Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Saturday Previews

  • Gratuitous Space Battles on Cliffski’s Blog. Upcoming new features detailed.
  • Splinter Cell Conviction on IGN.

View
19 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

19. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 15, 2010, 04:52 Jerykk
 
If you ask me, that's the sum of an action game with a stealth gimmick bolted on. If you can reasonably succeed at option 4, options 1-3 are superfluous and only serve to make the stealth-oriented player take twice as long to complete the same game.

This. Ubisoft isn't trying to evolve the series or even improve it, they just want to appeal to a broader audience. It's the exact same thing they did with R6 and Ghost Recon. Realistic tactical shooters aren't as popular as pseudo-realistic, highly-scripted shooters, after all. From all that has been shown thus far, there really doesn't appear to be any reason to be stealthy in Conviction. Thanks to the cover system, you can easily pop out and headshot every enemy in a room without getting hit once. If anybody gets near, BOOM, one-hit melee kill. Or a shotgun to the face. Ohnoes! Here come reinforcements! Oh wait, I can just dispose of them the same way I disposed of the first group.

Conviction's idea of stealth seems to be "sneak into a room, then start blowing shit up or pulling/throwing guys through windows.

Now that I think about it more, I believe it is possible to have an action-stealth game. Arkham Asylum comes to mind. If you're in a room full of armed enemies, you have to be stealthy because they can mow you down in a second if you're seen. Conversely, if the enemies are unarmed, you can just beat them up in one big fight. In AA's case, stealth and action exist in the same game but are separate. There are parts where stealth is the only viable option and there are parts where action is the only viable option. Unfortunately, action seems to always be viable in Conviction, whereas stealth is far more limited.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 23:57 Narf2029
 
You had to get to those giant ant riders and pay them to travel. That's different.

I suppose that's a valid point, though with mark/recall you could easily avoid that risk, albeit with one extra step. Another reason I liked Oblivion's fast travel is that on my old machine, I would crash if I walked outside a city for more than 20 minutes.

I wouldn't say I was really "scared".. but knowing that you could get "startled" any moment gave you a certain feeling, whatever name you wanna tag on it.

At least in my case, I would feel that tension for maybe the first few surprises. Beyond that, I would realize I was in little danger of harm or death even at a subconscious level. Things jumping out from around the corner would still startle me now and then, but the anxiety and anticipation of that event was gone because my gun was always bigger.

in Splinter Cell Conviction you can: 1. Do stealthy kills; 2. Move silently and unseen; 3. Use stealthy gadgets; 4. Choose the renegade way and Rambo your way to the objective.
If you'd ask me, I'd say that's the sum of a stealth/action game.

If you ask me, that's the sum of an action game with a stealth gimmick bolted on. If you can reasonably succeed at option 4, options 1-3 are superfluous and only serve to make the stealth-oriented player take twice as long to complete the same game. The core aspect of a stealth game is to be specifically unable to take all enemies head on. This is why I feel there is no such thing as a stealth/action game - the end goals and the means through which you achieve them are polar opposites. In an action game, you're supposed to be a match for every bad guy on the level combined, through a combination of better guns, better armor and intelligent use of cover and lame explosive objects or spike racks. In a stealth game, every single enemy should be a deadly threat, which is ok because you are supposed to be better at observing and exploiting the environment to bypass or defeat them. In simpler terms, your goal and means in an action game involve direct action, right in the enemy's face. In a stealth game, that should be the primary thing you are trying to avoid.

they could just aswell complain why in Mass Effect 2 you can't control the Normandy to blow up things ala Descent.

This isn't exactly a fair comparison. At least to my knowledge (I haven't played Mass Effect 2 yet) there are no points in Mass Effect 2 where you do directly control the Normandy. It would not make sense to do that, since it is a third person shooter and not a space sim. If they did add that in, it would probably be as gimmicky and second-rate as the Mako was.

