1. #31
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,446
    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    Yeah, I loved his relationships with Grim and Lambert, especially. Despite the seriousness of the situations, the lighthearted banter worked well.
    Same, and I hate how the relationship between Grim and Sam turned into in Conviction and Blacklist.

    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    Seems like it hit its peak in CT (what didn't? lol)
    True, a lot of things peaked with CT. But I will go into a controversial opinion and say that my favorite story and favorite soundtrack are the ones from Double Agent


    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    but I'd like to see that again. It was definitely one of the things that set the SCs apart.
    I hope as well, especially that Clint Hocking and Michael Ironside are available for a new game so there's no reason for that not to happen.



    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    That's what I ran into - I just felt like the game didn't want me to play that way. Granted, that happens to me a LOT, because I always try to stealth and very, very few games are actually designed around it.
    Actually it's not a bad thing in Hitman because I want this game to keep its unique gameplay style.
    I liked the two last Sniper Elite games and how they focused a bit more on stealth with large open levels. Sure stealth isn't perfect and AI has some stupid reactions but level design is quite good and offers a good replay value. The same goes for the Styx games which had the first game more focused on the light & shadow system. But maybe you already played these games.


    And I agree with you on your answer to KenTWOu.
    About Double Agent's gameplay, it was definitely a refreshing and a good evolution of the series to me, while staying faithful to the roots and keeping most of the core gameplay elements. But the series should had definitely went back to its traditional tracks after this game and expand on these.
    Share this post

  2. #32
    KenTWOu's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Siberia, Russia
    Posts
    2,275
    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Dear KenTWOu, saying that Blacklist was primary focused on ghost playstyle by implying that it was therefore focused on pure hardcore stealth players is a lie...
    Nope, that doesn't imply that. Stealth purists are less important than stealth players in general the game was focused on. More over, Splinter Cell never was about stealth purists. Even Chaos Theory wasn't. All SC games have objectives where you have to deal with enemies or objects or other stuff. Splinter Cell wasn't about 'leave no traces' ghosting like Thief. Thief was kind of, because it was about stealing. From narrative standpoint it's easier to not deal with people, when all you have to do is steal those little shiny things.

    You're just moving the goalposts, because you have nothing to say regarding the real points of my message.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    And by the way it's not because the final scoreboard gives you extra points for playing ghost that it means the gameplay is focusing on stealth.
    Man, that's not what I was saying. Extra points are not important. It's just impossible to finish each mission and get Panther points only. No matter what you do you'll get ghost points as well, either because the game didn't spawn few enemies (Panthers don't raise alarms) and counted them as ghost not disturbed or had forced ghost sequences not suitable for Panther players. The game betrays panther and assault playstyles quite often.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    I hear your arguments about panther playstyle and I understand them, they apparently changed that panther playstyle too much at a point that even fans of panther playstyle like you were disappointed.
    Where did I say that I was disappointed? I love Blacklist, because I wasn't Panther player first and foremost. But it's still obvious to me that Panther style was messed up.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    But to me the game is definitely focused on panther playstyle because they built the game on Conviction assets and it has those same type of quick takedowns & animations. And also because the devs showed panther playstyle first at the E3 2012 demo to show the continuity with Conviction.
    That's your feelings, we can't argue with that. But they contradict the game actual design, which wasn't focused on Panther playstyle. Oh, did I mention H2H denials? That's another Panther/M&E block and absolutely frustrating one! Jazz got rid of that in his mod as well after I showed him how to do that.

    Anyway there is a huge difference between saying I don't like Blacklist stealth, its stealth wasn't deep and/or hardcore enough. That's understandable. It was a fast paced stealth after all, not a slow paced one like in Chaos Theory. I love both of them, by the way, KO in motion rocks... and saying that the game was focused on Panther players. The latter is just wrong! Absolutely wrong!



    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    Meh... each group of missions had its own focus, definitely not just ghosting. Same basic formula as D-Ops, with the different types suiting different play styles. I'm okay with that.
    But they don't have. They're all playable using ghost playstyle and very fun at that. For example, I spent more time playing Charlie missions, knocking everyone non-lethally. I've spent there like not dozens, but hundreds of hours. It's that fun. But some of them are not for Panthers and Assault players.

    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    I guess I'm just too much of a ghoster - I like stealth to be clean and smooth, but also unforgiving. One of the things I like the most about the genre is the tension. If there are no consequences, it's just not that tense.
    Legion is an open world check point based game, which obviously doesn't have quicksave/quickload feature. It's impossible to make the game as hardcore as Chaos Theory. It just wouldn't work in such an open unpredictable environment.

    Especially after Clint Hocking (he led Legion development) realized Chaos Theory design shortcoming - its stealth balance was made in such a way that it was almost pointless to play the game after multiple detections and alerts. The consequences were so harsh, it was easier to reload a quicksave. I think that's one of the main reasons why Legion is more generous and allows you to recover relatively easy and get back to stealth.

