Splinter Cell: Blacklist Assaults the Ghost Panther

[Zetatrain]

PS: No there shouldn't be an easy mode in Dark Souls. There isn't a fucking hard mode in Assassin's Creed either now is there? Catering to everyone is not a solution, it will never be because guess what, the people that don't play Dark Souls already will be bored to shit on easy mode because it's all about the repeated challenges. The game IS the struggle to overcome the odds against you, not to go sightseeing through the world squashing enemies with your 78+ electric damage blade. This again betrays that you simply don't get what makes these games have their appeal in the first place.

I wouldn't buy Assassin's Creed any more or less if there was a hard mode because really the AC games are not about the combat.

I don't see how having a hard or easy mode in a game is the same thing as what is happening with Splinter Cell: Blacklist.

Assuming that an easy or hard mode just means simple changes such as damage you receive, damage you deal, and number of enemies I don't see what the problems is. If splinter Cell 1-3 had an easy mode, it would not have made the games any worse, because the core gameplay elements are unchanged and you are not force to play on easy mode. In short, it would still be a game built around the idea of hardcore stealth gameplay with an easy mode tacted on at the end.

The situation with Blacklist is different from what I described above, because in order to make the game more accessible they changed the core gameplay elements. Unlike the first 3 SC games Blacklist was a game primarily built around the idea of accessibility. A game like Blacklist would still be way more accessible than an old school Splinter Cell game with an easy mode.

While the two concepts mentioned are centered around the same principle, accessibility, how they do it is completely different.

[
MGS4's controls were the reason you could run and gun if you wanted to, it wasn't because of added gameplay mechanics or changes to core mechanics, it was due to the controls alone. That's why I mentioned controls. Your loss for missing out on MGS4, which also included the best online shooter this gen (every shooter now is borrowing from MGO as it was way ahead of its time). Yeah, MGS4 should've had more gameplay but Kojima had a shit-ton of story to tell to wrap everything up. I haven't played Hitman so I really can't comment on that, I have a friend that loves Hitman and he loved the new game so that's all I got there.

As someone who played MGS4 I have to disagree. IMO, the addition of an over the shoulder camera view with a target reticle and the ability to move in first person are what allowed it to be more run and gun.

I should also mention that MGS3 and MGS3 Subsistence made two changes that made gun battles more survivable. The first one was the fact that bullets would no longer stun/stop you in you tracks unless they wounded you. The second one was the addition of a third person camera. However, unlike in MGS4 the TP camera in MGS 3 Subsistence did not make it much easier to shoot enemies because

1) The direction of the camera was not synced with the direction you were aiming in
2) You had no target reticle

Personally, I would consider these changes to be gameplay changes and not control changes.

 

[Zetatrain]

Delete Please

 

[Zetatrain]

double post

 

[1337mokro]

PS: No there shouldn't be an easy mode in Dark Souls. There isn't a fucking hard mode in Assassin's Creed either now is there? Catering to everyone is not a solution, it will never be because guess what, the people that don't play Dark Souls already will be bored to shit on easy mode because it's all about the repeated challenges. The game IS the struggle to overcome the odds against you, not to go sightseeing through the world squashing enemies with your 78+ electric damage blade. This again betrays that you simply don't get what makes these games have their appeal in the first place.

I wouldn't buy Assassin's Creed any more or less if there was a hard mode because really the AC games are not about the combat.

I don't see how having a hard or easy mode in a game is the same thing as what is happening with Splinter Cell: Blacklist.

Assuming that an easy or hard mode just means simple changes such as damage you receive, damage you deal, and number of enemies I don't see what the problems is. If splinter Cell 1-3 had an easy mode, it would not have made the games any worse, because the core gameplay elements are unchanged and you are not force to play on easy mode. In short, it would still be a game built around the idea of hardcore stealth gameplay with an easy mode tacted on at the end.

The situation with Blacklist is different from what I described above, because in order to make the game more accessible they changed the core gameplay elements. Unlike the first 3 SC games Blacklist was a game primarily built around the idea of accessibility. A game like Blacklist would still be way more accessible than an old school Splinter Cell game with an easy mode.

