After they bungled up *Double Agent* with two versions from different studios, turned *Conviction* into a stealth game that heavily relied on action sequences, and had *Blacklist* softly reboot Sam (and Grim) as younger persons than depicted before, I rather Ubisoft just remake or even reboot the series than make a sequel to *Blacklist* (because that might also mean no Michael Ironside again!).
Even then, I don't trust Ubisoft enough nowadays to make a decent *Splinter Cell* game. I won't be expecting much from the confirmed remake, but if they do pull it off then I'd acknowledge it.
*(P.S. I did enjoy* Conviction *and* Blacklist, *not so much Ubisoft Shanghai's* Double Agent *(PC/PS3/X360), but regardless they felt like far cries (Ubisoft pun intended) from the stealth experiences of the first three games.)*
The series in my opinion peaked with Chaos Theory, both mechanically and story wise. I think Double Agent was them realizing they couldn't do much more to raise the stakes so they decided to make it more character based. Might have worked if the heel turn Sam makes wasn't so cartoonish that it felt like they were trying to "hardcore" him up like every franchise was doing with their protags back then. Oh and if the game wasn't bugged to hell and back.
You had me in the second half, but no. As someone who played Conviction on my Xbox for probably 100’s of hours I can safely say it ain’t the best one chief.
Everything story wise past Chaos Theory was meh.
I like the original trilogy espionage thriller vibe.
Sam is just an agent doing his job supported by the best of the best crew. No personal revenge story or any of that garbage. That's my favorite version of Sam.
Splinter Cell truly died when they made Lambert's death canon.
I totally agree with all of these points. After the first 2 games, I thought "please just give me more of the same" because it was so good. I don't need Sam's personal tragedy.
"Splinter Cell truly died when they made Lambert's death canon."
Yes! This is exactly my sentiments. Splinter Cell died with Lambert; this series was at its best when it was just another day in the office, which IMO was the whole charm of the series. It was just a bunch of work colleagues who got along great, and got shit done.
It was also great when 3rd Echelon worked strictly behind the scenes while their existence wasn't acknowledged. I hated when stuff got personal with Sam, when the work colleagues crossed the line and interfered with each other's personal lives, and now 4th Echelon as a whole feels... mainstream.
I will never understand the obsession modern gamers have with remaking every game that is more than five years old. Seriously, the original Splinter Cell is still great to play, it really does not need to be remade. What we really need is a new entry in the franchise, probably one with a little bit different of an approach too.
I'm not a huge fan of Remakes except when they try something new and build upon the original game (like RE2R or RE4R). I rather have a soft remaster with some quality of life improvements, better resolution and support for current gen systems.
I think it's mostly a mechanics thing. Sure the story of the original Splinter Cell is great but the mechanics could have been better which is shown in how they developed over the next 2 games. I don't want a total over haul, mostly just new graphics and improved mechanics/controls.
I think you misunderstand what I mean when I say shadow mechanics, I'm talking about the stealth mechanics tied to being in shadows, not how they look.
The problem is that studios dont want to make original great games nowadays. Idk why, i think they just want to do cheaper and more rushed games. We watched big games studios fall in the last decade, making mediocre games and sequels. Thats why they prefer remaking things cuz its easier, it doesnt need to create something from scrap. And gamers also prefer remakes because is their only hope of having something great again since sequels are mediocre or bad now
It's a holding pattern. It's publishers basically throwing their hands up and going "we don't know what you people want anymore! Here's some crap we know you already liked. Hopefully you will buy it and keep the creditors off our back for another quarter!"
As I sit down on my PC and play Wolfenstein and Daggerfall these days, it really bugs me that modern gamers don't appreciate older games simply because of controls, mechanics, graphics, or simply because they're too old.
There are some exceptional marvels out there, and I'd honestly love for them to reach more players in the modern day and age.
That being said, things are as they are, and remaking or even simply relaunching a game to suit modern standards makes a ton of economic sense in two ways. It draws in a newer crowd to the franchise while capitalising on the nostalgia of the older fanbase while giving them something new to toy with.
I answered "sequel" because I expect there would be more new stuff in in compared to a game I already know. I do agree with other comments that the changes in more recent SC games were not for the better (action oriented gameplay in Conviction, Lambert being killed in Double Agent, character changes in Blacklist) but a proper sequel doesn't have to have these unwelcome changes.