    Anyway, I would argue that Legion has both tension and consequences in spades. It was made around its recruitment system, and IMHO the most fun way to play Legion is choosing the highest difficulty level and permadeath mode, which means game over if you loose all your recruits. I guarantee you each play session would be tense with these settings. The game will have more tension than any Splinter Cell ever had.
    Share this post

  3. #33
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,446
    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Nope, that doesn't imply that. Stealth purists are less important than stealth players in general the game was focused on. More over, Splinter Cell never was about stealth purists. Even Chaos Theory wasn't. All SC games have objectives where you have to deal with enemies or objects or other stuff. Splinter Cell wasn't about 'leave no traces' ghosting like Thief. Thief was kind of, because it was about stealing. From narrative standpoint it's easier to not deal with people, when all you have to do is steal those little shiny things.
    Well now you say it doesn't imply that but in your former message you clearly said "Blacklist devs messed up Panther style to please hardcore stealth players"...
    Anyway there are less stealth hardcore players than stealth players for sure, but that doesn't mean Splinter Cell never was focued on pure hardcore stealth. Because it definitely was and that is why so many stealth players never finished the games or complained about their difficulty.

    Thief and Splinter Cell used to share a same spirit, which is that killing is unprofessional (unless it's a given objective). Because what is tacit in the game is the fact that if enemies don't know you're there and you leave no traces then they will never know that a secret agency is spying on them, because that is how work all intelligence agencies around the world. And that would be an advantage for Echelon 3 in a story standpoint. And by the way we clearly see that the first SC games were taking inspiration from Thief games and Clint Hocking was influenced by these games.
    Sure you can kill in the old SC games but they will punish you roughly for doing so during the mission and/or during the final scoreboard. And yeah Chaos Theory made the formula a bit more permissive but it didn't betray the roots of the series like Conviction and Blacklist did afterwards.

    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    You're just moving the goalposts, because you have nothing to say regarding the real points of my message.
    The real points of your message ? You only talked about panther playstyle between Conviction and Blacklist, and I answered you that I hear your arguments and understand them but at the end I'm still thinking that Blacklist was too focused on panther playstyle. You brought the comparison about panther playstyle between Conviction and Blacklist, not me. And using that argument to claim that panther playstyle has not a huge influence on Blacklist's gameplay is unsuitable because Conviction still bequeathed a lot of gameplay structure and elements to Blacklist.
    So I'm not moving anything, and it's funny you say that because you are actually a professional (and I noticed that so do many other Blacklist lovers that I talked with throughout the years) of always bypassing the arguments of hardcore stealth fans without never answering them directly, because you actually are the ones who have no real arguments to provide. But anyway I'm used to it now.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Man, that's not what I was saying. Extra points are not important. It's just impossible to finish each mission and get Panther points only. No matter what you do you'll get ghost points as well, either because the game didn't spawn few enemies (Panthers don't raise alarms) and counted them as ghost not disturbed or had forced ghost sequences not suitable for Panther players. The game betrays panther and assault playstyles quite often.
    Well if the game counted them as ghost not disturbed, that's only because there a flaw there that devs didn't fix before releasing the game.
    As for forced ghost sequences, they have always been a thing in Splinter Cell games and they were justified by the story. So there are no reason to be mad at that.

    Anyway to me, people asking for a Splinter Cell game to be fully playable on panther playstyle or on action playstyle would be like people asking for a Doom game or a Call of Duty game to be fully playable by only using stealth. To me it's the same way of expectations, it makes no sense.
    Mixing gameplays is not good for all type of games. There are some franchises having their own fundamental pillars and to me the new incoming games must always expand, evolve and built on these pillars without betraying them. And I'm convinced Splinter Cell is one of these franchises and must return to to its original design philosophy if it wants to regain success once again in terms of sales and critics.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Where did I say that I was disappointed? I love Blacklist, because I wasn't Panther player first and foremost. But it's still obvious to me that Panther style was messed up.
    Well you said it wasn't fun to play Blacklist using Panther style and show your frustration about that so I guess there's at least a bit of disappointment there.
    Anyway panther style may have been messed up compared to the one in Conviction according to those who appreciated it back then, but the fact is that it is still here and predominant in Blacklist and at the end it significantly affected the potential of the ghost playstyle to become really enjoyable and close to what it used to be in the older games.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    That's your feelings, we can't argue with that. But they contradict the game actual design, which wasn't focused on Panther playstyle. Oh, did I mention H2H denials? That's another Panther/M&E block and absolutely frustrating one! Jazz got rid of that in his mod as well after I showed him how to do that.

    Anyway there is a huge difference between saying I don't like Blacklist stealth, its stealth wasn't deep and/or hardcore enough. That's understandable. It was a fast paced stealth after all, not a slow paced one like in Chaos Theory. I love both of them, by the way, KO in motion rocks... and saying that the game was focused on Panther players. The latter is just wrong! Absolutely wrong!
    They're not my feelings, they're facts and proofs.
    And the game design also contradicts the hardcore stealth playstyle as it makes it too easy to ghost 98% of the time. And by the way I'm glad to see you finally admitting that you understand fans who say that Blacklist stealth wasn't deep or hardcore enough, it was about time after all these years.