While the two concepts mentioned are centered around the same principle, accessibility, how they do it is completely different.

Is this going to be a thing now? Where people state why something is wrong and then completely ignore that they basically summed up just now in their own words why people are disappointed and furious at the changes made?

Splinter Cells 1-3 do have different difficulties. Why is this okay? Because the gameplay is not centered around challenge. It is centered around stealth, see obvious reason why Blacklist fails at that. However here changing the leeway for game over does not impact the element of stealth it's main component. A person on easy will have to use the same techniques as one playing on expert. The threshold for success is simply more complex seeing as it isn't really higher by the addition of more guards or less allowed mistakes as the same gameplay is used to accomplish both difficulties.

By changing the things you mention in Dark Souls 2 it essentially loses a gigantic part of it's gameplay that is centered around patience, avoidance of mistakes and planning. You can make more mistakes now, running that dragon gauntlet is no longer impossible without careful timing. Not to mention the segregation based on difficulty for the online elements. After all you can't pull an easy mode gamer into a normal mode, they would get massacred or the reverse would happen where an easy mode was able to grind to a point where he basically becomes a troll ghost. The entire game changes based on the difficulties, barriers that exist fade with a lower difficulty and the player is not asked to learn the same set of skills as their regular mode counter parts. Not to mention the diversion of resources to make sure both modes are entirely balanced and playable. In the worst case scenario the situation gets reversed where the easy mode is the standard mode and they just beef up the enemies or put negative modifiers on the PC.

Accessible is really just another word for dumbed down. Resident Evil 6 was accessible, it was also the game that gave us an experience similar to a slug giving head to a giraffe.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

All I really have to say here about Splinter Cell is what you said about MSG4 to me.

I bet you also speed run Half Life in 85 minutes, unlike that hack that did it in 90 a while back. Amateur.

I love just love how you basically sum up almost any Splinter Cell fan's feelings about Blacklist when you talk about AC but completely failed to empathize with them at any level. It's quite amazing to have the same feelings but be completely unable to recognize them in other people.

So... we are in agreement?

Why would you think I would speed run any game? I never do speed runs in any game (not even MGS) as they don't really appeal to me.

From what I understand about Blacklist is that it's keeping added mechanics from Conviction but putting back in the things that makes Splinter Cell, Splinter Cell. The gameplay from SDCC seems like a really good stealth game so I don't see what you guys are complaining about especially when the game isn't even out yet. Plus, I've read posts from old-school Splinter Cell Spies vs Mercs players that have played and liked the multiplayer in Blacklist.

As someone who played MGS4 I have to disagree. IMO, the addition of an over the shoulder camera view with a target reticle and the ability to move in first person are what allowed it to be more run and gun.

I should also mention that MGS3 and MGS3 Subsistence made two changes that made gun battles more survivable. The first one was the fact that bullets would no longer stun/stop you in you tracks unless they wounded you. The second one was the addition of a third person camera. However, unlike in MGS4 the TP camera in MGS 3 Subsistence did not make it much easier to shoot enemies because

1) The direction of the camera was not synced with the direction you were aiming in
2) You had no target reticle

Personally, I would consider these changes to be gameplay changes and not control changes.

To me, they are control changes, and MGS4 just controls the way a TPS should control. I'm a pretty hardcore competitive TPS player and the controls for MGS4 and MGO (which I played weekly for 4 years) are the best TPS controls ever; the aiming is just spot-on without any need for bloody aim-assist and the controls have that depth like being able to lean (that almost no shooter has anymore, not even FPSs) and all the little things like shoulder swapping are done properly (TPSs like Ghost Recon Future Soldier, Uncharted, and The Last of Us can't even do shoulder swapping properly). Uncharted doesn't even allow you to adjust the game's camera sensitivity while MGS4 has 3 separate camera sensitivities to adjust.