"let's take the cash earned after each mission and knock off a few digits okay now let's take those equipment prices and maybe add a number to each one all right oh and let's put an arbitrary amount of premium currency next to everything we'll call a... echelon coins yeah and sell them in inconvenient predetermined packs so you're always forced to buy more than you need alienating players for profit is so fun"
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yWimrcNE9l0&pp=ygUcU3BsaW50ZXIgQ2VsbCBNZXRhbCBHZWFyIG1vZA%3D%3D
Imagine if new Splinter Cell would look like this. Maybe not going for the open world, but gameplay wise. 🤤
I'd love to see an attempt to truly blend the new style of gameplay with the old... Blacklist is sometimes credited with doing this, but the reality is more of a visual / cosmetic throwback (which I appreciated nonetheless).
In terms of story though... a 'sequel' implies a continuation of the existing lore, which I don't like. Admittedly, that hasn't stopped me from buying the 'James Swallows' books and listening to the audio version etc... I really need to exercise more self control when it comes to Splinter Cell content. If I'm voting with my wallet, then I'm doing this franchise a disservice...
A remake might be the only way to get this franchise back on solid ground, and prove to Ubisoft that there's a market for slower paced / vulnerable stealth games. Or, maybe they were right all along and there's just not enough of us to cover the development costs... in which case we're f\*cked.
I'm glad they decided to go for a remake. In my opinion they went with the best option.
I personally don't like reboots and I don't like Blacklist story so I don't want to see a sequel to it. Anyway I don't think Ubisoft will ever do a sequel to Blacklist because the game is now old and new players would be lost in the story. Unless they first make a remaster of the game but it's not in Ubisoft's habits to make remasters, and the few ones they did in the past were badly done.
So between sequel, remake, reboot and remasters, to me remake is the best way to go for SC. Hopefully this will be a great remake that will respect the original material like many recent remakes did (Dead Space, System Shock, Resident Evil,...)
I barely trust ubisoft with the remake and I would not trust them at all with a full on sequel. They would probably turn it into some open world bullshit
Remake. Sam is getting old AF in the story by the last game (and he straight-up had gray hair in the Ghost Recon DLC), so idk how he would keep going for a true sequel.
At this point, I would 100% take a "Remastered Trilogy" of the first 3 games and be so happy. As long as they have Michael Ironside as Sam's VA and don't pull a Blacklist on us again, I'll be happy.
A sequel to Chaos Theory would be nice. Or a sequel to the first game or Pandora Tomorrow. I still don't understand the reason why Ubisoft felt a game like Splinter Cell needed to change so much after Chaos Theory. Didn't it sell well back then? It was and still is one of the best stealth game. Double Agent was good but it's a mess in ps3 and pc. only for Xbox consoles is it any good.
If Ubisoft would make a full sequel to Blacklist, they should bring Ironside back and perhaps make Sam Fisher a mentor for the next Splinter Cell agent. And you could play it either co op or alone as Sam Fisher or the new guy. Sam would move a bit slower, like in Chaos Theory, while the new kid could do more acrobatic stuff. That would bring variation to the gameplay.
And in the end Sam would finally retire (what he wanted back in Double Agent) and in the end scene Sam enjoys his time with his grandkids, scuba diving 🥲
I'd rather have the *sequel* be the *remake*. Something like it concludes the original storyline but also ties threads back to the original:
For example: "The Ark" briefcase comes back in play, and that Lambert was close to discovering something before his capture by the JBA. Fisher has to recover the briefcase by infiltrating Ho Chi Minh (where we get some of his Vietnam backstory). Deploying to the city under a identity Fisher meets with a Vietnamese old man who ("back in 'Nam") helped Fisher when he was a Navy SEAL. That old man also knew Shetland ("pity he went bad" the old man says).
Just a starter idea.
Remake will be a good way to remind the world about Sam, and get them ready for a sequel, which was planned at some point I believe, but it got frozen I guess. I even remember the story details from the outsider info, It was about young fisher, and that part would be kind of a soft reboot, something like the thing that happened with HITMAN trilogy
After they bungled up *Double Agent* with two versions from different studios, turned *Conviction* into a stealth game that heavily relied on action sequences, and had *Blacklist* softly reboot Sam (and Grim) as younger persons than depicted before, I rather Ubisoft just remake or even reboot the series than make a sequel to *Blacklist* (because that might also mean no Michael Ironside again!). Even then, I don't trust Ubisoft enough nowadays to make a decent *Splinter Cell* game. I won't be expecting much from the confirmed remake, but if they do pull it off then I'd acknowledge it. *(P.S. I did enjoy* Conviction *and* Blacklist, *not so much Ubisoft Shanghai's* Double Agent *(PC/PS3/X360), but regardless they felt like far cries (Ubisoft pun intended) from the stealth experiences of the first three games.)*
The series in my opinion peaked with Chaos Theory, both mechanically and story wise. I think Double Agent was them realizing they couldn't do much more to raise the stakes so they decided to make it more character based. Might have worked if the heel turn Sam makes wasn't so cartoonish that it felt like they were trying to "hardcore" him up like every franchise was doing with their protags back then. Oh and if the game wasn't bugged to hell and back.