    Anyway I feel like this conversation will go round in circles once again so I think we would agree on the fact that like I said at the conclusion of my previous post, Ubisoft wanted to please too much different types of players at once. Therefore they took elements of each playstyle and tried to make them work together, which at the end gave indeed a good experience but a really bad Splinter Cell game and a quickly forgettable stealth experience.
    Share this post

  4. #34
    KenTWOu's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Siberia, Russia
    Posts
    2,275
    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Well now you say it doesn't imply that but in your former message you clearly said "Blacklist devs messed up Panther style to please hardcore stealth players".
    First of all, that doesn't prove anything. Whether they pleased them or not is irrelevant, they clearly tried, see Perfectionist difficulty.
    Second, I'm a hardcore stealth player, I truly am. They pleased at least me. They pleased tons of stealth fans, who think that Blacklist was great and are still waiting the next Splinter Cell.
    I say it all the time, each time there is a Splinter Cell rumor, people on Russian forums and gaming news sites express their appreciation of Blacklist, calling it a 'back to the roots' game after disappointing Conviction. Last time they dreamed of Splinter Cell on UE5. Thought there is one thing in common, they dislike Ubisoft's focus on open world games, and their using of micro transactions, so they don't believe that the next Splinter Cell will be any good.
    Third, it's really sad that official Splinter Cell forums are still full of people who think otherwise, I mean, you didn't like the last game, why are you spending your time here? It's rather pointless. Spend your time on games you clearly love (e.g. Hitman) at least till Splinter Cell VR release.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Thief and Splinter Cell used to share a same spirit, which is that killing is unprofessional (unless it's a given objective).
    Again this common misconception. Nope, nope, nope.

    Thief doesn't have killing is unprofessional unless it's a given objective spirit, because it has a much stricter approach, it's not about killing at all. It doesn't have killing objectives. You don't even have to kill the antagonist of the first game to complete it. The antagonist of the second game dies in a final cut-scene.

    The first Splinter Cell didn't share the same spirit, because one half of the team tried to make a Thief game, while another one - a MGS killer.
    The 2nd game was a sequel to the first one.
    Only Chaos Theory was kind of close to a Thief, but as Clint Hocking said, it was too late, because Splinter Cell fans already formed their expectations based on the first game, that's why (although dev team was formed mostly from Thief fans and all devs were on the same page) they didn't make a Thief game, they've made the best Splinter Cell possible.
    For example, Seoul mission was clearly not Thief. That's not how you make a Thief mission.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    The real points of your message ? You only talked about panther playstyle between Conviction and Blacklist....
    What did you expect? You've said that Blacklist was focused on Panthers, which isn't true. that's why I talked about Panther playstyle. It's necessary to have a well balanced, a highly polished Panther playstyle to say that the game was focused on that playstyle.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Well if the game counted them as ghost not disturbed, that's only because there a flaw there that devs didn't fix before releasing the game.
    Let's assume that was a bug. The thing is when devs found all the bugs in their game they decide which ones are more important to fix. They set a priority. The fact that they didn't fix those scores proves that Panther style wasn't a priority for them. Panther style was an afterthought.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Anyway to me, people asking for a Splinter Cell game to be fully playable on panther playstyle or on action playstyle would be like people asking for a Doom game or a Call of Duty game to be fully playable by only using stealth. To me it's the same way of expectations, it makes no sense.
    Meanwhile, MGSV has rocket launchers and drive-able tanks! And reflex mode, which forces you to shoot people. And people called it a stealth game! Not a stealth-action game, but a stealth game! Like it was a pure stealth game for stealth purist.
    Typical double standards among stealth fans, a common bias against Ubisoft games.
    Share this post

  5. #35
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,446
    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    First of all, that doesn't prove anything. Whether they pleased them or not is irrelevant, they clearly tried, see Perfectionist difficulty.
    Second, I'm a hardcore stealth player, I truly am. They pleased at least me. They pleased tons of stealth fans, who think that Blacklist was great and are still waiting the next Splinter Cell.
    I say it all the time, each time there is a Splinter Cell rumor, people on Russian forums and gaming news sites express their appreciation of Blacklist, calling it a 'back to the roots' game after disappointing Conviction. Last time they dreamed of Splinter Cell on UE5. Thought there is one thing in common, they dislike Ubisoft's focus on open world games, and their using of micro transactions, so they don't believe that the next Splinter Cell will be any good.
    So now that doesn't prove anything and it's irrelevant, hum ? Funny how you try to hide moments where you contradict yourself. Anyway I'm not surprised by this attitude.
    Perfectionist difficulty is not a proof that they tried. It's exactly like the example of scoreboard giving extra points to ghost players that I used in my previous comment. If they had really tried then almost all the options available in the perfectionist difficult should have also been present in the lowest difficulty (rookie), which means no M&E, not being able to see through walls, rare ammunition and a more reactive AI. But even that wouldn't have been enough.
    There are a lot people who appreciated Blacklist everywhere, they have the right to have their opinion and I respect their tastes. But calling Blacklist a "back to the roots" game is a wrong statement, this game just made references to the old games but never went back to the roots.
    By the way since 2013 I've never met a single Blacklist fan who managed to use solid and valid arguments to convince me that Blacklist can be defined as a true Splinter Cell game or even as a hardcore stealth game, and believe me I've been debating on many english-speaker and french forums, youtube comment sections, press specializing in video games websites, discord discussions,... And there are many other fans who think like me and have almost the same opinions that I have on this series.