By trying to make a stealth/action hybrid, they are just trying to simplify the game as a whole. The net effect is almost certainly going to be a poorer game in general. By sticking to the stealth roots of the series they can continue to have a unique game. Trying to give it wider appeal is going to invite comparison to other games that do stealth OR action better, and will ultimately make the game forgettable.

This comment was edited on Feb 15, 2010, 00:06.
 
Huh? I'm sorry, I was thinking about cake.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 19:39 Jerykk
 
You can be very scared if you're armed to the teeth and can blow the crap out of anything that attacks. FEAR is a good example for most, although that game left me cold scary-wise. A better example is Aliens vs Predator 2 as a marine.

AvP Marine campaign is probably the only shooter that I'd consider scary. I think of it as the exception that proves the rule. That said, even though you can shoot stuff, you feel vulnerable because you have limited visibility, are badly outnumbered and aliens can eviscerate you if they get up close. This in contrast to games like FEAR, Dead Space, The Suffering, Resident Evil 5, etc, where you can blow the crap out of everything without any real fear of death.

While I suppose that action can be mixed successfully with horror and stealth, that's very rarely the case because the genres are polar opposites and it requires a really perfect balancing of the two to get it right. ME2, for example, is not a good example of an action-RPG because it's 90% action, 10% RPG. Deus Ex had a much better balance between the two genres. I don't consider SS2 to be an action-RPG, I consider it to be survival horror-RPG.

As for Splinter Cell, yeah, the devs can do whatever they want with the series. That doesn't mean I have to like it. True stealth games are pretty rare these days while third-person, cover-based shooters are a dime a dozen. The Splinter Cell series has always appealed to me because of stealth, not because of action, so Conviction doesn't appeal to me at all.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 19:37 Eldaron Imotholin
 
Narf2029 wrote on Feb 14, 2010, 14:48:
I liked the quick travel in Oblivion. It lets you explore all you want, without having to go back over what you just saw to get back to the world and on with the game. Or if you've only got a half hour to play and want to accomplish something meaningful, quick travel let you spend your half hour doing something other than walking to the next step. It's not fun to spend a small chunk of free time traveling to the action, only so you can save and do the action some other time. Further, using fast travel in Oblivion didn't dramatically alter your odds of surviving a battle.

Sorry, it's my own fault not to made clear what I meant: Quick travel is ok, like it was in Morrowind. You had to get to those giant ant riders and pay them to travel. That's different. Because of this system you kept thinking twice before going deeper into the wilderniss and further away from cities. In Oblivion, no matter where you went.. you could instantly teleport to whatever area you liked. It killed a certain immersion for me.

I have to disagree. There's a big difference between being scared and being startled.

Like I said, AvP 2 brought me the uncomfortable tension because of that motiontracker and the impending aliens. I wouldn't say I was really "scared".. but knowing that you could get "startled" any moment gave you a certain feeling, whatever name you wanna tag on it. If you don't wanna call that being scared, then.. honestly: What game (or movie, for that matter) made you feel scared? Because I can't name one.

A true stealth game rewards you for that by killing you. You should never have an easy out when you make a novice mistake. All that does is teach you it's ok to cut corners because you'll always have that easy way out of trouble.

Yeah, so --> This just in: Splinter Cell Conviction is not a "true stealth game". It's a stealth/action game. And although some people here wanna argue on whether that term should exist or not, the fact remains that in Splinter Cell Conviction you can: 1. Do stealthy kills; 2. Move silently and unseen; 3. Use stealthy gadgets; 4. Choose the renegade way and Rambo your way to the objective.
If you'd ask me, I'd say that's the sum of a stealth/action game.

If you want a true stealth game you wait for Thief 4 or a game that's not yet in the making. Splinter Cell: Conviction is not a true stealth game so people should stop complaining about it or they could just aswell complain why in Mass Effect 2 you can't control the Normandy to blow up things ala Descent.
 
Avatar 15836
 
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 15:48 Dmitri_M
 
I miss RvS so much. Darnit.

I loaded it up, the lighting engine looks like it was made in 1973.

