Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
Cian Hassett
16 May, 2011

Love to Hate #18

PALGN Feature | Sam, I am disappoint.
When something takes the best part of four years to be released, it's fair to say that the average gamer is hoping for a high quality package. Actually, hope is the wrong word. The average gamer deserves it for being patient, accepting countless delays and frustrations. In many ways, it's a bit like Melbourne's public transport. But what in god's name am I talking about? Splinter Cell: Conviction, that's what I'm talking about. There's an awful lot to discuss when dealing with Sam Fisher's last adventure, and that's not because his mission was a lengthy one, it's because Ubisoft decided to take a new direction. The end result? Alienation.

As of right now, Sam Fisher is dead to me, Splinter Cell is dead to me and if I had any say in how the franchise operated, Conviction would never have happened. Imagine a situation where you wait, and wait, and keep on waiting until eventually you're on the brink of giving up hope. That's what happened, as Conviction initially appeared to be a fascinating take on the Splinter Cell formula, portraying Fisher as a rougher, edgier character whose persona was stuck somewhere between hero and villain. Then nothing. Conviction disappeared into the shadows for what felt like an eternity, before making an extraordinary comeback at E3 2009. The build-up was a roller coaster ride of excitement and disappointment, and finally - disgust.

What did you say about my beard?

What did you say about my beard?
Close
Unlike most other games, I have a story to tell about Splinter Cell: Conviction. A genuine story. Being a huge fan of all things stealth, except recent Tenchu outings, Conviction was a big deal for me. I suppose I only have myself to blame, after all, I fell into the pre-release hype machine and got lost inside there. You probably get the point by now, Conviction was a LONG time coming and you'd struggle to find anyone more excited than yours truly. So on release day, I decided to ditch a morning lecture about the Holocaust and drive to my local GAME store. Cian was so keen that he arrived before the doors had even opened. At approximately one minute after nine, I briskly walked up to the counter. After throwing a bunch of pre-order bonuses into a bag alongside the mighty collector's edition copy of Conviction, I drove home and began playing Sam's rebooted adventure at half past nine.

Four hours later and I had completed the game on the hardest difficulty and was still in shock. I'll touch on the gameplay soon, but the most astounding part of Splinter Cell: Conviction was its length. The whole campaign from start to finish was four hours long (or short), so by my mathematical genius, that equates to sixty minutes of gameplay created every twelve months up until the release date. That doesn't sit well with me, not one little bit. Previous adventures lasted double that and offered competitive multiplayer to coincide with gripping solo missions. Conviction had neither. I enjoyed the 'Spies versus Mercenaries' mode in Double Agent; it was, at the very least, original. In Ubisoft's defence (and this is the only time that I will give them credit during this piece of writing), they played with a lot of original ideas that were either poorly executed, or didn't suit the Splinter Cell mantra of completing your objectives quietly.

They'll never spot you killing a guard in a fully lit area. No chance.

They'll never spot you killing a guard in a fully lit area. No chance.
Close
During an interview with VG24/7, Maxime Béland from Ubisoft made the following statement (pay careful attention to the segments in italic); "When we decided on the direction for Conviction we wanted to expand the reach of the franchise and let more people enjoy what it is to play as Sam Fisher, to be the ultra-powerful, highly-trained secret agent acting from the shadows. With that in mind we made a lot of changes; in essence we kept the core of the stealth experience but unleashed a lot of Sam’s potential by giving him a more offensive capability to complement his defensive side." I usually try to avoid getting too angry, but it's unavoidable at times. Sorry Mr. Béland, you lied to face of every fan who supported Splinter Cell from the early days. Shadows? Core stealth? This is exactly how Conviction played out.

