marinius
07-24-2007, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
Yeah, but most thread started by us start off in hope of having some REAL disscussion before the anti-convictionists come and pollute it with their whining. The only reason they use to back up their "opinion" is " http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif they are taking away light and shadow http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif I liked it so much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif"

Well, your perception of reality differs somewhat from mine. Also, there's a word called "generalisation". You might wanna look it up.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 11:17 AM
One thing for sure, all these thread are pointless but pretty damn humerous. Nothing useful has been discussed but its pretty entertaining.

pietjevlip
07-24-2007, 11:28 AM
Well, it looks like there's a little friction around here (Whoever said "understatement" is for English people only should visit the forums around here more often) so let's get some things cleared out:

In this "war" there are three "factions" trying to get their opinion justified... some even try to use teir 5th freedom for it...

On the one hand (random order, no favouritizing intended) we have the "pro-convictionists" who are telling us how great it is that L&S gameplay have been removed, and that the series definitely needed a new direction. Of course they can give us a lot of arguments why it should or should not.

On the other hand, we have the "anti-convictionists" who keep telling us how bad it is that L&S has been removed, and the series were fine as they were. Of course, they give us a lot of arguments too...

Then we have the third group, being a minority, which thinks we shouldn't decide before it hits te shelves and we have more info... people from both other groups use this argument too, but only one-sided... this group distincts itself because they say it can be two ways...

If one person from either of two first groups speaks his opinion about the game in a thread, the other groups stumble over it, resulting in a chain-reaction.

I personnaly think (So: in my opinion) that we do not yet know enough to judge this game... there are pro's and con's, but we don't know how much pro's we know, neither do we know how much con's we know....

As far as I know, there is no confirmation from devs that the L&S gameplay will be removed completely... and if so, what will replace it? (yeah, the crowds. and what else do they have in store, or is it all? we just don't know) Same goes for SvsM... it might be cool in previous games, and could be made a lot better in this version... but we don't know what they will come up with... porting SvsM to Conviction wouldn't be award-winning because of lack of originality... not because it is/was bad, but because the award was allready taken... If they decide to do something new, it could give us a big surprise... and I like getting surprised by games...

Oh, and, if any of you know something I don't, please update me... and if possible: without calling names to me...

MKCC14
07-24-2007, 11:45 AM
We already know the whole game is not in crowds. The game also takes place indoors with Sam going up against guards, similar to the old games. But is more fast-paced.

Take A Look (http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/902/902601/img_4566388.html)

Georg_Maximus
07-24-2007, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by aniket_nayak:
One thing for sure, all these thread are pointless but pretty damn humerous. Nothing useful has been discussed but its pretty entertaining.

They are indeed made pointless by ...ahem... "certain individuals" who refuse to let proper arguments sink in, but resorts to name calling, insults and wild speculations in the face of opposition. This they may find amusing and entertaining - others find it just pitiful.

aniket_nayak
07-24-2007, 12:11 PM
You are not capable of producing a discussion with a point. But to see utter stupidity in so many posts one after the after, one cannot help but laugh. In fact I find it somewhat pitiful, how someone can come up with absolutely BS arguments and make such bold statements.