    And dreaming of a new Splinter Cell game using Unreal Engine 5 is a common dream for many fans, whatever if they liked Blacklist or not. CoastalGirl also mentioned it here the other day. And we also agree on Ubisoft focusing too much on open worlds and microtransactions, we've been saying that for years.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Third, it's really sad that official Splinter Cell forums are still full of people who think otherwise, I mean, you didn't like the last game, why are you spending your time here? It's rather pointless. Spend your time on games you clearly love (e.g. Hitman) at least till Splinter Cell VR release.
    So what you're saying here is that we should all be happy with how games are, buy them and shut our mouths, never complain and never talk about what we don't like ? Waow, what a respectful and democratic way of thinking you have here.
    That's not how it works, we're not living in care bears world. We're buying a product and we have the right to acclaim it and say why we liked it for sure, but we also have the right to criticize it and tell why we didn't like it. Diversity of opinion is a fundamental and healthy element to have, to keep and cherish and this whatever the subject is, despite all people who are trying to destroy it nowadays in our modern society. So no it's not sad to have people who think otherwise, that's part of life and that's a good thing ! How could we improve ourselves and the products we consume without constructive criticism and opinions from other people ?
    And if there are so much people thinking otherwise on Splinter Cell forums then maybe you should ask yourself why. Wouldn't it be because of how Ubisoft changed this franchise with the two last games and therefore divided the fanbase community, in particular by bringing a new type of players ?

    I'm spending time here because I still have love for this series despite the two last games, because there are here people who have the same love as me for this series. And I can share with them good memories, ideas, expectations and dreams about this series.
    And there are people like you with whom I disagree but understand their point of view. But I'll never tell you to go on another forum or to stop talking because I don't share the same opinion as you. Because I consider that debating and discussing is always a good thing, and even more when there are valid arguments from both parts. And in the case of Splinter Cell it keeps the series alive, it can make ideas move forward, it can allow you to question your opinion or on the contrary perfectionate it.
    Another important point is that it will show Ubisoft (well if someday they decide to come back here and finally read us) that there are still some fans waiting for them to really go back to the roots with this franchise.

    And no need to tell me what I should do, I already spend time on forums of games that I like. You can find me on many forums and among them is hitmanforum. And you know what ? I said how happy I was with the last games there but I also complained about the things I didn't like or what could have been done better or improved.
    And I do the same with all the games I love, because you will never find in me a stupid consumer who applauds eyes closed to everything entertainment companies are selling. If you want to talk with people like that then go on Twitter, there are a ton of them there.
    Me I'll never stop keeping a balance between saying what I liked and what I disliked in a product, and especially with Splinter Cell which is my favorite videogame franchise ever. So don't worry, you'll still continue to read me here


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Again this common misconception. Nope, nope, nope.

    Thief doesn't have killing is unprofessional unless it's a given objective spirit, because it has a much stricter approach, it's not about killing at all. It doesn't have killing objectives. You don't even have to kill the antagonist of the first game to complete it. The antagonist of the second game dies in a final cut-scene.

    The first Splinter Cell didn't share the same spirit, because one half of the team tried to make a Thief game, while another one - a MGS killer.
    The 2nd game was a sequel to the first one.
    Only Chaos Theory was kind of close to a Thief, but as Clint Hocking said, it was too late, because Splinter Cell fans already formed their expectations based on the first game, that's why (although dev team was formed mostly from Thief fans and all devs were on the same page) they didn't make a Thief game, they've made the best Splinter Cell possible.
    For example, Seoul mission was clearly not Thief. That's not how you make a Thief mission.
    Please pick everything that I said and not only one sentence. And let's leave aside the given objectives because what really matters is the amount of freedom given to the player during normal gameplay.
    I used the word "tacit" to underline the fact that "killing is unprofessional" is implied either by the storyline or by the gameplay.
    Both games give freedom to the player to kill (except for some forced ghost sections in Splinter Cell) but if the player do so then the consequences will be important and the game will either become harder or punish the player. This is intended to convince the player that remaining stealthy and doing less kills as possible will help to achieve the mission in a safer way and with a better score.
    And in the case of Splinter Cell "killing is unprofessional" is also implied by both story and context for the reasons I explained in my previous post.