Essentially, you have a solid third-person shooter. There's never any encouragement to be stealthy and it's impossible in many scenarios. Assuming you get spotted, which you most definitely will because the shadows aren't anywhere near as useful as before, Conviction turns into a very basic and unrewarding cover shooter. Sam's subtlety must have been left behind on the drawing board. All you need to do is tackle the first enemy and trigger a chain of headshots requiring no skill whatsoever. At first, the idea was pretty cool but it grew stale within the opening thirty minutes of gameplay. To further solidify the fact that Conviction had no right to lie in bed with its predecessors, there was a section resembling Mirror's Edge about halfway through the disappointing story. I kid you not, Sam sprints and gallops and jumps after his target like Faith. And before I forget, Conviction spends some time in the Middle East. Out of every other complaint, this would have to be the nadir of Splinter Cell. I'd rather not spend too much time talking about it, as my breakfast will end up flowing through the grooves in my keyboard.

Holding the gun at a forty-five degree angle is both cool and pointless.

Holding the gun at a forty-five degree angle is both cool and pointless.
Close
I say all of these harsh words with a heavy heart, because I'm still an obsessed Splinter Cell freak and it genuinely saddens me to see such a disgraceful attempt at changing an already terrific franchise. I'll use these remaining paragraphs to try and pluck a few positives from Conviction. It looked looked good, it sounded good, it was presented well, and there were a couple of "Hellz yeah I'm Sam Fisher!" moments. Honestly, the only other positive things about Conviction were the co-operative modes. Old school stealth tactics were put in place and you were screwed if you decided to run with a gun. I'm not referring to the co-operative story which was equally anti-stealth and unimpressive, I'm referring to 'Hunter' and 'Infiltration'. Unlike everything else, they were one-hundred per cent dedicated to providing a stealth experience. No fancy cinematic sequences, just clean missions without triggering the alarm. That's what Splinter Cell was built upon, not bearded men barging through doors.

That's only a portion of Splinter Cell's multiplayer, because Ubisoft scrapped the competitive modes. They vanished without a trace. It mightn't have been the most popular online game, as proven with Double Agent, but for the few of us who remained, it was a breath of fresh air. Dividing teams up between spies and mercenaries, designing maps with unique areas only accessible with particular classes, tense gameplay; competitive multiplayer had a lot going for it. Instead of developing that idea even further, Ubisoft foolishly removed it. Apparently it didn't fit within the Splinter Cell universe during the events of Conviction. I find this to be a terribly ironic excuse. Since when has running around as a commando in the Middle East been a crucial part of Splinter Cell? If you can provide me with a valid answer, I'll prove that Jim Morrison is still alive somewhere in South America.

That's for making me wait so long...for nothing.

That's for making me wait so long...for nothing.
Close
What else can I say about Splinter Cell: Conviction? It's currently sitting on an average score of eight-five (via MetaCritic), and that leads me to believe I'm either missing the point or almost none of those reviewers touched Splinter Cell prior to the release of Conviction. Don't get me wrong, I'm a firm believer in people being entitled to their own opinion and I try very hard not to judge them because of it, so in many ways, I can understand how Conviction was received positively. Assuming you've never played Chaos Theory, then you'll probably end up seeing Conviction as an inventive cover shooter with a some stealth mechanics hanging on by a loose thread. From the perspective of a firm believer in Splinter Cell's original merits, Conviction stands out as one of the most disappointing games ever made. Alongside Far Cry 2, also developed by Ubisoft. Hmm...

Is there a pattern emerging here? Maybe Far Cry 2 should be the next partner in this hateful relationship? It would have been, except that Denny won the race and nailed it brilliantly. Before I sign off and start receiving all sorts of e-mails saying how my opinion is less informed than Jim Sterling's, I'll leave you with this appropriate phrase - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Not only did Ubisoft break Splinter Cell, it was ripped apart from the inside out before being polished up with average gimmicks. At least I have the 3D version of Chaos Theory to enjoy... or maybe not. Rest in peace Sam Fisher, it was fun knowing you during the good times.

Related Splinter Cell Conviction Content

Splinter Cell Conviction Review
24 May, 2010 Sam Fisher earns a makeover.
Deniable Ops DLC for Splinter Cell: Conviction
18 May, 2010 Not as free as you might think.
Splinter Cell Conviction winners announced
10 May, 2010 Congratulations to...
22 Comments
1 year ago
i haven't played this, but this trend in games being pretty easy on hard is getting worrying. I hate to think what easy is like in a lot of games these days.
1 year ago
Nice write up Cian. Personally, I hated Conviction and it killed the series for me. Stuff a wider audience, if the game sucks it sucks. As you said, just another third person shooter.
1 year ago
I notice how many games they have killed by going for a wider audience even though the core game was popular in the first place
1 year ago
I liked how different it was compared to the traditional game, something different.... this might be because i was not very good at the traditional game (always had one alert on one mission here and there).