Yeah I still play it from time to time online. It's a little dated, though everything still looks good enough to me. The audio and the weapon sounds are still up there with anything out today.
 
Avatar 22350
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 14:48 Narf2029
 
I liked the quick travel in Oblivion. It lets you explore all you want, without having to go back over what you just saw to get back to the world and on with the game. Or if you've only got a half hour to play and want to accomplish something meaningful, quick travel let you spend your half hour doing something other than walking to the next step. It's not fun to spend a small chunk of free time traveling to the action, only so you can save and do the action some other time. Further, using fast travel in Oblivion didn't dramatically alter your odds of surviving a battle.

You can be very scared if you're armed to the teeth and can blow the crap out of anything that attacks.

I have to disagree. There's a big difference between being scared and being startled. One might be nervous waiting for the first encounter to pop out and startle them, but once it's dead, the player knows what to expect and more importantly the heavily-armed player knows he can often easily overcome it. Developers can try to change it around like Doom 3's monster closets, but you learn just as quickly there. It even makes it funny - walk backwards!

ie an enemy you didn't spot did spot you and comes charging you with 4 of his friends.

A true stealth game rewards you for that by killing you. You should never have an easy out when you make a novice mistake. All that does is teach you it's ok to cut corners because you'll always have that easy way out of trouble.
 
Huh? I'm sorry, I was thinking about cake.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 09:50 Eldaron Imotholin
 
Prez wrote on Feb 14, 2010, 05:43:
You know why the aiming from behind cover in RB6 Vegas never bothered me in the least? Because I never used it. It felt too gamey and so I chose to not take advantage of what felt like a cheat. Simple.

For me, and I think for many of us gamers, it's really not that "simple". When I know a game has a certain feature, whether I like it or not I feel like having to use it.. simply because I can.

Do you remember Oblivion's quick-travel option? I think that option (which unlocked the moment you stepped out of those freaking sewers) was an insult to the game itself, it being a game of exploration. Still, I used it too often than I'd wanted to.

Jerykk wrote on Feb 14, 2010, 05:57:
I've never considered Splinter Cell to be "stealth-action." The two genres are polar opposites, much like "action-horror." You can't be stealthy if you're shooting people, beating them up and making stuff explode. Similarly, you can't be scared if you're armed to the teeth and can blow the crap out of anything that attacks.

I agreed with most of what you said through this discussion, but this is just flawed to the core. You can be very scared if you're armed to the teeth and can blow the crap out of anything that attacks. FEAR is a good example for most, although that game left me cold scary-wise. A better example is Aliens vs Predator 2 as a marine. During those first few levels that motiontracker reallllly got my heartbeat raising.

As for Splinter Cell: Conviction, Jerykk, like I said I agreed with most of your points however I'm not pissed off about it all. At first I was, like somewhere in early 2009, but now I look at Conviction from a different angle. Fisher is a pissed off father of a dead daughter and all he really wants to do is kill every piece of shit out there, whether those fucks are linked to his daughter's death or not. The devs obviously wanted to give Conviction exactly that feel.

If you were a fan of Splinter Cell I suggest you get the Splinter Cell: Conviction novel. It's a nice read and it portraits what I've been telling you.

As for the Mark & Execute bullshit, yes.. that really looks retardedly overpowered. But you cannot always perform the executes and since I think you can really still choose to do a stealth-approach, you can save the executes for moments when shit goes fucked, ie an enemy you didn't spot did spot you and comes charging you with 4 of his friends. Pew-pew-pew & escape. Might be fun, fuck it.
 
Avatar 15836
 
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 07:59 MTechnik
 
Dmitri_M wrote on Feb 14, 2010, 06:08:
Hell, R6 Ravenshield even had a "fluid posture" system that allowed for smooth interpolation between crouch\standing\lean positions. Though that feature will never see any advancement now.

I miss RvS so much. Darnit.

I loaded it up, the lighting engine looks like it was made in 1973.
 