    When did I say that Splinter Cell was built like Thief ? I said they were sharing a same spirit around "killing is unprofessional", that's it.
    I heard that podcast when Clint Hocking talked about how divided the team was back then. But it has nothing to do with what I'm saying here. When I talked about Clint Hocking being influenced by the Thief games when he developed the SC games, yeah it's obvious. Every creative people is consciously or unconsciously influenced by the things he/she have seen and experienced in his/her life. And that's a fact for any creative process, either it's a book, a movie, a game, a music,...
    And that "killing is unprofessional" spirit has a different form in Splinter Cell but it has been influenced by Thief, just like the light & shadow gameplay mechanic for example, which is also coming from Thief.
    And I know how SC missions are built compared to Thief missions, that was not the topic here and I don't need a lesson about this, thanks.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    What did you expect? You've said that Blacklist was focused on Panthers, which isn't true. that's why I talked about Panther playstyle. It's necessary to have a well balanced, a highly polished Panther playstyle to say that the game was focused on that playstyle.
    I was expecting for you to not use the reason that the panther playstyle in Blacklist is less enjoyable than the one in Conviction to justify the fact that therefore Blacklist is not focused on panther playstyle. It's not enough to use this as a whole justification because there are other factors that have to be taken into account and I gave many examples in my previous replies.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Let's assume that was a bug. The thing is when devs found all the bugs in their game they decide which ones are more important to fix. They set a priority. The fact that they didn't fix those scores proves that Panther style wasn't a priority for them. Panther style was an afterthought.
    Maybe nobody complained about it during the playtesting sessions and by the way I don't remember seeing anyone complaining about this right after the release. Or maybe some people did but I missed or forgot that.
    Anyway I don't think it must be a hard "bug" to fix, that must concern a few lines of code and a developer could had probably fixed it in less than an hour, or even half an hour. So that doesn't necessarily prove that panther wasn't a priority for them because they could have easily published a patch to fix this.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Meanwhile, MGSV has rocket launchers and drive-able tanks! And reflex mode, which forces you to shoot people. And people called it a stealth game! Not a stealth-action game, but a stealth game! Like it was a pure stealth game for stealth purist.
    Typical double standards among stealth fans, a common bias against Ubisoft games.
    Once again you're taking one sentence of my previous post and not all my quote.
    MGS has historically never been about hardcore stealth gameplay, it always left room for action gameplay. And even if MGS V has a nice and enjoyable stealth gameplay with a great AI system compared to the previous games, it's far from perfect because the gameplay lacks of precision and control. The cover system is wobbly, the camera isn't practical and sometimes too close to Snake, we don't have a real option to open doors slowly, there is no manual saves (which is a big flaw to me in a stealth game, but that's a debatable point) and we cannot move Snake as precisely and slowly as we were moving Sam in the early SC games. And the biggest problem with stealth in this game is the level design which is quite simplistic, boring and repetitive, especially indoor environments. And to me a good level design is just an essential element to have in a stealth game.
    So yeah stealth is good in that game, way far better than the one in Blacklist but still not enough for me to surpass the one in the first SC games.
    But saying that MGS V is not a stealth-action game when the game allows you to go full guns blazing, use explosives, tanks and other type of loud machinery is just dishonest. The games provides good action gameplay and it also provides good stealth gameplay, period.

    What I also said in my complete previous answer (but you once again avoided it) is this: There are some franchises having their own fundamental pillars and to me the new incoming games must always expand, evolve and built on these pillars without betraying them.
    MGS fans didn't get bothered by the mix of gameplays in MGS V because it has always been in the DNA of the franchise and this does not come in conflict with the main story, the philosophy of the series and neither with Snake's superhuman abilities or the tech he's using.
    However for Splinter Cell it's another thing. To me this franchise must remain focused on stealth and especially on hardcore stealth because that's the original DNA of the series, and I am convinced it is the main and only way for this franchise to express its full potential in order to be the most innovative and the most successful in terms of critics.
    You can disagree with this. And sure you can try to diversify and casualize the gameplay, turn it more towards action in order to appeal to a larger audience. That's what Ubisoft did and we've seen the results, they're not great and they made a lot of original fans unhappy.

    And there are no bias against Ubisoft games, only facts and real arguments in order to prove their flaws. But I've noticed that Blacklist lovers usually like to close their eyes in front of these arguments and hijack the discussion on another point, that has most of the time no direct connection with the main problem talked about. Typical method among Blacklist fanboys.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  6. #36
    Honestly, as long as it doesn't affect my stealth experience, they can add whatever they want at this point. Rocket launcher? Sure. Cannons? Go for it.

    Anyway, this Archer/Sarah thing...who knows what they have in mind for the future. We're getting close to the 20th anniversary, though...wow I feel old.
    Share this post

  7. #37
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,446
    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    Honestly, as long as it doesn't affect my stealth experience, they can add whatever they want at this point. Rocket launcher? Sure. Cannons? Go for it.

    Anyway, this Archer/Sarah thing...who knows what they have in mind for the future. We're getting close to the 20th anniversary, though...wow I feel old.
    Well they also made Sam fighting drones mentally controlled by a villain in the Breakpoint DLC. Maybe they'll put him in Rainbow Six Extraction and make him sneak behind aliens to interrogate them

    I'm honestly scared of what they have in mind for the 20th...
    Anyway we don't only feel old... we are old ! ^^
    Share this post

  8. #38
    KenTWOu's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Siberia, Russia
    Posts
    2,275
    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    But saying that MGS V is not a stealth-action game when the game allows you to...
    I thought it was obvious that I'm saying that MGSV is a stealth-action game, but not a stealth game.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    So now that doesn't prove anything and it's irrelevant, hum ? Funny how you try to hide moments where you contradict yourself.
    I'm not contradicting myself, it's possible to make a game that focuses on stealth players, but not on hardcore stealth players, because it's not hardcore enough. See Styx. I've played the first one. Good game with lots of freedom, with lots of problems as well, and so incredibly unpolished.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    So what you're saying here is that we should all be happy with how games are, buy them and shut our mouths,
    What games? They stopped releasing Splinter Cells a long time ago. I'm pretty sure during all these years you already did enough, you left your own feedback on these forums hundreds of times. So why are you still here? Let's not pretend that's censorship, I'm just asking.
    By the way, I just remembered how ridiculous it was. Blacklist wasn't even released yet, but Bob and Dome and other people already made a thread 'what is wrong with the game'. I mean, they already got your feedback even before the game was released. So what's the point?