The aiming reticule isn't that big of a deal because in any TPS you aim with the free look camera anyways. When you go to L1/LT aim in a TPS, the reticule should already be on the enemy and if it's not, you're usually dead.

Your character should aim in the direction of the camera, that's just kinda how you make a TPS. That makes it easier to shoot, but it doesn't stop you from playing stealthy either. It's just overly clunky if you don't aim in the direction of the camera.

The addition of being able to move 1st-person isn't that helpful at all. You move 1 step at a time when moving in 1st-person, it's not like it even comes close to playing as a FPS. You really only use 1st-person for very precise shots and leaning, that's it.

I don't even recall the difference you're talking about with bullets stunning you from MGS2 to MGS3. I remember being able to kill guards pretty easy in MGS2 with no problems after getting spotted as every so often I'd just have a bit of fun killing all the reinforcements.

 

[Zetatrain]

Is this going to be a thing now? Where people state why something is wrong and then completely ignore that they basically summed up just now in their own words why people are disappointed and furious at the changes made?

Splinter Cells 1-3 do have different difficulties. Why is this okay? Because the gameplay is not centered around challenge.

Care to elaborate on this? All games are based around challenge to some degree or another.

It is centered around stealth, see obvious reason why Blacklist fails at that. However here changing the leeway for game over does not impact the element of stealth it's main component.

That is exactly what I'm saying

A person on easy will have to use the same techniques as one playing on expert.

While the player can still opt to do all the fancy stealth moves that he normally would use on a higher difficulty, depending on how much the player is buffed by easy mode he may be able to simply shoot his way out.

The threshold for success is simply more complex seeing as it isn't really higher by the addition of more guards or less allowed mistakes as the same gameplay is used to accomplish both difficulties.

Lets see, more guards means it will be harder to stealth by and the player will have be much more careful. Less health will also mean that the margin for error is much smaller, which would make the game more difficult. If they added a very hard mode in which the game ends if you are spotted once(MGS's extreme difficulty)then that greatly effects the difficulty and the play style that the player most adopt in order to survive.

By changing the things you mention in Dark Souls 2 it essentially loses a gigantic part of it's gameplay that is centered around patience, avoidance of mistakes and planning. You can make more mistakes now, running that dragon gauntlet is no longer impossible without careful timing.

Everything you mentioned there can be applied to Splinter Cell or stealth games in general. Patience is a must in a stealth game. Charging in without studying a guard's patrol and looking for the safest route to take with most likely end in disaster. How is making changes to health, damage, or enemy numbers in Dark souls any different than doing it in Splinter cell?

Not to mention the segregation based on difficulty for the online elements. After all you can't pull an easy mode gamer into a normal mode, they would get massacred or the reverse would happen where an easy mode was able to grind to a point where he basically becomes a troll ghost.

I will the admit that I didn't think about the effects this could have on online play since I never bothered with it. However, this does not mean there can't be a solution. The easiest way they could probably mitigate this is to restrict interaction between players based on the difficulty setting they chose, and make the difficulty level unchangeable once they start their playthrough/character. Basically if your setting is easy mode then only someone else who is also on easy mode can invade your game.

The entire game changes based on the difficulties, barriers that exist fade with a lower difficulty

The challenge/difficulty changes but the gameplay remains the same.

Not to mention the diversion of resources to make sure both modes are entirely balanced and playable.

True, but how much resources are we talking about? It could be significant or it could be negligible.

In the worst case scenario the situation gets reversed where the easy mode is the standard mode and they just beef up the enemies or put negative modifiers on the PC.

Or they could just design the standard mode with the hardcore gamers (those that want a challenge)in mind and not the easy mode crowd. I'm not saying they can't fuck it up, but at the same time I see no reason why they can't do it properly.

Accessible is really just another word for dumbed down. Resident Evil 6 was accessible, it was also the game that gave us an experience similar to a slug giving head to a giraffe.

You'll get no argument from me about RE6. However, what happened to RE6 is still not the same as adding a difficulty mode to Dark Souls.