Splinter Cell - Destruction

Splinter Cell: Conviction feels wrong. It's one of those games that (if you care about Splinter Cell, anyway) makes you think "this is not going the way it should", like Deus Ex: Invisible War, which wasn't a bad game, but it also deviated too much from what a Deus Ex game should be.

Conviction is a mess in many ways. First, Sam Fisher doesn't feel like the same character. He's old and battered, as he should be, but now he looks ape-like, and his eyes have pretty much disappeared. Even if the graphics are really detailed, he looks less human than ever. He's now an unstoppable killing machine.

The story is as subtle as a jackhammer. Somebody killed his daughter, so he wants revenge. This is the excuse to present him as somebody who doesn't care about anything, and who just kills everyone in his path with no remorse, unlike all the previous games which were about surgical strikes and careful stealth. Very early in the story (like, in the second level or so) you discover that she's not dead after all (spoiler!!), but does that change anything? No, not really: Fisher continues on a rampage, and the game keeps beating you on the head with images and dialogues about your daughter, over and over, after we just don't care because we know that she's still alive, though Fisher doesn't seem to care about anything else, even about Irving Lambert. Oh, the game tells you with a throwaway line that you killed your best friend (a very optional choice from the previous game) but Fisher never shows any pain or guilt about that whatsoever. So no "Oh, I thought my daughter was dead, so I didn't mind killing my best friend. I'm an idiot!". There's a scene that tries to suggest that by projecting words like "guilt", "lies" and such on the walls in giant letters (again, sublety!), but when Fisher finally catches up to what was obvious for the player a few hours earlier, he doesn't show regret, but anger. At this point, I guess we are supposed to feel sorry for Fisher, but he just looks stupid. Yes, the game is full of bad writing, and that's just a sample of it.

.

.

SC: Conviction also seems to believe, like Batman: Arkham Asylum, that showing a lot of people dying is cool. The "climax" of the story takes you through a virtual tour of empty, boring White House hallways and rooms with lots of dead people around you. Family entertainment! (Modern Warfare 2 did something similar with the Washington setting in smaller doses, and it worked considerably better). Also, there's a lot of torture (inflicted by the protagonist!) that seems ripped straight from THQ's The Punisher.

.

So there's a lot of bad shooting? What else? Well, everything is streamlined for the dumb, assuming players will be overwhelmed unless the game holds your hand all the time (the stylish messages telling you what to do and where to go get old very soon). You don't even have to hit a crouch button: if there's a big pipe in your way or you have to enter an air duct, Fisher ducks automatically. Also, you are really fast, and you can climb a very tall building in 30 seconds. Altair and Ezio never were so quick. It feels almost like a parody.

Still, the game still forces you to be more or less stealthy, not only in those annoying "if an alarm sounds, you are instantly dead" stages but also during the rest of the game, because if the enemies discover you, it's pretty much impossible to line up a shot with a keyboard and mouse. I didn't have any trouble at all playing the unfairly maligned Alpha Protocol, but shooting in the PC version of Splinter Cell: Conviction is just a pain. And that is too bad, as Sam Fisher is no longer a spy: he's now a soldier. We even get a contrived Modern Warfare-like flashback to the first Iraq war which soon becomes a below-average cover shooter that feels jarringly out of place and stupid (you are wounded and can't take too many hits, so why don't you just stay of the road to avoid the enemy soldiers? But there's an invisible wall...). This is not Splinter Cell! What is this, Soldier of Fortune Payback?

Ubisoft seems to be doing everything wrong lately. Now I see it's not by chance that the Splinter Cell series director called it quits a few weeks ago. And just now, the guy behind the Assassin's Creed series has also left the building after completing the new, unnecessary "Assassin's Creed 2.5" sequel. Ubisoft Montreal, one of the best game studios in the world, seems to be in trouble. And we all just believed the rumours when somebody said that Michel Ancel had left Ubisoft too. Hmm... Something has changed. Ubisoft is no longer a company where creativity is respected and high quality is always to be expected. I hate what they are becoming now.

.

One more thing: I finished the game in one day. But, unlike all the previous Splinter Cell games, I don't think I will be playing this one ever again.

Alpha Protocol - A review (kind of)

WHAT I THINK (This review has two parts. Go to the end of this entry to jump straight to what players think)

This is not just a review. This is a defense.



Alpha Protocol is a great game. Professional troll Jim Sterling from Destructoid has decided to wage a war against it to see if the internet follows his lead. But he is wrong.

Let's be serious for a minute. Sterling claims that AP is a 2/10 game. Really?

If you read from an alleged former Obsidian worker that the game was mismanaged by Chris Parker, even if that happened to be true, it wouldn't mean that AP is a waste of your time. It may be just the opposite, depending on your tastes. This is not an AAA game that you have to like. This is a game that may interest you if your favourite games are Deus Ex and Vampire: Bloodlines.

What is wrong with this game, then? A lot of people say that AP doesn't offer great shooting and a great cover system. But, you know, GTA IV didn't either. It didn't matter because the game was cool. AP is not a shooting game. It's an RPG game with shooting.

Other people say that it's crippled with bugs (if "I don't like what they did here" or "sometimes the menu takes too long to appear" can be considered game-killing bugs). Well, in my two playthroughs I didn't find a single bug. My game never crashed, and I didn't find any weird stuff like the things that players around the world are finding in Red Dead Redemption (I'm sorry if I'm picking too much on Rockstar's stuff). I think they are prejudiced against Obsidian because of their previous games, and now "Obsidian = buggy games" is another internet meme.

About the mini-games? During the first hacking mini-game I was completely lost. But it was my fault. After that, the mini-games were fair enough. But, of course, you need to spend some points in your tech skill so they don't become a nightmare later. Same with the shooting: some reviewers/players automatically assumed the shooting was abysmal because it felt so imprecise at first. (Have you played Deus Ex lately? You couldn't hit anyone at first)

Maybe my positive opinion comes from the fact that I chose to play first the game without shooting anyone. Yes, it's possible to play this in that way. If you do that, it plays basically like Splinter Cell (why nobody hasn't declared this game a "Splinter Cell rip-off" yet?), . A couple of weeks ago I decided to try the "big" version of Splinter Cell: Double Agent (I had played the alternate "small" version using my Wii), and the whole thing is almost unplayable, either on PC or on PS3 (I own both versions). This isn't mentioned in most reviews (maybe because they played it on Xbox 360 and it didn't suck there?), but that was a mess. AP is alright.

(A brief aside (mild spoilers): It's possible to finish the game without killing anyone, with two exceptions: you throw somebody off a bridge in a cutscene and he's ran over -this is listed as "death by collateral damage" in your statistics-, and there's a boss battle against a main character who is placed in a tower that you can't reach to subdue him with martial arts. This is intended by design, because if you follow the story closely you will hear about his father, a senator, who is probably intended as a future villain if a sequel is made.)

Before you say "oh, but I want to shoot people!" I'll say that after finishing the game I started another playthrough allowing myself to shoot just everybody, and it still feels OK. The shooting in all the Splinter Cell games previous to SC Conviction was worse! I can only assume that in 2010 players are now expecting Call of Duty production values in every single game.

The music is OK but nothing special. The main theme is a blatant "James Bond Theme" rip-off, so bad that it makes you wonder how it got approved (maybe Chris Parker really liked it). Shockingly enough, there are no themes by Alexander Brandon (main composer from Deus Ex) listed in the credits, though he allegedly contributed music and audio. He left Obsidian after working in this project, like Allen Kerry, the lead character artist. (Was Parker as unreasonable as that anonymous guy said?).

Now, for the good stuff. Despite all the criticism directed at the graphics because they could look much better, the character design is actually great (every main character is instantly identifiable), and unusually for a game made with the Unreal Engine, here people don't look like action figures.

And then, the story. Well, even Jeff Gertsmann, not a forgiving reviewer, admits that the story is so good that it makes up for the less-than-stellar shooting: "There are parts of Alpha Protocol that I feel are totally amazing and absolutely worth seeing, but you'll have to trudge through a lot of very disappointing stuff just to see it."

While it's true that Mike Thorton is a bit on the bland side and not a classic character (even the name -or alias- doesn't have a ring to it), other characters are. Mina Tang is very likeable as your main 'handler', and Nolan North, usually overused as a Nathan Drake sound-alike, breathes life in the likeably psycho Steven "Don't call me Steve" Heck.

And the freedom. Oh, the freedom. There's no other game like this. When you play it a second game, you see how every decision changes everything. Other games make the script ambiguous to avoid facing the consequences of what you did, but here it's taken to its full extent, with voice over recorded for any possibility. And the game is not linear! You can visit any of the three main locations in any order, so if you go to China after you go to the two previous locations your character complains because the two previous safehouses were really nice and now you are supposed to live in a dirty apartment. In my second playthrough, I went to China first, so he just said "This place is a dump!".

You really feel like you can shape what happens around you. It will not be the same at all if you try to say something flirty to a girl when she likes you and when she hates you. Your reputation is not just a statistic: it really changes how other people treat you. This is just amazing, and you wonder why other games don't do it.

And then you realize why: because people will tear you apart if you use up your resources trying to let you be free instead of having great shooting.


If what I said make it sound at least interesting, go play this game. If you still aren't convinced, keep reading and listen to what other players thought.


WHAT PLAYERS THINK


I recommend to go to this post in Rock, Paper, Shotgun and read the comments left by users. Many of them acknowledge that the game grows on you and that it's a great experience. Here's a sample of what some players think:


"The Sombrero Kid": "if this had come out before Dragon Age and Heavy Rain it'd've been universally praised and a masterpiece of non-linearity despite it's lack of polish."

"Ihzr": "Alpha Protocol is amazing. If you'd put it next to Mass Effect, it would be the same sort of comparison like between Stalker and Crysis: big budget polished shiny sparkly mainstream mediocrity versus... something else. A pretty amazing something else."

"Mitza": "It's a strange game, but it's really enjoyable. All the extremely negative reviews I've read are an absolute shame. This is the kind of game that deserves a sequel, because they could fix the major flaws and refine&improve the rest of the game."


"jaheira": "Just played AP for another three hours and it's getting better and better. Stealth works great. Amazing silenced pistol action. Some of the best dialogues I've experienced. Might be game of the year so far for me."

"Javier-de-Ass": "loved this game. (...) I've read some impressions from across the net, especially Americans seem to despise this game, and I simply can't relate to any of the criticisms. Not to the shotting [sic] complaints, not to AI complaints, not to general jank complaints (...). I didn't come across any big bugs in the game."

"Mercurial": "By modern standards to a modern audience this game is flawed.

However, look past all that and it's a real gem. The comparisons to Deus Ex and Bloodlines (sans bugs for me at least) aren't blowing smoke, the more I play it the more I see the similarities."

"BL": "Probably the best in any action-RPG ever made, in the history of videogames, so that should get some recognition I think. But as a shooter, it's below average."


About bugs and control:

"jaheira" again: "It's not buggy. One incident of getting stuck on the scenery is the only problem I've had in 11 hours."





"jti": "I'm playing the game with keyboard+mouse and am having no trouble at all. Nothing to complane [sic] about them."


And as a summary, a guy called Wulf summarizes my opinion about the general reception for this game. Just go and read it.

Alpha Protocol is a cool game

Jim Sterling from Destructoid is an idiot. He gives a 2/10 to Alpha Protocol, so you would assume the game is broken and unplayable.

You would be wrong.

I'm playing it right now. It's a compelling game, with decent stealth gameplay and a great dialogue system. For me, it feels like a decent Splinter Cell-like game (I've decided I'm not killing anybody and the game lets me do just that, just stalking everybody and knocking them out) in which I can make a lot of choices, developing further the black-and-white "kill this guy or let him live" mechanics from Splinter Cell: Double Agent. There are no other games like this right now.

The game accomplishes what it tries to do. So what if there's a texture-loading problem (Is that something you never see in a game? Have you played any game made with the Unreal engine lately?), if Mike Thornton seems to be a bit unlikeable (well, he is not, if you choose the right dialogue options.) and if the shooting is not as good as in other games? I don't remember Vampire: Bloodlines for it's great shooting or Deus Ex for its compelling, superbly voice-acted protagonist, and they are both classics. There's something else at stake.

Alpha Protocol is a good RPG, but of course it won't look good if you compare it (from a technical standpoint) with the big boys. I'm sure Sega, being as cheap as it is this days, didn't give them a huge budget for this, but the results are still decent. So don't believe what Destructoid and Joystiq say, and give this game a chance. I'll let you know what I think after I play it longer, but it's not a terrible game.

-------

But I'm not going to stop reading Destructoid yet! They are still a cool site. And thanks to them, I learn that Ubisoft has probably cancelled Beyond Good and Evil 2. If that is true, well... That's it, I'm done with Ubisoft. It was one of my favourite developers ever, but they've made huge mistakes one after another, ruining the Prince of Persia franchise with each new game, forcing the worst DRM possible on players and just being cheap for the sake of it. Where's the innovation, the support for different games? Beyond Good and Evil is a classic, and Michel Ancel is one of the best game designers around. Is he really gone from your company now, or is it just a nasty rumour?

Ubi, don't disappoint me.

It didn't take long, did it?

Only 3 days after the European PC release date, the strange/stupid DRM imposed by Ubisoft has already screwed the users, who can't play the game. I guess they didn't expect so many people to buy the game or something (the Ubisoft rep said something about "excepcional demand"), as some people were saying on the forums that they really didn't mind about this form of DRM and that they would buy this great game (one of the best from 2009, that's for sure!) anyway. Well, I wouldn't be surprised if those same users are saying right now "This is the last Ubisoft game I buy!"

Let me tell you a little story. I always have some hot chocolate and toast for breakfast. And my toast used to have some "Philadelphia" cheese on it for a really long, long time. A few months ago, my supermarket stopped carrying the old boxy Philadelphia and started selling a new format. It looks like they also fiddled with the recipe, because only a few days after opening it, the cheese started getting mouldy. Was it a bad batch? Well, I bought a different type of Philadelphia (probably the diet version, or maybe one of the bizarre variations you can find in Germany), and I had the same problem.