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Please pick everything that I said and not only one sentence. And let's leave aside the given objectives because what really matters is the amount of freedom given to the player during normal gameplay.
    We discussed it last time I was here. Three classic Thief games are immersive sims with incredible amount of freedom, because they're immersive sims first and foremost! Splinter Cells are not immersive sims! Chaos Theory was kind of, but not enough to seal the deal. That's the proof that Splinter Cell games don't have the same amount of freedom as Thief games have. And never had. The case is closed.

    I know, I know, I noticed recently that people don't understand what immersive sims truly are, that's why sometimes they're saying that games that have nothing in common with immersive sims are immersive sims. Just recently I've seen a video by one very respectful youtube reviewer who said that Chronicles of Riddick Escape from Butcher Bay is an immersive sim, despite his own analysis proved that it's not, not even close, the opposite of that design philosophy.

    And don't get me started on people who called Cyberpunk 2077 an immersive sim, just because it had similarities with Deus Ex games. Boy, they're wrong. By the way, I did this mistake myself, judging by several reviews I thought that Watch Dogs Legion was immersive like Far Cry 2 was. But then I played it and realized that I was wrong. One of the earliest story missions was enough to realize that. Legion is not an immersive sim.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Both games give freedom to the player to kill (except for some forced ghost sections in Splinter Cell)
    LuckyBide, please, use this guide and check all missions objectives of the first two Thief games. And count how many of them has don't kill anyone or any humans objective. Almost every one! Because Thief games had a much stricter approach than Splinter Cells, because your main tool in those games is blackjack, which is non-lethal. Your main goal is to steal loot and avoid people. Are you really a hardcore fan? Then how come you don't know that?
    Anyway the case is closed, you're wrong. They were not sharing the same "killing is unprofessional" spirit. Thief games are not about killing at all. If you kill someone it's game over.


    Anyway, I noticed that some of you hardcore fans here have some serious delusions regarding the classic Splinter Cells. You're thinking that they're as hardcore as Thief games are, as immersive as Thief games are. They are not and never were. But thinking that way you're raising the bar so high for a Splinter Cell game you set yourself up for disappointment.

    Even Chaos Theory 2.0 led by Clint Hocking won't be able to achieve that bar. Because Splinter Cell wasn't about absolute freedom, wasn't about not killing anyone, wasn't about systems. It had MGS DNA somewhere in there, tons of scripted events and in engine cut scenes from the very beginning. it had too much narrative, endless chatter by Sam, Lambert and Grim. When your game has tons of dialogues, it's impossible to give the same amount of freedom Thief gave. You won't be able to script all those dialogues, to take into account everything player can do, to set all those triggers using level editor.
    Share this post

  9. #39
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,446
    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    I thought it was obvious that I'm saying that MGSV is a stealth-action game, but not a stealth game.
    Maybe I misread but it wasn't clear to me, I thought you were taking part of people who are saying that MGS V is a pure stealth game.
    Anyway at the end we both agree on this subject and my point's still valid.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    I'm not contradicting myself, it's possible to make a game that focuses on stealth players, but not on hardcore stealth players, because it's not hardcore enough. See Styx. I've played the first one. Good game with lots of freedom, with lots of problems as well, and so incredibly unpolished.
    I was talking about Blacklist and only about that game because what you said has contradicted your statement from the other day claiming that "Blacklist devs messed up Panther style to please hardcore stealth players".
    Otherwise everybody knows that not all stealth games are hardcore stealth ones, nobody ever said the contrary. By the way these games are a good entry point for people who are not familiar with infiltration. And I also loved the Styx games, even if the second one is not as good as the first one unfortunately.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    What games? They stopped releasing Splinter Cells a long time ago. I'm pretty sure during all these years you already did enough, you left your own feedback on these forums hundreds of times.
    And you, didn't you too leave your feedback hundreds of times since 2013 ?...
    Now do you see how full of contradictions you are ?

    And why this connection with the fact they didn't release a Splinter Cell game for many years ? You know Bethesda didn't release a The Elder Scrolls game for much longer and people on these forums are still debating on Skyrim, on why they like or not this game, or on why Morrowind is the best of the series, or on many other topics around the games. That's called passion for a series, fans will never stop talking about what they love. Exactly like you're doing here.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    So why are you still here? Let's not pretend that's censorship, I'm just asking.
    I can ask the same question to you: why are you still here ? But ultimately I won't ask it because I'm not here to judge people's habits. And by the way I already answered to your question in details in my previous post, but apparently you like to ignore what people are writing or maybe making sure to ignore them so that it suits you.
    And I didn't pretend the censorship myself, your statement was pointing in that direction and implying a form of censorship. That's how I felt it.
    But I have a more interesting question for you: what's the ultimate goal of your question ?
    I told you I won't leave and I won't stop expressing my opinion, dreams and ideas so you can keep asking your question everyday for the whole decade to come.
    And actually it's funny that you just didn't think about stop answering me. I mean you're talking as if you don't like to read me or as you're bored to see my posts. Therefore why do you keep pushing me into answering you ?