Avatar 23463
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 06:55 Prez
 
I've never considered Splinter Cell to be "stealth-action." The two genres are polar opposites, much like "action-horror." You can't be stealthy if you're shooting people, beating them up and making stuff explode. Similarly, you can't be scared if you're armed to the teeth and can blow the crap out of anything that attacks.

As usual, I disagree. Splinter cell falls into whatever genre the developers decide to make it in. That you disagree with the direction they are going is one thing. To say that they are forever bound by the genre tropes of previous games is quite another. I in no way think that they are.

I would argue that games like FEAR and Dead Space are Action Horror. Call me a girly man or whatever, but FEAR creeped me out while I loved the shooting, and there was plenty of it. I'd also argue that Rainbow Six is stealth action. I spent most of my missions in R6 sneaking around, but I've gotten into plenty of thrilling firefights too. I'm not really interested in arguing the particulars of games and their genres; that has nothing to do with my original point.

You always have been WAAAAY to hung up on pigeon-holing games into tight genre constraints. Which I find ironic, given that 2 of your favorite games, Deus Ex and System Shock, pissed all over such constraints and were all the more awesome for it.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 06:08 Dmitri_M
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Feb 14, 2010, 03:19:
The problem with that "no real cover" system was that levels usually consist of open fields or long hallways, half-life 2 / doom 3 anyone? Where every enemy basically is a set damage value you can not avoid unless you get really lucky with the first shot.

Poor choice of games to illustrate your point.

Doom 3? Rainbow Six franchise gained a cover system when it moved to console as the primary development platform. The original PC franchise never had a cover system, the levels and maps were incredibly detailed and offered many points where a player could naturally take cover without the use of special needs aids like one button auto cover.

Hell, R6 Ravenshield even had a "fluid posture" system that allowed for smooth interpolation between crouch\standing\lean positions. Though that feature will never see any advancement now.
 
Avatar 22350
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 05:57 Jerykk
 
There's a fine balance between keeping a stealth-action game from being frustrating and making it too "gamey", but I am a "benefit of the doubt" kind of fellow.

I've never considered Splinter Cell to be "stealth-action." The two genres are polar opposites, much like "action-horror." You can't be stealthy if you're shooting people, beating them up and making stuff explode. Similarly, you can't be scared if you're armed to the teeth and can blow the crap out of anything that attacks.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 05:43 Prez
 
Still optimistic myself. There's a fine balance between keeping a stealth-action game from being frustrating and making it too "gamey", but I am a "benefit of the doubt" kind of fellow.

You know why the aiming from behind cover in RB6 Vegas never bothered me in the least? Because I never used it. It felt too gamey and so I chose to not take advantage of what felt like a cheat. Simple.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 04:06 Jerykk
 
And worse, the games without cover usually don't have lean either, which means to "jump out of cover" you have to physically move out of cover, which makes snipers and campers really really happy (Cod 6 anyone? ;p).

I've never played a shooter that doesn't have cover. I don't think that's even possible. If a game has perpendicular hallways or objects, it has cover. Some games have less cover than others, sure. Those games tend to be run & gun shooters where it's more about accuracy and mobility (like Quake) than hiding and waiting for enemies to expose themselves.

It is not unrealistic to go behind cover and headshot everyone that comes close.

If you're going to argue realism, you're opening up a whole can of worms. If Conviction was trying to be realistic, you'd bleed to death after getting shot once and you wouldn't be able to see through walls. You wouldn't be able to move so fast either, nor would enemies be so stupid and oblivious.

If you do that more than once someone is going to see the dead bodies and sound the alarm anyhow.

The problem is that the alarm doesn't mean anything. More enemies flood into the room? Just hide behind cover, pop out, headshot, take cover again.

If this game wasn't called Splinter Cell, I wouldn't be so offended. Unfortunately, it is. Chaos Theory was a big step forward in stealth games. The AI was really clever. If you shot out a light, broke a lock, hacked a keypad, etc, they would notice and investigate. You actually had a reason to be stealthy and leave no evidence of your presence behind. As far as I can tell, this simply isn't an option in Conviction and you'll end up having to shoot your way through the game.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 03:19 eRe4s3r
 
The problem with that "no real cover" system was that levels usually consist of open fields or long hallways, half-life 2 / doom 3 anyone? Where every enemy basically is a set damage value you can not avoid unless you get really lucky with the first shot.