That being said i did trade it a while after finishing it, the co-op did nothing for me. I would pick it up again at some point (probably the pc version during another Steam price reduction!).
1 year ago
Picked conviction up during a steam sale, and i'll be honest, even though i'd heard it was a different game to the predecessors, i though it would still feel like a splinter cell game. Man was i wrong.
I really want to see more of what they were originally going to do with Conviction, with Hobo Sam fighting with chairs around DC. All i ever saw was screenshot, but i was more interested in that game then the one we got.
1 year ago
i liked it icon_biggrin.gif but im not a big fan of stealth games icon_razz.gif conviction wasnt a stealth game, but it was fun for me.
1 year ago
Everything in this article is what I'm worried the new Hitman will be.
1 year ago
PALGN wrote
The average gamer deserves it for being patient, accepting countless delays and frustrations.
Stopped reading right here. Explain to me the bit where you deserve anything, because I can't get my head around it. Especially after all your doing nothing to actually craft the game.
1 year ago
The bit where he was a consumer and they were trying to sell a product to him.
A game they built a fanbase around, the same fanbase they need to keep buying the game to be able to crap out more sequels
1 year ago
thecomicrelief wrote
PALGN wrote
The average gamer deserves it for being patient, accepting countless delays and frustrations.
Stopped reading right here. Explain to me the bit where you deserve anything, because I can't get my head around it. Especially after all your doing nothing to actually craft the game.
Because he has this:



It's a matter of opportunity cost and brand loyalty. Instead of spending time and money elsewhere, he's spent his patience on waiting for this title, for which he's already invested a significant tangible and intagible amount. And since his money is paying the wages of those who crafted it, so yes, he does deserve a certain expectation to be met.
1 year ago
to be fair just cause he has cash doesn't mean he deserves quality for it. There are plenty of **** games out there that cost money. Yeah seeing a game series you love turn to **** sucks.

But you don't actually deserve quality, you deserve the product you chose to buy. So unless Cian handed over the cash and then got a different game disc or something it's not a matter of what you deserve at all. I mean I bought bioshock expecting a game that wasn't arse. I sure as hell didn't deserve anything else though.
1 year ago
Benza wrote
But you don't actually deserve quality, you deserve the product you chose to buy.
That is some dumb ****. If you pay for ANYTHING, you expect and deserve it do be a certain quality, especially if you work hard for that money. Be it anything from a coaster to a car to a house. If you pay for it, you expect and deserve quality. And as I said, we're paying the developers wages - you wouldn't be happy if you paid a builder to fix your roof but it still ends up with leaks in it.
1 year ago
Jeremy wrote
And as I said, we're paying the developers wages - you wouldn't be happy if you paid a builder to fix your roof but it still ends up with leaks in it.
That's a completely different thing. The game still works. I'm not talking quality of workmanship. If you paid 80 bucks for a game and got a buggy broken game that's one thing. That (At least from Cian's articles) isn't what happened. He got a game and didn't like the direction it went with the game. That's something else entirely.
As a paying customer you have no say in what direction a game takes, you have no right to have a say or place any expectation on what direction a game takes with it's story or game play.
You can either choose to pay to support the direction it takes or not.

I'm not saying don't get pissed off. When they change a game around that you like it sucks and you can get pissed off, but you're not entitled to ****. Your entitled to the game you paid for and what it is. Nothing more.
1 year ago
Quote
As a paying customer you have no say in what direction a game takes, you have no right to have a say or place any expectation on what direction a game takes with it's story or game play.
But i think this is half the problem for a lot of developers these days, they do listen to every man and his dog and some games end up being like homers website
1 year ago
I've learned that defending what I write is a waste of time, so I'll only say this...

We pay for games, we keep the industry functioning, therefore we deserve quality.