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    By the way, I just remembered how ridiculous it was. Blacklist wasn't even released yet, but Bob and Dome and other people already made a thread 'what is wrong with the game'. I mean, they already got your feedback even before the game was released. So what's the point?
    You know, people analyzing gameplay trailers and making threads about things they like or didn't like is a common thing and it exists for all games. In every forums and youtube gaming channels you'll see people analyzing trailers frame per frame, talking about gameplay mechanics,... way before the game is released.
    And by the way I don't remember if that was the case for them, but haven't Bob and Dome been part of the group of people that has been invited to Toronto to test the game a few months before the release ?


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    We discussed it last time I was here. Three classic Thief games are immersive sims with incredible amount of freedom, because they're immersive sims first and foremost! Splinter Cells are not immersive sims! Chaos Theory was kind of, but not enough to seal the deal. That's the proof that Splinter Cell games don't have the same amount of freedom as Thief games have. And never had. The case is closed.

    I know, I know, I noticed recently that people don't understand what immersive sims truly are, that's why sometimes they're saying that games that have nothing in common with immersive sims are immersive sims. Just recently I've seen a video by one very respectful youtube reviewer who said that Chronicles of Riddick Escape from Butcher Bay is an immersive sim, despite his own analysis proved that it's not, not even close, the opposite of that design philosophy.

    And don't get me started on people who called Cyberpunk 2077 an immersive sim, just because it had similarities with Deus Ex games. Boy, they're wrong. By the way, I did this mistake myself, judging by several reviews I thought that Watch Dogs Legion was immersive like Far Cry 2 was. But then I played it and realized that I was wrong. One of the earliest story missions was enough to realize that. Legion is not an immersive sim.
    I don't get why you are talking about immersive games now. I know this genre and I love it, I know the story of Looking Glass Studios, I've played the Deus Ex games, the Thief games. I've also played VTMB, I've played the games made by Arkane Studios, I'm waiting for System Shock 3 and for the remaster of System Shock. Sadly there are not a lot of games like that.
    And I never said Splinter Cell games are immersive games, stop making this type of wrong mental shortcuts. Saying that two games are sharing some elements in common doesn't mean they're the same type of games.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    LuckyBide, please, use this guide and check all missions objectives of the first two Thief games. And count how many of them has don't kill anyone or any humans objective. Almost every one! Because Thief games had a much stricter approach than Splinter Cells, because your main tool in those games is blackjack, which is non-lethal. Your main goal is to steal loot and avoid people. Are you really a hardcore fan? Then how come you don't know that?
    Anyway the case is closed, you're wrong. They were not sharing the same "killing is unprofessional" spirit. Thief games are not about killing at all. If you kill someone it's game over.
    Let me reopen the case. You are forgetting the fact that it depends on the difficulty level. It's the case in Thief Gold where the game doesn't require to not kill anyone if you play on normal difficulty. So stop being cocky with your boring questions like Are you really a hardcore fan?...
    Anyway. I don't remember if the same system exists for Thief II. It's been a long time I didn't play a Thief game and I need to refresh my memory on these games.
    However the goal of my reasoning was not about that. You are still extrapolating and assuming that I said that SC and Thief are totally similar when I just said that these games share some common things. And the "killing is unprofessional" spirit is one of them. And once again I didn't say that it was the exact same spirit, but that they were sharing it, with each game having its own form of it.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Anyway, I noticed that some of you hardcore fans here have some serious delusions regarding the classic Splinter Cells. You're thinking that they're as hardcore as Thief games are, as immersive as Thief games are. They are not and never were. But thinking that way you're raising the bar so high for a Splinter Cell game you set yourself up for disappointment.
    Once again you are making assumptions by yourself because no one in this thread made a direct comparison between Thief and SC by saying that they are equally hardcore or have the same level of "immersion".
    Most of players who loved the original hardcore SC games also loved the original hardcore Thief games. Both franchises are different and have their own strenghts and own particularities. And players are not idiot, they see that these games are not the same even if they share some ideas.

    And no one ever said that Splinter Cell was or should become a complete immersive game. And no one has been or is raising the bar very high for Splinter Cell. I presume that we are all gamers for at least more than twenty years here so we know games, we know the videogame industry and what it is capable of. Actually I have seen a lot of fans hoping for the series to get inspired by the large open-ended maps of MGS V Ground Zeroes or the new Hitman games. So that's not raising the bar high, and these games are not immersive sim games.
    And by the way Ubisoft disappointed us way before we could have put the bar anywhere.