And worse, the games without cover usually don't have lean either, which means to "jump out of cover" you have to physically move out of cover, which makes snipers and campers really really happy (Cod 6 anyone? ;p).

It is not unrealistic to go behind cover and headshot everyone that comes close. If you do that more than once someone is going to see the dead bodies and sound the alarm anyhow. As for the take-down thingy, don't like it, don't use it ,p
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 03:09 Jerykk
 
I think R6: Vegas has the worst, most unbalanced cover system I've ever seen. Aside from letting players look around cover in an otherwise first-person game, you could also AIM while behind cover, letting you line up headshots without having to leave cover at all.

As Narf mentioned, cover systems are just inherently unbalanced. The natural balance of cover vs awareness is completely destroyed. When you take cover, you should be protected at the expense of knowing what your enemies are doing. Third-person cover systems let you do both. In addition, if a game is designed around a cover system, the level design becomes all too predictable. If you enter an area with lots of waist-high cover, you know enemies are inevitably going to appear on the other side of room. Combat boils down to waiting behind cover until an enemy exposes his head, at which point you pop out, pull off a headshot, then hide behind cover again. Gears of War was slightly more interesting in this regard, as you typically couldn't kill enemies with a single headshot and they would move around a lot. Still, the level design was horribly predictable.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 01:43 Narf2029
 
Only significant experience I have with cover mechanics is from Mass Effect and GTA IV. Man, GTA IV's cover was a joke. Once I discovered I was only marginally less accurate while firing "blind," I never did anything but. Just find a corner or a barricade, crouch, and headshot everyone in the area without ever exposing yourself to any risk. At least Mass Effect made you stand up or lean out to fire. I think if cover mechanics get any more overpowering, the game will be released in theaters.

I like the cover system from the good old days - if you want to avoid being shot, all you have to do is get behind something solid! And this system is so adaptive and flexible in that any solid object will do, rather than having to use certain places because they are scripted as valid locations for the cover system. And what about partial cover? You can find that almost anywhere too, unless you're playing a game with a cover system because then if you're not in a scripted safe place, the partial cover will often have no effect at all.
 
Huh? I'm sorry, I was thinking about cake.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Splinter Cell Conviction Feb 14, 2010, 01:26 Jerykk
 
What a shitty preview, especially from a "seasoned Splinter Cell player." I wonder how much Ubi paid him to be so complimentary?

This doesn't make Splinter Cell too easy. There are usually more enemies than you can tag and taking out two dudes while another guy is standing next to them is an easy way to tip off your position.

Hmmm...

From cover, you're nearly invincible. Headshots come easily, you won't get hit if you stay low and you can quickly grab and take down any enemy that gets too close.

So let me get this straight: If you take cover, you are basically invincible and can headshot enemies with ease (like in most cover-based shooters). If they get up close, you can one-hit kill them. In addition to that, you have the autowin Mark & Execute bullshit that makes it even easier. Why even bother being stealthy? Hell, Sam has a shotgun in this game.

Remember, the idea is that Sam Fisher is a trained killer, one of the world's best and should be able to take down enemies with ease.

Worst logic ever. So, if I'm playing as a member of an elite task force in a shooter, I shouldn't have to aim, right? I mean, my character should be able to take down enemies with ease!

Splinter Cell = dead and raped.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Gratuitous Space Battles on Cliffski’s Blog. Upcoming new features detailed Feb 13, 2010, 15:06 Narf2029
 
Doubt that will ever happen, given that the game is about strategic command and not tactical.  
Huh? I'm sorry, I was thinking about cake.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Gratuitous Space Battles on Cliffski’s Blog. Upcoming new features detailed Feb 13, 2010, 14:13 BobBob
 
Add the ability to directly control your ships.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo