“…But that’s not what our game is actually like when you get to play it” is one of the most infuriating things a developer can say about their game after it is shown at a press event. With the stealth and horror genre being bastardized by not being “sellable,” each has tried to go down a heavily traveled action path to become something more attractive to a wider audience. It’s the same every time. We see a game that had a stake in its genre, the demo gets shown and features more explosions, the fans get understandably and predictably pissed, and then the developer cowers down and tries to douse the flames. It’s a cycle that should stop, especially if the industry knows what is good for itself.
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell has been out of action for a decade, so it's time to look back at 2013's Splinter Cell: Blacklist.
Sam Fisher is evidently the most skilled stealth operative because no-one has seen him in his own game for years
why make an inspired game that takes effort when you can half ass it with multiplayer gaas games and filler filled assassins creed games?
That question up there is the reason you don't see splinter cell games
The entire mark and execute system belonged in another game.
It’s cool, but the polar opposite to how Sam Fisher initially handled.
The original trilogy made shooting very, very difficult, yet a viable option, which ultimately motivates stealth.
The mark/execute system makes shooting stupid easy, to the point of why would you even bother trying stealth as an alternative?
Because Ghost is the method fans of the series actually prefer? IMark and execute is never forced upon the player you liiterally never have to bother using it even once throughout Blacklist.
The sad part is that I actually really enjoyed the last game, Blacklist. It may have lacked the iconic voice but the gameplay was excellent, and blended stealth, action and a mix really great compared to most games, where none of the three options felt like the wrong way to play. I really hope they either produce a remake of the original game or a proper sequel.
If EA and Motive Studio plan on remaking all the main Dead Space entries, they have to change a lot of what made Dead Space 3 so divisive.
Simple, do not bother with a Dead Space 3 remake. Rather have a new entry for Dead Space.
Yeah I agree. Make a dead space 3, but have an original story/setting. They’ve proven they can do the game justice, and I think they could evolve 2 in a good direction, keeping a similar tone. I’d love s Dead Space 2 and 3 though. The remake was fantastic. Top tier remake, up there with RE2.
Remaking 3 would need to be a reworked and somewhat changed remake as 3 was flawed in most peoples eyes and the worst entry.
WTMG's Kyle Nicol:
"Was Dead Space 3 really that bad?
Well, it’s a complicated question. Dead Space 3 is undeniably the weakest of the trilogy. It’s a game that deviates so far from the original formula, that it throws a lot of what made Dead Space special in the first place out of the window. Although, where it does make up for it is one of the best cooperative shooters on the market, even after all this time. Do I recommend playing this game ten years later? Hell yes. But make sure your expectations are in the right place. It has a lot of problems that bring it down."
Great article - really well written and makes a great point. I enjoyed it. It was novel, synthesized a great analogy, examined real life examples of language and industry presences and made a pretty convincing argument.
On the point of which - damn I wish they'd stop. It's not necessary and dead space 3 will struggle to make the sales they've mentioned. Companies that succumb to much to the industry part of "games industry" often take hidings. In particular Bioware and EA come to mind - bioware has shown a significant reduction in quality of products the more and more they've become a part of EA. Not to mention numerous employees have gone to basically confirm that EA's presence complicated the development process in a harmful way.
R.I.P Splinter Cell. 2002-2006 :(
This was a good read, and that's basically what it boils down to: Developers want to make that 'Call of Duty' cash, thus put explosions, airstrikes, and some AC-130U-like section to make that 'Call of Duty Cash.' Good read.
Hey guys, I want to thank you for the positive words. It really means a lot to me!