If that doesn't click with you, then google economics.
1 year ago
But Conviction was a quality game. Top notch presentation in a cohesive package. I played it like a stealth shooter - sure you didn't have to, but that doesn't mean you couldn't - and found it much better than the 'stick to the path or die' of previous splinter cell games.

God forbid someone tries to take a stale series in a fresh direction, hey? Conviction isn't the problem with the industry. Stupid pointless articles like this is the problem, and the fact you don't even want to bother backing up your flamebait speaks volumes.
1 year ago
i don't remember you being such a large douche before, what happened, what part of opinion piece don't you quite understand, it is a fairly simple concept.

I understand that he doesn't like it, you do, but i am sure you can get your point across without being a wanker about it
1 year ago
I'm 100% with what Cian has to say on this topic. Conviction was a crap SPLINTER CELL game.

You can bake an awesome looking chocolate cake, place it carefully in a nicely presented box, but when I bite into it and it takes like dirt, then it's a bad chocolate cake.
And I'll want my money back thanks.
1 year ago
Fetidchimp wrote
i don't remember you being such a large douche before, what happened, what part of opinion piece don't you quite understand, it is a fairly simple concept.

I understand that he doesn't like it, you do, but i am sure you can get your point across without being a wanker about it
So opinion piece = free reign to spew hyperbolic "one of the most disappointing games ever made"? The article reeks of elitism, the old boys (or girls) club, "back in my day we walked uphill both ways and Splinter Cell was a stealth game dagnabbit!"

Sometimes opinions aren't worth sharing. Read the letters to the editor in any weekend rag.
1 year ago
Well obviously SOMEONE agrees with Cian drinniol. If you played and enjoyed the previous Splinter Cell games (for what they were), then yes, Conviction was a disappointment; it was nothing like them.
So what's your point? That you enjoyed it because it was a different game? Great, but that's not Cian's point, his is the opposite. He can have his opinion but it seems since you disagree, he can not.
1 year ago
This thread amuses me.



I actually haven't played Conviction yet as I've got a massive stack of other games to play, though from what I have heard it's a massive change of direction from the original Splinter Cell games which yeah, I can imagine would piss off a good portion of fans. Plus 4-5 hours of easypeezy single player screams "streamlining for the masses", which doesn't sit well with my elitist gamer opinion. (damn right I'm an elitist)

It's kinda like the new PoP, which I just couldn't get into as opposed to the trilogy on last gen consoles, which were amazing. Orbs pissed me off, the gameplay didn't feel exciting, and I found the ending to be pretty overhyped. But hey the trailers were great and it looked really good, so there's some positives for a game that put me to sleep half the time.

drinniol wrote
Sometimes opinions aren't worth sharing. Read the letters to the editor in any weekend rag.
I don't like your opinion so shut up.
1 year ago
drinniol wrote
God forbid someone tries to take a stale series in a fresh direction, hey? Conviction isn't the problem with the industry. Stupid pointless articles like this is the problem, and the fact you don't even want to bother backing up your flamebait speaks volumes.
Running around, killing people with headshots, while smashing everything in your pathway is not a fresh direction. Splinter Cell was one of the last types of unique shooters left man. Not only that but people still loved the franchise, it didn't even need a gameplay change. Just give people what they want and polish it like crazy. If they wanted it to play like this then they could have just added it as a bonus mode or DLC or mod or something. In fact that would of made it epic.
Add Comment
Like this feature?
Share it with this tiny url: http://palg.nu/4JP

N4G : News for Gamers         Twitter This!

Digg!     Stumble This!

| More
  Pre-order or buy:
    PALGN recommends: www.Play-Asia.com

Publisher:
  Ubisoft
Developer:
  Ubisoft Montreal

Read more...
Currently Popular on PALGN
Australian Gaming Bargains - 08/12/11
'Tis the season to be bargaining.
R18+ Legislation
R18+ Legislation
Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm Generations Preview
Hands on time with the game. Chat time with the CEO of CyberConnect 2.
PALGN's Most Anticipated Games of 2007
24 titles to keep an eye on during 2007.
PALGN's Most Anticipated Games of 2008
And you thought 2007 was populated.