Sepharo wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 08:39:

StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 04:04:
The common sense difference there is Coke is always the same fucking thing, every time you have it.

Except when it isn't, and everyone (rightly) throws a shit fit.

Kind of the point of that analogy I assume and you walked right into it.

StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 04:04:
The common sense difference there is Coke is always the same fucking thing, every time you have it.

Jerykk wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 03:59:
As for my analogy, I'm not really sure what you find wacky about it. Makes perfect sense, really. Expectations are determined by labels. That's why labels are important. We rely on labels to make life easier. If I recognize a label, I expect it to be accurate. If I buy a Coke, it should taste like a Coke, not a Pepsi or Dr. Pepper. Likewise, if I buy a Splinter Cell game, it should play like a stealth game, as established by all the other games that carry that label.

You may not care about labels and that's fine but you should at least understand why others consider them important.

I will say if you ignored all previews and videos and bought the game anyway expecting Chaos Theory again then yeah, you might be pissy, but that was your fault for buying something with no research wasn't it? I mean you already know this game is not really stealth from watching the early media... that didn't take much effort on your part to figure out.

Jerykk wrote on Jun 6, 2012, 04:59:
I feel it's fairly important to hold publishers and/or developers accountable for their marketing decisions. Labels are important, as they determine expectations and are thus used to judge a product's success in meeting those expectations. If I order a steak at a restaurant, I expect to get a steak, not a salad. The salad might be pretty tasty but it's not what I ordered. I don't care if the restaurant wanted to try something different or appeal to a larger demographic. I ordered a steak. Same thing applies to videogames. If I buy a Splinter Cell, I'm expecting a stealth game because that's what all the previous games have been. That's why I enjoyed the previous games and that's why the brand has any meaning to me. If you give me a shooter instead, I'm not going to be happy because that's not what I wanted, even if it ends up being a perfectly competent shooter.

StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 13:45:

Jerykk wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 12:36:
If Conviction wasn't an SC game, I probably would have been more forgiving. However, if you're going to attach yourself to a certain brand, you need to meet the expectations that brand has established. Conviction failed to do this.

That's a common sentiment, but I've just never really cared what was written on the box when it comes to enjoying gameplay or not. I can be disappointed it's not another Chaos Theory, but once I start playing the game all that matters is how good that game is on its own.

Jerykk wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 12:36:
If Conviction wasn't an SC game, I probably would have been more forgiving. However, if you're going to attach yourself to a certain brand, you need to meet the expectations that brand has established. Conviction failed to do this.

StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 06:13:

Jerykk wrote on Jun 4, 2012, 22:37:
Splinter Cell: Conviction was awful.

I wouldn't say awful at all. A step down from Chaos Theory certainly, and barely a stealth game, but as a "hunter" action-stealth experience I quite enjoyed it.

PC port was blah though. Still, better than playing on console.

I tried one of the SC games a while back (can't remember which one now), but just couldn't make sense of the stealth mechanics really. It seemed almost random whether you would get spotted or not and was just a lot of trial-and-error stuff that got boring quickly.

StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 06:13:

Jerykk wrote on Jun 4, 2012, 22:37:
Splinter Cell: Conviction was awful.

I wouldn't say awful at all. A step down from Chaos Theory certainly, and barely a stealth game, but as a "hunter" action-stealth experience I quite enjoyed it.

PC port was blah though. Still, better than playing on console.

Jerykk wrote on Jun 4, 2012, 22:37:
Splinter Cell: Conviction was awful.

Clancy wrote on Jun 4, 2012, 18:35:
This is Ubi, so that means, you must always be online to play, and hand over your first newborn.

Talutha wrote on Jun 4, 2012, 23:01:
Found it, you can hear the representative say, "Now that Sam is the leader of 4th Echelon" or something along those lines. It is at the 51-52 minute mark.

http://twitch.tv/gamespot/b/320358181

2. I thought Fisher was on the run & 3rd Echelon was after him? I could be wrong its been awhile since I played the last one.

I'm a big fan of this IP I've played all the SC games & have enjoyed every one of them. They seem to get better each time. But I have some questions.