You know what? I haven't eaten any Philadelphia cheese since then. I haven't put anything else over my toast for ten years, and now they lost me because they fiddled with the product for reasons that are not clear to me.

See what I am getting at? Ubisoft wanted to re-invent PC gaming to offer... nothing but a half-baked, big-brothery DRM scheme. Which nobody asked for. So yes, Ubisoft still offers some of the best games around, but we are not going to pay for something that is liable to stop working at any time while offering me nothing in return but some cloud-saving that I don't really need. I haven't played Far Cry 2 yet because of the 5 computers activation limit, and I won't play Splinter Cell: Conviction because of this mess.

Ubisoft, don't be stupid and don't fight Activision for the #1 Baddie spot.

Never buy a piece of crap!

Hi SuperViv!

I'm sorry that I took so long to answer. My wife was about to leave to Spain and I wanted to spend all the time I could with her. I didn't even touch any videogame these days. But I intend to catch up now!

So we all agree. Never buy an Acer laptop! You can quote me if you want! :D Next time I'll probably buy a Toshiba.

I can't play games like The Sims, I just can't. I don't like those games where you don't have a clear goal, and you just do it to improve your character, or the way you play. That's why I can't stand those fighting games in a fixed setting. You play, you get better at playing, then you play again, you get even better... And there's no end. I prefer if they say, "this is point A, get to point B", not going in circles while "having fun". For me, that's the same as sitting in a rocking chair. I need a story in my game, or at least a progression.

I also get bored with the Minesweeper. It's fun, but just for ten minutes. But I love Picross, which is basically the same thing but with a point, because after every puzzle you get an image with a funny animation. It's my favourite DS game so far. Well, or it was until I knew Rhythm Paradise! (wink, wink!)

I know some people disagree, but Ghostbusters is not a very good game. The design choices in some cases are dead wrong. I was stuck for two weeks in a boss fight because its attack patterns made it unwinnable if you were hit only once when your AI partners were down. That's bad design!

But if you tried the Wii version... Well, it follows the same template as the other versions, but in fact it's a different game. It reminds me of what Ubisoft did with Splinter Cell: Double Agent. With almost the same script and dialogues, they created two different games. I played the Wii version of SCDA and I really enjoyed it, and I was surprised to read reviews saying that "the changes to the Splinter Cell formula were disappointing". They were referring to the "bigger" versions, because the Wii game looks and feels exactly like the previous titles, so I bought the PS3 version to check what they complained about. I still haven't tried it, though.

Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to send an email to JR. He never replies because he's too busy (he just moved to a new place, and you now how exhausting that is), but I like writing letters to him anyway.

See you soon!

- Danda

****************

Hi JR!

So you decided to buy the new Painkiller compilation on Steam! I already own the GOG.com version, and everybody says that the sequel is not as good as the original. Often, when the original developers move on, the sequels just stop being any good. But you know, I'm such a completist that I'll have to buy it too :D

There's also a new Painkiller-like game in town: Dreamkiller. It's intended as a "spiritual successor" (the title makes it very obvious), but there's a catch: it was developed by the same people who... developed the sequel that nobody liked. Bummer! Of course, the reviews are not very favorable. Well, I wasn't going to buy it anyway...

What I'm definitely going to buy is this week's big new release, Uncharted 2. I really love the first title, quite possibly the finest PS3 release so far. The gameplay was great (some Prince of Persia/Tomb Raider platforming, a lot of shooting from cover), the acting was very good (note: I played with Spanish audio), and the music was amazing! It even has a title track that would be great in a movie. I don't usually buy full-prize, new releases, but this one definitely deserves it.

There are other new releases this week. We have Brütal Legend, which looks promising, but we'll see. Oh, and next week we have Borderlands. This doesn't look as good. I don't mean its look, because I like cell shading (I was one of the only ten people who liked Ubisoft's shooter XIII). No, I'm more worried about it's mechanichs. If I'm playing any FPS, I like being able to kill someone with a single headshot. Here, everybody has "health bars" floating above their heads, and I've seen some videos where you laboriously chip away the enemies' health emptying magazine after magazine on them. How stupid! But I'm being unfair, because I'm judging it as an FPS, when it's actually a "dungeon crawler" RPG in disguise. When you kill enemies, they will drop weapons with random statistics. That's something I don't like in Guild Wars and similar games: you have to check all the weapons left after you kill someone to see if it's slightly better than yours. After a while playing GW, I stopped checking or caring.

I don't know... I've never loved any game made by Gearbox Software. Half Life: Opposing Force was really disappointing, Brothers in Arms is an acquired taste, and in some ways it really annoyed me... But maybe Aliens: Colonial Marines will change everything. I certainly don't expect Borderlands to do that. Will I be wrong?

Now I'm looking forward to playing Uncharted 2. The buzz is really good about this one!