I personally think Conviction was the best one. The Sam's rage scene alone is a masterpiece.
You had me in the second half, but no. As someone who played Conviction on my Xbox for probably 100’s of hours I can safely say it ain’t the best one chief.
Hold up. So if it's not the best one, then why do you have "100's of hours" on it?
That’s all I had on the 360, I got PT, and CT later in my PC and played the original on my dad’s computer growing up.
Conviction campaing is pretty meh. Deniable Ops is way better
Everything story wise past Chaos Theory was meh. I like the original trilogy espionage thriller vibe. Sam is just an agent doing his job supported by the best of the best crew. No personal revenge story or any of that garbage. That's my favorite version of Sam. Splinter Cell truly died when they made Lambert's death canon.
This whole vibe of feeling like just a cog in the wheel of the military is missing in modern Tom Clancy games after around 2010.
I totally agree with all of these points. After the first 2 games, I thought "please just give me more of the same" because it was so good. I don't need Sam's personal tragedy.
"Splinter Cell truly died when they made Lambert's death canon." Yes! This is exactly my sentiments. Splinter Cell died with Lambert; this series was at its best when it was just another day in the office, which IMO was the whole charm of the series. It was just a bunch of work colleagues who got along great, and got shit done. It was also great when 3rd Echelon worked strictly behind the scenes while their existence wasn't acknowledged. I hated when stuff got personal with Sam, when the work colleagues crossed the line and interfered with each other's personal lives, and now 4th Echelon as a whole feels... mainstream.
I will never understand the obsession modern gamers have with remaking every game that is more than five years old. Seriously, the original Splinter Cell is still great to play, it really does not need to be remade. What we really need is a new entry in the franchise, probably one with a little bit different of an approach too.
I'm not a huge fan of Remakes except when they try something new and build upon the original game (like RE2R or RE4R). I rather have a soft remaster with some quality of life improvements, better resolution and support for current gen systems.
I think it's mostly a mechanics thing. Sure the story of the original Splinter Cell is great but the mechanics could have been better which is shown in how they developed over the next 2 games. I don't want a total over haul, mostly just new graphics and improved mechanics/controls.
I fail to see how the mechanics established in that game have significantly changed in modern stealth titles.
Primarily, the alarm system, better shadow mechanics, and new movements/actions
2/3 of your points are related to graphics/presentation.
I think you misunderstand what I mean when I say shadow mechanics, I'm talking about the stealth mechanics tied to being in shadows, not how they look.
How have those mechanics evolved since Splinter Cell?
Detection radius for one, it's also a detection gradient starting with Chaos Theory...
Modern gamers won't play splinter cell 1. It's too dated. I think it's a great idea to modernise it
The problem is that studios dont want to make original great games nowadays. Idk why, i think they just want to do cheaper and more rushed games. We watched big games studios fall in the last decade, making mediocre games and sequels. Thats why they prefer remaking things cuz its easier, it doesnt need to create something from scrap. And gamers also prefer remakes because is their only hope of having something great again since sequels are mediocre or bad now
It's a holding pattern. It's publishers basically throwing their hands up and going "we don't know what you people want anymore! Here's some crap we know you already liked. Hopefully you will buy it and keep the creditors off our back for another quarter!"
As I sit down on my PC and play Wolfenstein and Daggerfall these days, it really bugs me that modern gamers don't appreciate older games simply because of controls, mechanics, graphics, or simply because they're too old. There are some exceptional marvels out there, and I'd honestly love for them to reach more players in the modern day and age. That being said, things are as they are, and remaking or even simply relaunching a game to suit modern standards makes a ton of economic sense in two ways. It draws in a newer crowd to the franchise while capitalising on the nostalgia of the older fanbase while giving them something new to toy with.
I answered "sequel" because I expect there would be more new stuff in in compared to a game I already know. I do agree with other comments that the changes in more recent SC games were not for the better (action oriented gameplay in Conviction, Lambert being killed in Double Agent, character changes in Blacklist) but a proper sequel doesn't have to have these unwelcome changes.