    Originally Posted by KenTWOu Go to original post
    Even Chaos Theory 2.0 led by Clint Hocking won't be able to achieve that bar. Because Splinter Cell wasn't about absolute freedom, wasn't about not killing anyone, wasn't about systems. It had MGS DNA somewhere in there, tons of scripted events and in engine cut scenes from the very beginning. it had too much narrative, endless chatter by Sam, Lambert and Grim. When your game has tons of dialogues, it's impossible to give the same amount of freedom Thief gave. You won't be able to script all those dialogues, to take into account everything player can do, to set all those triggers using level editor.
    I see you there. You are trying to revive that debate about narrative-driven games and gameplay-driven games, aren't you ? If so then just keep it for yourself, we already had this discussion during many pages months ago here and it ended up going in circles with you avoiding my arguments, as usual...
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  10. #40
    KenTWOu's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Siberia, Russia
    Posts
    2,275
    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    I was talking about Blacklist and only about that game because what you said has contradicted your statement from the other day claiming that "Blacklist devs messed up Panther style to please hardcore stealth players".
    I repeat, there is no contradiction! They messed up Panther playstyle to please hardcore stealth players. Whether they pleased them or not is another story. They certainly pleased stealth players.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    And you, didn't you too leave your feedback hundreds of times since 2013 ?...
    Now do you see how full of contradictions you are ?
    What contradictions? I love Blacklist despite the game has dozens of issues, for example, not toggle-able Active Sprint is one of them (btw I turned it off by mods). What feedback? I come here once a year during E3 or leaks to see that you're (not you specifically, but people who didn't like Blacklist and/or Ubisoft) still here and doing the same thing. And I love Blacklist, so me being here is certainly sounds less ridiculous.

    By the way, I don't care about Ubisoft's focus on open worlds. It's just a reality of the current video game market. You can't make a single player story focused game unless you're Naughty Dog, unless your brand is strong, unless you have a huge budget, have a marketing powerhouse like Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo behind you, i.e. platform holder, who can afford making a prestige game.
    By the way, I forgot Watch Dogs Legion has micro transactions as soon as I started the game. What a game, what an incredible achievement. One of the most innovative games of the last year and certainly the best game Ubi Toronto ever released, ruined almost all open world games for me.
    See, I have valid reasons to be here.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    You know Bethesda didn't release a The Elder Scrolls game for much longer and people on these forums are still debating on Skyrim...
    Because Skyrim is one of the most successful video games and still sells well during all those Steam sales, that's why it's obvious that there will be the next one. Meanwhile Blacklist underperformed. Christ, they have Elder Scrolls Online, and it's probably way more popular than recent Splinter Cells.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    But I have a more interesting question for you: what's the ultimate goal of your question ?
    There is way too much negativity in the world, we're too old, life is short, it's better to spend it on something you love, on games and devs that you love and respect.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    And by the way I don't remember if that was the case for them, but haven't Bob and Dome been part of the group of people that has been invited to Toronto to test the game a few months before the release ?
    AFAIK no. RealSamFisher (aka Andre202) was there, Shadow Fox, Chris Maker... Even if one of them was there, the point was they didn't play the game from start to finish, but created a thread with a valuable feedback, which wasn't that valuable and/or helpful because they didn't play the game yet.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Saying that two games are sharing some elements in common doesn't mean they're the same type of games.
    But they're not sharing those elements you mentioned.

    Thief is about stealing things. To steal like 75% of loot is unprofessional or even 89% of loot is unprofessional. Killing is not a thief's professional activity. Killing is completely forbidden. Levels that don't have don't kill anyone objectives are crypts and cathedrals full of zombies and undeads that already dead.
    Splinter Cells are not like that. Don't kill anyone objectives are rare, they're placed on you by Lambert when you're on American soil, among civilians or allied troops, which is relatively rare.
    Saying that both Thief and Splinter Cell give to the player freedom to kill is factually wrong. Thief games don't give you that.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    Let me reopen the case. You are forgetting the fact that it depends on the difficulty level.
    Irrelevant, they still have that objective on higher difficulty levels, while Splinter Cells don't. Not the same spirit.
    Besides, I thought we're talking about hardcore stealth players, stealth purist and professionalism, they don't care about other difficulty levels.
    If you want to judge devs vision in a stealth game you're talking about the highest difficulty level, when AI is the sharpest, the smartest, there are more enemies, and all Ai routines are turned on.
    When I'm talking about Blacklist stealth, I'm talking about Perfectionist difficulty level.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    However the goal of my reasoning was not about that. You are still extrapolating and assuming that I said that SC and Thief are totally similar when I just said that these games share some common things. And the "killing is unprofessional" spirit is one of them. And once again I didn't say that it was the exact same spirit, but that they were sharing it, with each game having its own form of it.
    I'm not extrapolating things! You've said that Thief gives you freedom to kill, it doesn't. Therefore these games don't share this exact thing. You're actually wrong and still trying to get out of it. No wonder no one could convince you. It's hard to convince someone who's doing things like that.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    I don't get why you are talking about immersive games now.
    You talked about freedom, immersive sim is a good measurement of that. Plus, that's what we discussed last time I was here.

    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    And no one ever said that Splinter Cell was or should become a complete immersive game.
    Check the discussion we had last time, I don't want to point fingers.
    Share this post