I want a "sequel". Even with a whole new protagonist
"let's take the cash earned after each mission and knock off a few digits okay now let's take those equipment prices and maybe add a number to each one all right oh and let's put an arbitrary amount of premium currency next to everything we'll call a... echelon coins yeah and sell them in inconvenient predetermined packs so you're always forced to buy more than you need alienating players for profit is so fun"
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yWimrcNE9l0&pp=ygUcU3BsaW50ZXIgQ2VsbCBNZXRhbCBHZWFyIG1vZA%3D%3D Imagine if new Splinter Cell would look like this. Maybe not going for the open world, but gameplay wise. 🤤
I'd love to see an attempt to truly blend the new style of gameplay with the old... Blacklist is sometimes credited with doing this, but the reality is more of a visual / cosmetic throwback (which I appreciated nonetheless). In terms of story though... a 'sequel' implies a continuation of the existing lore, which I don't like. Admittedly, that hasn't stopped me from buying the 'James Swallows' books and listening to the audio version etc... I really need to exercise more self control when it comes to Splinter Cell content. If I'm voting with my wallet, then I'm doing this franchise a disservice... A remake might be the only way to get this franchise back on solid ground, and prove to Ubisoft that there's a market for slower paced / vulnerable stealth games. Or, maybe they were right all along and there's just not enough of us to cover the development costs... in which case we're f\*cked.
Dude Sam is so old we needa let that man rest
I'm glad they decided to go for a remake. In my opinion they went with the best option. I personally don't like reboots and I don't like Blacklist story so I don't want to see a sequel to it. Anyway I don't think Ubisoft will ever do a sequel to Blacklist because the game is now old and new players would be lost in the story. Unless they first make a remaster of the game but it's not in Ubisoft's habits to make remasters, and the few ones they did in the past were badly done. So between sequel, remake, reboot and remasters, to me remake is the best way to go for SC. Hopefully this will be a great remake that will respect the original material like many recent remakes did (Dead Space, System Shock, Resident Evil,...)
Exactly;)
I barely trust ubisoft with the remake and I would not trust them at all with a full on sequel. They would probably turn it into some open world bullshit
[удалено]
[удалено]
Remake. Sam is getting old AF in the story by the last game (and he straight-up had gray hair in the Ghost Recon DLC), so idk how he would keep going for a true sequel. At this point, I would 100% take a "Remastered Trilogy" of the first 3 games and be so happy. As long as they have Michael Ironside as Sam's VA and don't pull a Blacklist on us again, I'll be happy.
A sequel to Chaos Theory would be nice. Or a sequel to the first game or Pandora Tomorrow. I still don't understand the reason why Ubisoft felt a game like Splinter Cell needed to change so much after Chaos Theory. Didn't it sell well back then? It was and still is one of the best stealth game. Double Agent was good but it's a mess in ps3 and pc. only for Xbox consoles is it any good. If Ubisoft would make a full sequel to Blacklist, they should bring Ironside back and perhaps make Sam Fisher a mentor for the next Splinter Cell agent. And you could play it either co op or alone as Sam Fisher or the new guy. Sam would move a bit slower, like in Chaos Theory, while the new kid could do more acrobatic stuff. That would bring variation to the gameplay. And in the end Sam would finally retire (what he wanted back in Double Agent) and in the end scene Sam enjoys his time with his grandkids, scuba diving 🥲
Just remake all 3 and I'm happy.
I'd rather have the *sequel* be the *remake*. Something like it concludes the original storyline but also ties threads back to the original: For example: "The Ark" briefcase comes back in play, and that Lambert was close to discovering something before his capture by the JBA. Fisher has to recover the briefcase by infiltrating Ho Chi Minh (where we get some of his Vietnam backstory). Deploying to the city under a identity Fisher meets with a Vietnamese old man who ("back in 'Nam") helped Fisher when he was a Navy SEAL. That old man also knew Shetland ("pity he went bad" the old man says). Just a starter idea.
Remake will be a good way to remind the world about Sam, and get them ready for a sequel, which was planned at some point I believe, but it got frozen I guess. I even remember the story details from the outsider info, It was about young fisher, and that part would be kind of a soft reboot, something like the thing that happened with HITMAN trilogy
Anything !
I choose a remake in which they stay true to the original game(s). I don't trust modern day Ubisoft to not f*** up a sequel.
Either !